The locavore movement is a movement made up of people who have decided to eat and use locally grown or produced goods as much as possible for the reasons of nutrition and sustainability. Many communities should consider organizing a locavore movement. A locavore movement can grant an abounding number of benefits to the consumer, the farmers and community, and to the environment. If the community organizes a locavore movement, it will forge an easier method for individuals to acquire all the nutrients they need and a larger supply of healthy foods. A greater amount of people are malnourished in vitamins and minerals (some they may not even know exists) which most processed food do not contain. This is why fresh foods from local farmer’s markets are superior considering that “‘Nowadays, we know a lot more about the naturally occurring substances in produce,’ said [Cynthia] Sass. ‘It’s not just vitamins and minerals,
Long-distance transportation of food uses an abundance of fuel, which increases the carbon footprint created by the growing, shipping, and eating of food. ”Long-distance food shipments promote profligate fuel use and the exploitation of cheap labor (which compensates for the profligate fuel use), shifting back to a more locally sourced food economy is often touted as a fairly straightforward way to cut externalities, restore some measure of equity between producers and consumers, and put the food economy on a more sustainable footing.” (source E). The long-distance transportation of food uses a profligate amount of fuel and exploit cheap labor in the process. It can greatly assist the environment to buy from local sources by making the carbon footprint of food production lesser and saving natural resources such as oil. Buying from local farms also creates lower prices and a greater amount of the money spent goes back to the community and the
McWilliams does provide examples and statistics, as well as a calculation demonstrating the importance of considering food per gallon of fuel instead of how many miles traveled. McWilliams provides a wide variety of reasons in favor of his position, although some do not relate directly to the topic on environmentally friendly food. For example, he uses an emotional appeal of asking us to consider the livelihoods of 1.5 million sub-Saharan farmers who are threatened by the modern locavore movement. For all his statistics, many of them, including the previously mentioned farmers, are not cited and the reader does not know if the information is accurate. To provide adequate backing, he needs to cite his sources and offer more of them, especially more directly related to his claim that locally grown food is not necessarily better for the planet.
James E. Mcwilliams stated his aversion to the locavore movement in his essay “The Locavore Myth: Why Buying from Nearby Farmers Won’t Save the Planet”. The locavore movement is the concept of buying produce, meat, and other farm-grown food locally as opposed to having your vegetables or fruits shipped from across the world. This notion believes going local reduces harm to the environment by decreasing the miles food needs to travel before landing on your plate. From the title of his essay itself, the claim would seem obvious. The locavore movement does not essentially help save the environment through lessened food mileage. Don’t be easily swayed, in short. Mcwilliams presented several grounds and data for his justification on this issue.
Moreover, this system of mass farming leads to single crop farms, which are ecologically unsafe, and the unnatural treatment of animals (Kingsolver 14). These facts are presented to force the reader to consider their own actions when purchasing their own food because of the huge economic impact that their purchases can have. Kingsolver demonstrates this impact by stating that “every U.S. citizen ate just one meal a week (any meal) composed of locally and organically raised meats and produce, we
Reason 2: the locavore movement is saving the world with its conservation of the environment
Humans are damaging the planet to live comfortably, we must change the way food is distributed worldwide, support local farmers and switch to a healthier diet in order to stop global warming. The current global has been getting better for us humans over the years, from eating bread and eggs 3 times a day in the XV century, now we can eat better than the kings of those times, however the much of the food in not healthy and the global food system still fails in getting food to every individual in the planet and in addition it contributes to the destruction of our world. Ms. Anna Lappe explains how the food system contributes to around 1/3 of the global warming issue in her essay “The Climate Crisis at the End of Our Fork”, while a group of Plos one explains the issues about the export and import of food growth over the last 50 years in the
“Hungry for Change” is an eye opening documentary made to explore the role that food plays in peoples’ lives. The experts, ranging from authors to medical doctors, address a variety of claims through testimonials, experiments, and statistical evidence. They not only state the flaws in this generation’s diet but also logically explain the reasons behind the downfall in peoples’ diet and offer better ways to approach our health.
