Locavorism And Local Food

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.

America’s vast food supply has increased. Foods that were once hard to come by can be found in almost all the grocery stores across the nation. In the article “What’s Eating America”, by Michael Pollan, who is a professor of journalism, explains how the bounty of food came about. He writes about the creation of synthetic fertilizer and how it was used to fertilize crops and essentially make all the foods today. He writes about the harmful effects that are occurring as a result of the chemically made fertilizer. In another article called written by Katherine Spriggs, a student from Stanford University, she writes about the benefits of buying local versus becoming dependent on the import of food. She feels that buying from local farms

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.

Buying local is the new slogan of producers and sellers selling their foods in the food market. There are a few stances that can be taken such as not bothering to care about where the food came from, getting what can be purchased within reason, and the extreme locavore. Although eating local and organic is desirable, it is improbable to create a sustainable lifestyle with the given difficulties.

Locavores are consumers of locally grown or produced products. Eating fresh foods from their local farmer’s market can improve income twice as much for its economy. This is important because people give away their money to companies that could instead be giving it to benefit their community. Gogoi Pallavi the author of The Rise of the Locavore states, “It’s a movement that is gradually reshaping the business of growing...local food movement has already accomplished something almost no

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.

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,

Did you know that one in every four childen in the United States is obese? But by buying and eating locally grown you can hopefully prevent yourself from getting obese. In the novel, Omnivore’s Dilemma: The Secrets Behind What You Eat, written by Michael Pollan, he talks about four food chains- industrial, industrial organic, local sustainable, and the hunter-gatherer food chain. In the Industrial food chain, people would grow their genetically modified crops on a monoculture farm and they would spray artificial fertilizer, pesticides, and other harmful chemicals on the plants. When growing organic foods on a monoculture farm in the industrial organic food chain, people would using natural fertilizer and would not use pesticides, antibiotics,

One of the issues of the locavore movement is the mile range. According to both source B and source G, the food in a locavore’s diet should come from within a 100 mile radius. This mile radius could possibly be an issue for people living in more urbanized cities like Houston, New York City, and Los Angeles. In cities like these, the mile range would make it harder for people to participate

Locavores want to ingest tasty foods meanwhile conserving the environment: which is almost impossible. Their practices will always have an environmental impact but on a smaller scale. McWilliams, in source C, argues that we need to take a close look at water usage, fertilizer types, processing methods, and packaging techniques. By looking further into this, locavores will find that other factors other than shipping far outweigh the energy it takes to transfer food. The movement’s approach to conserving the Earth contrasts its objective. A study from an online article in an environmental magazine presented the total greenhouse gas emissions by supply chain tier

As for the locavores positive impacts on the community a deeper look into the large scale effects of the movement will reveal that there are deep negative to coincide with these local benefits. With it is stated that the locavore movement can help the local economy it is not mentioned if this is and needed support. Although it can be viewed that any benefit to the community is a good one, there is nothing to suggest that the local community, in most cases, would be crippled by the removal of the locavore movement. The facts are that in most situation a local economy is stimulated from business and unless in specific rural locations the business is not driven by local farming. There is data to suggest, however, that the locavore movement has much more than a local impact but an impact that extends not just to a community, not just to a local consumer, not just to a local farmer, but to a world wide plane.

A new trend in the food world has stepped into the limelight, with strong opinions supporting each side. Locavorism involves consuming mostly locally grown and produced products, fresh, fragrant products packed with healthy nutrients. These American locavores have emerged within the past ten years, and the fad shows no sign of slowing down. Two of the main goals include an attempt to improve nutrition and to encourage sustainable food production. However, this movement has revealed some key issues and negative implications on communities, actually causing unfortunate effects on the modernized food industry. In this day and age, the United States’ industrialized agricultural world is unequipped to deal with the sudden shift in consumption towards

Locavores are a group of people who prefer to consume locally grown products and they get these products usually within a 100 mile radius from home. The main idea of this local movement is to avoid consuming products that are moved a long distance from the farm to the market. This a great movement for us the consumers because we know what we’re eating and how it was produced, in other words it has many beneficial health factors.