Locavore Movement Research Paper

Locavores consume only locally grown foods in an effort to reduce their carbon footprints and lose weight, among other reasons. The popularity of locavorism has grown dramatically over the last decade, and its merits are extolled by scientists and ordinary consumers alike. The locavore movement seems to be indisputably beneficial to the environment, the economy, and to consumer health, yet close examination of its common tenets reveals issues which should be taken into account before beginning a locavore diet.

Saving the planet is a topic that is taken seriously by a huge part of this planet’s population. James McWilliams argument, “The Locavore Myth: Why Buying from Nearby Farmer Won’t Save the Planet,” explains why people need to buy food from people other than the local farmers. He believes that the focus of the locavore movement on transportation is wrong because the real problem lies within the energy-hogging factors in food production. McWilliams also went on to explain that another mistake that the locavore movement made was how food miles were calculated. He believes that a truck with 2,000 apples driving 2,000 miles would consume the same amount of fuel as a truck that carried 50 apples to a local shop only 50 miles away. James McWilliams states that “The critical measure here is not food miles but apples per gallon.” He also argues that taking meat out of a person’s diet would cut down on the carbon footprint of his or her dinner because it takes less energy to bring plants, rather than meat, to the table.

The growing locavore movement suggests that local food is key for healthy eating and community growth. One would imagine that the closer the source of one’s food is from, the healthier and more sustainable it is, right? However, this is not the case. In the set of locavore articles, the authors provide information to show that the locavore movement brings about issues involving inefficiency, energy use, and impracticality.

It is a known fact that the way humans produce food is not sustainable for a bright future. Here in America we discard almost half the amount of food we produce, which could be used to feed the enormous amount of starving people in the world. Not only are we being wasteful, but we are also greatly contributing to the amount of pollution and greenhouse gases because of our practices. After reading “What’s for supper?” my eyes were further opened to how damaging our agricultural system is and inspired me to take on a “greener” lifestyle.

Many people are not sure whether the locavore movement is the right route to take, however, Americans are not aware of the positive things it brings to its community. The taste and quality of their produce will improve, along with nutritional factors. Making

The locavore movement has become increasingly popular over the last decade. Locavores are people who prefer to eat food that is locally grown and doesn’t travel long distances before getting to their plates. This thought process is slowly changing the way people eat and the ideals people consider when choosing food to eat. Along with this fresh perspective on where our food comes from, the movement provides a innovative ideal towards what is sustainable and what is not sustainable. While the definition of local is dependent on the buyer the effect is the same. The locavore movement has a positive impact on the local communities through improving the income and number of local farms that fosters good communities, and increasing the nutritional value of food eaten.

Have you ever walked down the grocery store aisle and wondered where your chicken comes from? Or if the ham you just bought is healthier for your family, than the other brand of ham you saw? In “The Omnivore’s Dilemma”, Michael Pollan states that there are four different food chains. They’re the industrial, the industrial organic, the local sustainable, and the hunter-gatherer food chains. I believe that the best food chain for everyone in the United States would be the local sustainable. The local sustainable food chain is the best for the United States because it is better for the animal, and better for the environment. Although the local sustainable food chain would take a long time to get used to, it would be the best option for the United States.

In order to change the way the United States food system is operating at the moment, a change needs to be made in the education that people are receiving about the way their food is produced, manufactured, distributed and consumed. The U.S. food system has become increasingly reliant on mass production factories and multinational retail corporations while local farms and family owned food markets diminish. Economies of scale and opportunity costs represent barriers to change of the current food system because of the many different paths available, each creating different outcomes for consumers, sellers, large corporations and small farms, determining their profit, prices, capital and value. Educating the American people about the benefits of local food production and the downsides of large scale food production, such as nutritional value, disease and safety concerns, and economic advantages, will help to move our food system from “point A” to “point B”.