Environmental advocate and cofounder of Eatingliberally.org, Kerry Trueman, in her response to Stephen Budiansky’s Math Lessons for Locavores, titled, The Myth of the Rabid Locavore, originally published in the Huffington Post, addresses the topic of different ways of purchasing food and its impact on the world. In her response, she argues that Budiansky portrayal of the Local Food Movement is very inaccurate and that individuals should be more environmentally conscious. Trueman supports her claim first by using strong diction towards different aspects of Budinsky essay, second by emphasizes the extent to which his reasoning falls flat, and lastly by explaining her own point with the use of proper timing. More specifically, she criticizes many
You are required to pay for everything yourself, such as paying for the seeds to plant, paying for the fertilizer, and paying for the water to help the plants grow. Thats just for plants there are many more responsibilities that come with animals. Mass production is cheaper for the economy “Today’s high crop yields and low costs reflect gains from specialization and trade, as well as scale and scope economies…” this is stated by Steve Sexton in “The Inefficiency of Local Food”. The prices of food would skyrocket if Locavorism was implemented indefinitely everywhere. This could cause an economic depression. Many people believe that eating local food would be a positive for their local economy, however that has been shown differently in a recent research paper by Elaine De Azevedo called “Food Activism: The Locavorism Perspective” “The slogan "local food, local money" espoused by Halweil, which argues that Locavorism generates wealth and local jobs, is another (controversial) economic issue that informs the movement”. Not only would prices go up indefinitely from locavorism but there would also wouldn't be enough food to go
Because the people who live in food deserts do not get proper supplements of fruits and vegetable, much of their diets are consisted of mainly junk food, fast food, and meats. As a result of this, today, more than one third of adults in America are obese. In addition to obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease can also be results of a lack of healthy food choices, which result from people buying their food from convenience stores that only sell processed foods and from fast food restaurants. This paper attempts to provide readers with a better understanding of the fact that not only do food deserts exists, they are threatening the lives of Amer...
Nutritionism and Today’s Diet Nutritionism is the ideology that the nutritional value of a food is the sum of all its individual nutrients, vitamins, and other components. In the book, “In Defense of Food” by Michael Pollan, he critiques scientists and government recommendations about their nutritional advice. Pollan presents a strong case pointing out the many flaws and problems that have risen over the years of following scientific studies and government related warnings on the proper amount of nutrients needed for a healthy diet. Pollan’s main point is introducing science into our food system has had more of a negative impact than a positive one, we should go back to eating more of a traditional diet. I believe food science has given us
Within these past few years, more and more people have tried to use their community’s grown produce instead of large company-based products. These ‘locavores’ have grown in numbers as people have taken into account the health related, environmental, and economic consequences of choosing locally grown products. The key issues associated with the locavore movement are the economic effects and the change made in the environment of a community.
More and more farm-to-table restaurants, farmer’s markets, and food co-ops are cropping up to meet the demand among consumers for healthy, local foods, as more chefs and consumers recognize the poorer taste and nutritional integrity of ingredients shipped in from far away. Fruits and vegetables that have to be shipped long distances are often picked before they have a chance to fully ripen and absorb nutrients from their surroundings. Because local food doesn’t have to travel long distances, it is grown in order to taste better and be healthier rather than to be resilient to long travel. The farm-to-table movement also helps local economies by supporting small farmers, which is a dying
A major issue that is occurring in America is a phenomena known as “food deserts”, most are located in urban areas and it's difficult to buy affordable or good-quality fresh food. Whereas in the past, food deserts were thought to be solved with just placing a grocery store in the area, but with times it has become an issue that people are not picking the best nutritional option. This issue is not only making grocery store in food deserts are practically useless and not really eliminating the issue of food deserts because even when they are given a better nutritional option, and people are not taking it. In my perspective, it takes more than a grocery store to eliminate ‘food deserts’. It's more about demonstrating the good of picking the nutritional option and how it can help them and their families. For example, “Those who live in these areas are often subject to poor diets as a result and are at a greater risk of becoming obese or developing chronic diseases.”(Corapi, 2014).
The Pacific Northwest is growing. Jobs, culture, and lifestyles are attracting many into the area. There is arguably no better example than Seattle. With thriving tech industries, strong medical community, and influential commercial enterprises, the appeal is obvious. But with these economic boons also come the pitfalls. And for all the access of those capable to afford the big city, come the inaccessibility of living in the outskirts. As such, a new plan is needed to address these populations and it all begins with food.
...veryday foods require a lot of energy and release a lot of greenhouse gases to produce. This is the reason we should stop wasting the foods, consume less meat, and eat more locally grown food.