Summary: Complications With The Locavore Movement

A new type of agriculture, locavore, is becoming larger and larger, the locavore lifestyle is promised to give anyone who lives it a healthy life. locavore is the practice of only consuming locally grown foods. Joining the locavore movement and eating locally grown foods is more healthy and helpful to the human body, but forcefully changing Americaʼs diet would prove to be dreadfully difficult, not to mention the negative impact it will have on the economy, including the fact that eating local foods is not the only way to stay healthy .There are many issues that must be taking into account before determining whether a transition so large would truly benefit any community or wreak havoc.

In the world of today, a new form of agriculture is starting to take place called "locavores." Locavores seek to change the way people eat by only growing and selling produce locally. However, many problems must be brought up to light before choosing this method as a benefit to the community.

If healthy food is the best food, why are we settling for any less? Locavore communities contain people who have decided to eat locally grown/produced products. Not only are locavore communities positively impacting local economies, they are also creating bonds within communities, and those involved are proving to be more nutritious and healthy.

I picked up a sweet, fresh, bright red apple at the farmer's market. The tangy smell of the apple makes me hungry, knowing I’m getting the freshest and most nutritious apple. Though is it really any different from the apple grown 300 miles away? The locavores are people who decided to eat locally grown produce, this has become known as the locavore movement and is quickly becoming widespread among more people. But, is a locavore movement really needed? The fact is, there is no difference between local produce and produce that was grown hundreds of miles away. The locavore movement may not make a huge difference.

In an article written in 2008 entitled, The End of Food Paul Roberts describes the present-day reality about producing locally grown, “...although decentralized food systems function well in decentralized societies - like the United States was a century ago, or like many developing nations still are - they’re poor fit in modern urbanized societies” (Source F). Realistically, locavore practices are no longer practical in centralized societies. Developed nations have moved on from these practices, so they are only realistic in developing nations. There is an entirely other side to the locavore movement that is not widely known about, a side intentionally hidden from the public. In a 2014 article entitled, “Limits of the Locavore,” written by Margaret Grey, Grey asserts, “Labor and the Locavore shows that our society’s tendency to idealize local food allows small farmers to pay workers substandard wages, house them in shoddy labor camps, and quash their ability to unionize to demand better working conditions” (Dissent). In essence, the locavore movement is glamorized to a point, allowing local farms to practice unfair labor methods. The labor aspect of the locavore movement is not pretty, and often not talked

Locavores base their lifestyle decision on the thought that the closer the food is the better it must be.But, according to Marion Nestle, a Professor and former chair of nutrition at New York University, the quality of produce is not dependent on the proximity from which the food came, but the independent factors like rich soil that determines the nutrients

On the contrary, James E. has concluded that the locavore movement causes problems like “industrialized food.” The academic study in 2006 is the ecological matter about a Londoner buying a lamb addressed from New Zealand rather than purchasing lamb brought up in the UK, is said to be absurd if only considering “food-miles.” Paul Roberts claims that this has lead to casting a bright spotlight on the questionable segments of the “modern food economy.” Based on the ideas of Paul, by reason of the “long-distance food shipments promote profligate fuel use[,] exploitation of cheap labour” this has resulted in the rise of “reliance” on foods shipped from halfway round the world.

As the quest to live healthy gains popularity, a variety of new ideas and approaches are developing. One such idea is the “100 mile diet”. Locavores (the name given to people who try to live like this), attempt to consume items that are only produced within a 100 mile radius of where they live. The idea is to reduce one’s carbon footprint by not promoting materials that have elevated transport costs so as to mitigate the CO2 emissions required to make them available. This is, in theory, a good idea. Recently, however, the trend has been criticized as unsustainable and not quite as eco-friendly as first thought.

As you scan the meat aisle of the grocery store, how do you select your meat? Some people choose by brand, price, looks and even organic verses non-organic. But does any of this really matter? Apparently, none of this matters in today’s society when choosing the meat in which our families will consume. According to Eric Schosser the author of the film “Food Inc.” the idea that you would need to write a book telling people about where their food came from is just a sign of how far removed we become. In the past, our food used to come from local farmers that have grown and harvested the fruits, vegetables, meat etcetera themselves, but in today’s society, most of our food isn’t grown locally, it’s shipped from across the world and pumped with many products to increase shelf longevity and some have even been finished growing with gas so the item is ripe by the time it hits the supermarkets.

Eating local is a simple change, but can make a difference in a few aspects. Food is able to stay on the vine longer and grow more nutrients for your body and money you spend locally will recycle through your community. Locavorism is becoming more popular and farmers’ markets a high demand since more people are discovering the benefits of it. Overall, it proves to be better for everyone when you buy and eat locally grown food.

"Local food", "local food movement" or the "Locavores" are a movement which aim to connect food producers and food consumers in the same geographic region; in order to develop more self-reliant and resilient food networks, improve local economies, or for health, environmental, community, or social impact in a particular place.[1] The term has also been extended

Locavorism – the idea that food grown in close proximity to where one consumes it is not only more nutritious and better tasting, but also more environmentally responsible than mass produced food – seems to be igniting a food revolution in America (The Week Staff). The movement has gained momentum across America as the number of farmers markets has increased fivefold since 1994 (The Week Staff). Locavores, those who champion the locavorism movement boast that buying and eating food locally is more environmentally sound, more nutritious and safer, but do their claims hold up? Sums of historical and scientific data disprove claims that locavorism is an all around better system than that used by agri-business. While buying and consuming food locally makes sense at times, confining people to only consuming local food is actually less sustainable, less, nutritious, and less safe than consuming food that is mass produced.

Buying locally “supports an area's farmers and, in turn, strengthens the community”.(source C) However, the localization of foods would have a negative effect on farmers who rely on Americans by reducing demand. The decrease in business for these farmers will cause less crops to be made because, if 90 percent of your products is no longer being bought, then you're losing money if you make any more than 10 percent. Another thing food localization will cause is local businesses outside of these communities, like farmers markets to foreclose, because farmers will be forced to look for different work. If all the farmers in New Zealand are focusing on supplying the US than no one is focused on what percent of foods stay locally in New Zealand. Therefore a major movement towards being a locavore could have a big, negative effect on major food production across the country. Many jobs will be lost, many families will be homeless, and many families will split

When we look at food, we should sit and wonder, “What is in this food, how was it raised, and what benefits are provided by it?” When we buy food at a big box store or from a restaurant we may not get these answers. Big box stores will try and tell you that they provide the best and safest foods in their stores, but they are providing a product that is mass produced. When something is mass produced, the quality control suffers and we must wonder what is seen as okay and what could be seen as detrimental. Either way you are allowing companies to tell you what is good for you instead of trusting yourself. When we buy local or grow our own, we are left without questions and instead feel satisfaction from the wholesome meal we just consumed. When

The smell of fresh vegetables and fruit, the vibrant colors from every direction you look, and the friendly smiles that come from the question, “Would you like to try one?” Yes, this is farmer’s market many people attend to buy the foods they eat at home. But why? The locavore movement, a trend for people to eat locally grown products, can have many benefits when looking into the environment around you and personal nutrition.