Local food
Local food is food that is produced within a short distance of where it is consumed, often accompanied by a social structure and supply chain different from the large-scale supermarket system.[1]
For foods with protected geographical names, see Geographical indication.
Local food (or locavore) movements aim to connect food producers and consumers in the same geographic region, to develop more self-reliant and resilient food networks; improve local economies; or to affect the health, environment, community, or society of a particular place.[2] The term has also been extended to include not only the geographic location of supplier and consumer but can also be "defined in terms of social and supply chain characteristics."[3] For example, local food initiatives often promote sustainable and organic farming practices, although these are not explicitly related to the geographic proximity of producer and consumer.
Local food represents an alternative to the global food model, which often sees food traveling long distances before it reaches the consumer.[4]
History[edit]
In the US, the local food movement has been traced to the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, which spawned agricultural subsidies and price supports.[5] The contemporary American movement can be traced back to proposed resolutions to the Society for Nutrition Education's 1981 guidelines. In 1994, Chicago pop culture made local food a trend in the Midwest. These largely unsuccessful resolutions encouraged increased local production to slow farmland loss. The program described "sustainable diets" - a term then new to the American public. At the time, the resolutions were met with strong criticism from pro-business institutions, but have had a strong resurgence of backing since 2000.[6]
In 2008, the United States farm bill was revised to emphasise nutrition: "it provides low-income seniors with vouchers for use at local produce markets, and it added more than $1 billion to the fresh fruit and vegetable program, which serves healthy snacks to 3 million low-income children in schools".[7]
Local food campaigns[edit]
Local food campaigns have been successful in supporting small local farmers. After declining for more than a century, the number of small farms increased 20% in the six years to 2008, to 1.2 million, according to the Agriculture Department.[15]
Launched in 2009, North Carolina's 10% local food campaign is aimed at stimulating economic development, creating jobs and promoting the state's agricultural offerings.[16][17] The campaign is a partnership between The Center for Environmental Farming Systems (CEFS), with support from N.C. Cooperative Extension and the Golden LEAF Foundation.[18]
In 2017, a campaign was started in Virginia by the Common Grains Alliance mirroring many of the efforts of the North Carolina campaign.[19]
Motivations for eating local[edit]
Motivations for eating local food include healthier food, environmental benefits, and economic or community benefits. Many local farmers, whom locavores turn to for their source of food, use the crop rotation method when producing their organic crops. This method not only aids in reducing the use of pesticides and pollutants, but also keeps the soil in good condition rather than depleting it.[20] Locavores seek out farmers close to where they live, and this significantly reduces the amount of travel time required for food to get from farm to table. Reducing the travel time makes it possible to transport the crops while they are still fresh, without using chemical preservatives.[21] The combination of local farming techniques and short travel distances makes the food consumed more likely to be fresh, an added benefit.
Benefits[edit]
Community[edit]
Local eating can support public objectives. It can promote community interaction by fostering relationships between farmers and consumers. Farmers' markets can inspire more sociable behavior, encouraging shoppers to visit in groups. 75% of shoppers at farmers' markets arrived in groups compared to 16% of shoppers at supermarkets. At farmers' markets, 63% had an interaction with a fellow shopper, and 42% had an interaction with an employee or farmer.[22] More affluent areas tend to have at least some access to local, organic food, whereas low-income communities, which in America often have African American and Hispanic populations, may have little or none, and "are often replete with calorie-dense, low-quality food options", adding to the obesity crisis.[7][23]
Environmental[edit]
Local foods require less energy to store and transport, possibly reducing greenhouse gas emissions.[24] In local or regional food systems it can be easier to trace resource flows and recycle nutrients in that specific region.[25] It can also be a way to preserve open landscapes and support biodiversity locally.[26][27][28]
Economic[edit]
Farmers' markets create local jobs. In a study in Iowa (Hood 2010), the introduction of 152 farmers' markets created 576 jobs, a $59.4 million increase in output, and a $17.8 million increase in income.[22] Promoting local food can support local actors and create job opportunities.[26][28][27]
Nutritional[edit]
Since local foods travel a shorter distance and are often sold directly from producer to consumer, they may not require as much processing or packaging as other foods that need to be transported over long distances. If they are not processed, they may contain fewer added sugars or preservatives. The term "local" is sometimes synonymous with sustainable or organic practices, which can also arguably provide added health benefits.[8]
Criticism[edit]
Food miles[edit]
Critics of the local foods movement question the fundamental principles behind the push to eat locally. For example, the concept that fewer "food miles" translates to a more sustainable meal has not been supported by major scientific studies. According to a study conducted at Lincoln University in New Zealand: "As a concept, food miles has gained some traction with the popular press and certain groups overseas. However, this debate which only includes the distance food travels is spurious as it does not consider total energy use especially in the production of the product."[29] The locavore movement has been criticized by Vasile Stănescu, the co-senior editor of the Critical Animal Studies book series, as being idealistic and for not actually achieving the environmental benefits of the claim that the reduced food miles decrease the number of gasses emitted.[30] Studies have shown that the amount of gasses saved by local transportation while existing, does not have a significant enough impact to consider it a benefit. Food miles concept does not consider agriculture, which is having contributed the highest when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions. Plus, season and transportation medium also makes a difference.[31]