Locavore Movement Argument

When my grandmother lived with us a few years ago, every day she would rise at the crack of dawn to water, collect, and care for the abundant vegetable garden in our backyard. We savored the fresh cucumbers, the succulent lettuce, and the sweet peppers that came straight off the vine. As a child, I once asked her, “Why don’t we sell these for money or trade with neighbors?” feeling it was a very novel concept at the time. Little did I know what I proposed was a rudimentary definition of the locavore movement, which encourages people to eat locally grown or produced products as much as possible. While picking vegetables from our backyard might not have been much of a struggle, a broader-level implementation of reliance on locally grown foods

Having an increased variety of foods available, as well as more diverse sources, allows a consumer to make educated and informed choices. As the community itself becomes more invested in the topic of food, there arise “ordinary, middle income folks who have become really engaged in food and really care about where their food comes from” (Source E). As such, they turn to local markets where they know the community members that produce the food and how the food is sourced. These individuals then promote the reasons for buying locally sourced food, as a blog dedicated to eating locally provides, saying that “produce that you purchase at your local farmer’s market has often been picked within 24 hours of your purchase” (Source A). Yet, for all its claims and popular support, the locavore movement also spreads false information. Marion Nestle, professor and former chair of nutrition at New York University, states that between locally and commercially sourced foods, there is a negligible difference in nutrition (Source B), even though the locavore movement has pushed the notion. However, despite its controversy, the locavore movement starts an educated discussion and piques the public’s interest about food. The social aspect of the movement then sustains itself through investment in the local

Many locavores believe that transportation greatly contributes to higher greenhouse gas emissions. Yet, Source D clearly shows that for red meat, nearly 90% of the greenhouse gas emissions per year come from production, not transportation. As such, local communities must also determine not only where their food comes from, but how to produce and manufacture that food to have the least environmental impact. Otherwise, the locavore movement contributes effects that are just as detrimentally to the environment as any other form of production would produce. Likewise, individuals and restaurants must also be held accountable in a community in order to have a positive impact. While locavores often focus on transportation, “A fourth of the energy required to produce food is expended in the consumer’s kitchen” (Source C). Consumers, by only focusing on where they get their food, ignore larger issues that are just as pertinent to them. In addition, the author of Source C also states that more energy is “consumed per meal in a restaurant, since restaurants throw away most of their leftovers” (Source C). As such, a locavore movement must also consider larger issues than just sourcing; otherwise, the movement is