Locavore Essay
We live in a world defined by a need for speed: Speed in production, speed in communication, and speed in transportation. We grab hamburgers and fries, ordered within minutes, through near-industrial drive-throughs that cook beef and potatoes shipped from thousands of miles away in a matter of seconds. One might ask themselves: With the advent of accessible speed and convenience, why anyone would prefer a comparatively inefficient local meal over the streamlined, often multi-regional processes that create our everyday diets? The locavore movement challenges these questionable societal norms in seeking food that grows within a small set radius in the search of food that is more wholesome, more fresh, and more delicious. Though …show more content…
Locavorism possesses a number of clear, tangible benefits that are undeniable to both its proponents and opponents: Local food, when it is available, tastes better, fresher, and provides returns to one’s community. Transportation often degrades food quality through travel time, spending “days or weeks” on boats, in refrigerated trucks, or on planes, separate from its plant in a state that optimizes shelf life, not freshness (Source A Maiser). A traditional concern amongst American consumers, the desire for food that looks fresh drives prices up and large producers to create food that sacrifices flavor for aesthetic, though why make compromises when local food offers both appearance and taste? Even though a tomato flown from California may essentially be the same nutritionally as a farm fresh Jersey tomato (Source B Smith/McKinnon), both dieticians and die-hard locavores seem to agree …show more content…
Though research and common sense suggests that food loses its nutrition through transportation, any real nutritional differences “will be marginal” (Source B). While freshness will remain a factor for many concerned shoppers, the lack of nutritional benefits as well as a higher immediate cost often deters consumers from buying local. Local purchases, though cutting out long-distance transportation as a polluting factor, does not address the >80-90% volume of greenhouse emissions created by the production of food (Source D, Chart). The locavore concept of eco-friendliness is further offset by producers who do reduce their carbon footprint, as they do with New Zealand lamb, to a degree that it outweighs the emissions incurred through transportation (Source C, McWilliams). Both sources contribute to the assertion that the soundness of using environmental benefits as an argument for the locavore movement is questionable, due not only to its impracticality in reducing the main source of emissions but the vast range of conditions present in production facilities that may offset any standardized environmental benefits. Lastly, the definition of “locavore” in of itself remains vague and in some cases, unworkable: People living
We live in a world defined by a need for speed: Speed in production, speed in communication, and speed in transportation. We grab hamburgers and fries, ordered within minutes, through near-industrial drive-throughs that cook beef and potatoes shipped from thousands of miles away in a matter of seconds. One might ask themselves: With the advent of accessible speed and convenience, why anyone would prefer a comparatively inefficient local meal over the streamlined, often multi-regional processes that create our everyday diets? The locavore movement challenges these questionable societal norms in seeking food that grows within a small set radius in the search of food that is more wholesome, more fresh, and more delicious. Though …show more content…
Locavorism possesses a number of clear, tangible benefits that are undeniable to both its proponents and opponents: Local food, when it is available, tastes better, fresher, and provides returns to one’s community. Transportation often degrades food quality through travel time, spending “days or weeks” on boats, in refrigerated trucks, or on planes, separate from its plant in a state that optimizes shelf life, not freshness (Source A Maiser). A traditional concern amongst American consumers, the desire for food that looks fresh drives prices up and large producers to create food that sacrifices flavor for aesthetic, though why make compromises when local food offers both appearance and taste? Even though a tomato flown from California may essentially be the same nutritionally as a farm fresh Jersey tomato (Source B Smith/McKinnon), both dieticians and die-hard locavores seem to agree …show more content…
Though research and common sense suggests that food loses its nutrition through transportation, any real nutritional differences “will be marginal” (Source B). While freshness will remain a factor for many concerned shoppers, the lack of nutritional benefits as well as a higher immediate cost often deters consumers from buying local. Local purchases, though cutting out long-distance transportation as a polluting factor, does not address the >80-90% volume of greenhouse emissions created by the production of food (Source D, Chart). The locavore concept of eco-friendliness is further offset by producers who do reduce their carbon footprint, as they do with New Zealand lamb, to a degree that it outweighs the emissions incurred through transportation (Source C, McWilliams). Both sources contribute to the assertion that the soundness of using environmental benefits as an argument for the locavore movement is questionable, due not only to its impracticality in reducing the main source of emissions but the vast range of conditions present in production facilities that may offset any standardized environmental benefits. Lastly, the definition of “locavore” in of itself remains vague and in some cases, unworkable: People living