Buying local is bad for the planet?

This subject burns me up.
That in mind, I only want to make a few short points.

In order to feed 9 billion, we will need a very diverse tool box. A lot of the small scale farmers
benefiting from the "locavore" interest, are growing food on land that would otherwise not be used.
Thereby increasing the global yield.
In recent years, the Nobel Prize in economics was awarded to Elinor Ostrom for publishing a paper
whose over all arc asserted that small groups were found to be more successful in management
than large governance. Our food systems would likely benefit from this sort approach.

In the conventional v. organic (or non-conventional) debate.
The Rodale Institute has done a 30 year side by side trial on commodity crops. The organic cropping
system implemented cover crops as the main source of N input. ( Mr. Kenny only cites sources comparing manure based systems as a means for dismissing the practicality of organics. )
Not only in their trials did organic yields meet that of conventional cropping, in drought years, the organic systems showed improved yields of 31%.
http://www.rodaleinstitute.org/fst30years/yields

The two biggest incentives for people to "buy local" are, freshness, and keeping the dollar in the community. The average farmer sees 15% of the food dollar as opposed to 40% in 1950.
Add that to the immigration debate fueled by Alabama's new laws and it's hard to see how
"ditching your fancy, organic, locavore lifestyle is good for the world's poor."
The contemporary farmer cannot afford to pay decent wages and if they could they would probably want to keep the money for themselves so they can buy a new flat screen.
Our modern global agricultural system is profit driven like everything else. It is set up to fuel the economy, not to feed people and support the global ecosystem.
What we need is not more pandering op-ed pieces, but a global paradigm shift, which draws from all
sides, with the mutual goal of producing nutrition for the belly instead of green for the pocketbook.

(Also, the majority of Whole Foods overpriced organic produce still comes from south america)

What we need is not more pandering op-ed pieces, but a global paradigm shift, which draws from all
sides, with the mutual goal of producing nutrition for the belly instead of green for the pocketbook

You make some interesting observations. Likely the reason the farmers share has dropped is because of the competition with a wider marketplace that transportation improvements have provided. You would think that the local farmer could compete since his transportation costs are much lower. Not to mention, the refrigeration and freshness issues. By itself I don't see the problem paying some blue collar folks to transport produce from various places. Customers, more than ever, have the opportunity to choose from a world of produce. I don't see that as a problem.

The problem I see is that labeling needs to be improved. I would like to know where my produce comes from. There have been improvements recently, but it still isn't enough. The paradigm I want is complete transparency of the source and then let the customer decide. Large distributors and grocers don't like this because they can't treat every item as interchangeable. I think this area is ripe for some judicious market regulation.

Another thing I think gets overlooked is that folks in Mexico or other areas in Latin or South America have a right to participate in free enterprise as anybody. So, I will not denigrate their efforts, and livelihoods out of hand. I just want to know where the stuff I eat comes from.

Is that a legislative request, Steve?

Wait... which of you are the liberals again?

Here. And I have no question that there is really good reason you raised this question. Let's have it.

I just typically find the attitude of doing what is in your own best interests and either not caring about or even being aware of the impact your actions have on others to be an approach more linked to conservatives than liberals. I would not expect this food concept to be news to most "liberals".

Liberals tend to think bigger picture.

Gotcha. I love seeing life with wide lense. But I couldn't disagree more with the premise of this topic.

Is that a legislative request, Steve?

I reserve the right to criticize any legislation or regulation.

But, regulation of a free marketplace is a legitimate governmental function, IMO.

Don't act so shocked!

I do have mixed feelings about it.

Gotcha. I love seeing life with wide lense. But I couldn't disagree more with the premise of this topic.

Alas , your lens isn't wide enough then.

All you have to do is compare the yields per acre and the labor costs of industrial vs. bio dynamic farming practices. If industrial farming were banned, billions would die of starvation. The global urban population is just to large to sustain any other way.

There is an argument that industrial agriculture should have never been developed, but then you are stuck with 90% of humanity being subsistence farmers. Some folks have this as their goal, but let's at least be clear about it.

Is that a legislative request, Steve?

I reserve the right to criticize any legislation or regulation.

But, regulation of a free marketplace is a legitimate governmental function, IMO.

Don't act so shocked!

I do have mixed feelings about it.

don't overthink it. You'll always have my respect.

Gotcha. I love seeing life with wide lense. But I couldn't disagree more with the premise of this topic.

Alas , your lens isn't wide enough then.

Oh, but thank god they're rosey.

Gotcha. I love seeing life with wide lense. But I couldn't disagree more with the premise of this topic.

Alas , your lens isn't wide enough then.

Oh, but thank god they're rosey.

I could use a good pair of lenses like that! Where'd you get 'em?

It's hard to be optimistic sometimes.

Alas , your lens isn't wide enough then.

Oh, but thank god they're rosey.

I could use a good pair of lenses like that! Where'd you get 'em?

It's hard to be optimistic sometimes.

Dot Fox - an All-American certified organic local boutique .

Dot Fox - an All-American certified organic local boutique .

Kwel! I shouldn't noticed them before. I'm really not that fashion conscience though.

Who da thunk it?

http://www.grist.org/population/2011-10-13-we-can-feed-10-billion-of-us-study-finds-but-it-wont-be-easy

"Ultimately, it's not about either organic or conventional; it's about using the best from all our options. Organic farming practices blended with conventional ones -- when brought to large scales -- could have big impacts.

That goes for local food, too. What's appealing about local food is that it's grown in a competent manner, with more transparency -- you know who grew it and where. Same with organic; it includes more scrutiny. But local food isn't necessarily better for the planet on an environmental level, and it's not practical for all the various food products we use.

The question is, could we take that same degree of competency and put it to work on the global food system? Let's take the best from organic, local, and conventional farming practices and global trade and use all these tools." - Jonathan Foley

All options will be on the table.

Industrialized agriculture is the only way to feed the masses, but it has many downsides and vulnerabilities to potential black swan events.

The organic and bio dynamic movements have done us all a service, keeping alive the genetic diversity of important food crops and in general, showing that a better way *might* be possible.

So, let's all support our local providers, even if they can't solve world hunger all by themselves.

I thought this might be of interest: http://markbittman.com/a-letter-that-al ... who-eats-n