In the end, it becomes troublesome to go grocery shopping. Likewise, this ties into the idea of environment. Which is more environmentally friendly: to walk to a local Whole Foods or to drive to the “local” farmer’s market? Many would say buying local reduces waste due to transportation; nonetheless, a chart from the magazine Conservation Magazine proves that a majority of gas emissions actually comes from the production of the food (Source D). Transportation is low already, so why should we add to that by traveling far distances? Becoming a true locavore for an environmental reason is not worth the efforts because the changes are very miniscule To become a true locavore has many incentives, but there are other reasons that influence can someone to dedicate a portion of their diet to local foods.

Eating food produced within a hundred-mile radius has never been a prominent concern historically, though there has been a recent increase in this trend. Those that are rigorously set on this new ideology are being labeled “locavores”. Christophe Pelletier, being a proficient individual on the topic of food production had an educated opinion on the locavore’s predicted way of life. Pelletier’s, “The Locavore’s Dilemma”, provides multiple examples to support his belief that informing every resident of the carbon footprint their food contains would realistically carryout the locavore’s ideology to a more viable agriculture. His blog post on this ideology goes into depth about the physical and economical destruction they would provoke. This would include: the possibility of famine, lack of needed nutritional supplements,

The locavore movement encourages people in towns to consume more locally grown food, by society consuming locally grown food transportation is cut down which helps better the environment. Since locally grown food is produce that is cultivated in the community transportation is down to a minimum which is a blessing for the environment. “ Eating local is better for air quality and pollution than eating organic. “ ( Source A ) less transportation use helps lessen the pollution in the air which in turn helps provide the community with cleaner fresher air. “ The move towards local food for all its trendiness highlights one of the problematic pieces of the modern food economy : the increasing reliance on foods shipped halfway round the world. “ ( Source E ) The

It’s no secret, Americans love their processed, energy-rich foods. And undeniably, this love affair has led to an obesity epidemic. In spite of the evidence against processed food, however, there are some who believe the problem may hold the key to the solution. David Freedman, author of “How Junk Food Could End Obesity,” criticizes Michael Pollan for his argument in support of unprocessed, local foods due its impracticality. Freedman’s criticism is based on the idea that “It makes a lot more sense to look for small, beneficial changes in food than it does to hold out for big changes in what people eat that have no realistic chance of happening” (Freedman Sec. 1). He contends that processed foods already play a big part in our diets, so instead of trying to expand the wholesome food business, we should try to make processed foods healthier. Freedman’s argument, however, overlooks many negative effects of processed foods and conventional farming. Michael Pollan’s wholesome food movements takes into account not only the obesity problem, but also the quality of the environment and the rights of farmers. Although Pollan’s solution to obesity may not seem the most efficient or time effective, the trades offs it provides in terms of environmental sustainability and the well-being of farmers outweigh the loss of efficiency.

Consumers have become increasingly detached from their food as America’s food system grows larger and continues to ruin the environment. The main problem is that most consumers do not know how their consumption habits affect the ecosystem around them. Nor do they know about how their food was produced. Information about how and where the food is being produced and wasted is essential, so people can shop responsibly. Short of legislation, Americans make choices at the grocery store. It is essential for all Americans to cast in a vote with their dollars to change the way that food is produced in the United States resulting in more sustainable food being more accessible in the aisles of the grocery store for all Americans.

Food deserts are at an all-time high in the United States. A food deserts is defined as “a location that has very little to no accesses to fresh and nutritious foods”. “People 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.” But the other major problem that needs worked on is even if there is access to fresh and nutritious foods, then why are people not choosing to eat them? To close the food deserts there have been serval states that offer to help retailers or family owned business open for business.

Locavores are starting a new movement, and it could ultimately be a good change for the community including the people who live there. Locavores main purpose is to eat healthy organically grown foods, and with their movement they’re trying to better not just themselves but others health as well. The locavore movement had been bettering the society and population for over a decade, starting in San Francisco California, where the idea of organic, healthy and fresh eating originated. According to the University of California, San Francisco’s Agriculture and plant sciences department, Eating locally preserves nutrients, and keeps the vital vitamins needed to sustain a healthy lifestyle. Another study at UCSF also found that Over 30%