The Locavore Movement

The Locavore Movement The locavore movement is a trend that has swept all over the world over the past decade, slowly revolutionizing how humans eat and grow their food while providing a new perspective on the sustainability of the environment. Locavores choose to eat locally produced food as frequently as possible to limit their impact on the environment. The believers of the locavore movement argue that the sustainability and nutrition provided by locally grown food far outweighs the conventional methods used in farming. There also have been critics of the Locavore movement who argue that it impacts the environment in negative manners while being unsustainable for the human population. As a critic, looking at the amount of greenhouse gases

However, upon deeper inquiry, it causes more damage to the world due to its unforeseen costs of production, which makes it unsustainable. The energy needed for the production of certain products far outweighs the transportation costs, therefore rendering the reduced transportation cost irrelevant. For example, it may make sense for a Londoner to buy local lamb, however, a study conducted in 2006 suggests that it would make more sense for a Londoner to buy lamb imported from New Zealand as “New Zealand lamb is raised on pastures with a small carbon footprint, whereas most English lamb is produced under intensive factory - like conditions with a big carbon footprint.” (Source C). The amount of carbon footprint in the production of lamb in london outweighs the amount of carbon reduced produced by the transportation of lamb from New Zealand. In an online article in an environmental magazine, a graph shows that the total greenhouse gas emission during production is at least triple the amount of greenhouse gas produced during transport or retail (Source D). Obviously, there is no benefit in eating locally produced food as it creates more greenhouse gasses than it supposedly should conserve. Therefore, the locavore movement does not benefit the environment, instead it has a bigger carbon footprint than conventional methods used in farming which renders the locavore movement environmentally

They point to the fact that Marion Nestle supports the notion of local eating to defend their view. While these people make a valid point they mistake her personal views from her professional opinion. For instance, when the article mentions “[Nestle] loves the mystery of years when the late corn is just utterly, incredibly good and no one can say why: it just is” the reader can see the extreme bias that leads to her view on the locavore movement as she personally supports it due to her own personal experience. In truth, she mentions that “there will be nutritional differences, but they’ll be marginal” and “that doesn’t mean it is necessary to eat locally in order to be healthy. In fact, a person making smart choices from the global megamart can easily meet all the body’s needs” (Source B). She mentions that there are differences in nutrition, however only slightly so marginal. Nestle also states that it is possible to shop at megamarts to meet the body’s needs, therefore implying that eating locally grown produce is not