The Locavore Movement: A Part Of The Alternative Food Movement

The current industrial agricultural system is dominated by monoculture in regards to how food is grown and eventually consumed, and these ideals have slowly begun to seep into the American psyche. However, throughout the past decade, the alternative food movement has begun to raise awareness of how society consumes food. Practices such as sustainable farming and the idea of eating locally grown, organic produce have become more common; yet, they have failed to address the issue of attempting to provide food security for everyone, regardless of status or income level. Although the idea of the alternative food movement has been beneficial in attempting to ensure increasing diversity in the food system, it still has numerous drawbacks.  While

the tenants of the alternative food movement, as demonstrated by the increased interest in the locavore movement, freeganism, and increased community-based agriculture projects for those in who are food insecure, have promoted new ways of thinking in regards to how consumers view food, it has ultimately failed to create uniform change across all demographics in the United States.
Part of the alternative food movement that has been touted as the way of the future in providing secure means of food access is local food movement, also referred to as the locavore movement; however, locally grown foods have not been consistently available across all classes and income levels due to uneven distribution of resources and the costs associated with purchasing locally grown food.

Avid supporters of the locavore movement are generally a group of like-minded people with “similar backgrounds, values, and proclivities” and have the wealth necessary to participate in the local food movement (Alkon, Agyemon, 2011). The benefits of the locavore movement are more substantial when the wealth and resources are available, especially considering that farmer’s markets tend to be located within fairly affluent areas (Guthman, 2008). As a result, it is more difficult for low-income families to have access local foods.  Furthermore, the cost associated with the consumption of locally grown foods is a limiting factor in the attempt to reduce food insecurity in the United States. For some, it is simply too expensive and time-consuming to purchase and then prepare fresh, local foods, and prepackaged food is more convenient and economically sound. In order for the locavore movement to dramatically impact food insecurity in the United States, it must become more accessible for all of the population, regardless of income level or geographic

location.
Another part of the alternative food movement that has been cited as a potential way to increase food access across the United States is the movement known as freeganism. Instead of relying on purchasing food, people have begun to dumpster dive in an attempt not to purchase food at all. Instead, they rely on finding and trading food and other basic necessities in order to maintain their lifestyle (Lindeman, 2012). When approximately one-third of food produced is not consumed but rather discarded, it results in a staggering amount of food waste that could be reclaimed and eaten (Just Eat It, 2014). However bountiful the results of such attempts may be, this movement has ultimately failed to have a notable impact on the food security in the United States, mainly because of the stigma attached to eating discarded food, however safe it may be. The freegan movement is beneficial to those who choose to participate in that lifestyle, but it has failed to gain widespread acceptance. Ultimately, the freegan movement will continue to impact only a small fraction of the population in the United States, and fail to uniformly impact food security.
Community supported agriculture (CSA) projects are one example of a practice of the alternative food that has failed to impact food insecurity in the United States because of a failure to consider the individual needs of the groups that compose a certain community. Although the concept of a CSA is beneficial when considering the potential outcomes, the benefits are oftentimes reduced when the values of one community, class, or race are imposed onto another. This is one issue that plagues the CSAs within predominantly ethnic neighborhoods. One problem that was encountered in communities that were supposed to be aided by the CSAs was that within different communities, there are different interpretations of what is viewed as acceptable food to grow and eat (Guthman, 2008). Although the intent of the CSA is benevolent, they oftentimes fail to consider the views and traditions held by the neighborhoods because of a difference in perspective and class. Some communities simply do not have the knowledge of how to prepare the foods that are grown in local gardens, and do not have the desire to change their diet (Guthman, 2008). This results in a less effective CSA and an alternative way of accessing food that is not useful to its given community. This scenario is an unfortunate aspect of the failure of the alternative food movement in the form of CSAs to have a substantial impact on food access in the United States.
In order to increase food security and the access of food through the country, it is necessary to take steps to ensure more uniform changes in the way food companies are regulated and the expectations of the American public.

In regards to the way food companies are regulated, the government must begin to actively attempt to regulate food production and ensure that companies attempt to donate food that they can no longer sell because it is past its expiration date. The Good Samaritan Act of 1997 states that no company can be sued if they donate a product to a food pantry that is past its expiration date, yet companies continue to throw millions of tons of food away every year. This would allow for the practices of freeganism to begin to impact a larger population because food pantries are less stigmatized than dumpster diving. Additionally, a change must occur in the way that the American public views food and how they make decisions. In order to make food access more uniform and to reduce senseless waste, a dramatic shift must occur. Society must move away from the acceptance of excessive waste, both on the level of the consumer and on the level of the company, and work to redistribute food in order to ensure that everyone is food

secure.
While the alternative food movement is working to ensure that food access is improved throughout the country, a substantial shift must occur within society in order for it to try be a noteworthy change. The freegan movement, increased community efforts to raise awareness, and increased reliance on locally grown foods all represent the potential start of a revolution in the way food is viewed, but there are numerous steps that need to be taken before the reality of food security across all populations in the United States is achieved.