Well, its over now, and I've eaten cake, drank beer and not looked at a label aaalll day!
I've learned a lot about how a local food system can be viable, even in November -- and how it can't be. Let me explain. Recently I've been reading critiques of the 'food miles' concept. Mostly, they are based on classic free market concepts like comparative advantage and efficiency, which frankly just make me roll my eyes. The argument is that some places have climates that are more efficient at making certain foods than others, and the energy saved in production more than makes up for the energy used in transport, and thus local food activists are just local farm lobbyists in disguise, using a marketing trend to sell more produce. While this argument (as many free market arguments do) misses the point completely, it does raise some interesting questions.
They are absolutely right that if I try to grow my own bananas, I'm taxing the environment more than if I ship them from the tropics (yes, this example is actually used...). However, the free marketist is once again attempting to reduce all information about the product down to its price. Throw in reducing social costs, having a connection with the land and the community, acheiving community sustainability, having more control over how your food is produced and processed AND reducing food miles, then you have a good idea why eating local is often the better decision.
But lets look at a less extreme example than bananas. Should we be eating local wheat? It's probably much more efficient to grow in the Prairies, even with train transport (though I haven't done the math). Yet, we did find and use wheat quite a bit. How sustainable is it, if say, everyone ate local wheat in the quantities that we did. The answer is, devastatingly, not really. But instead of throwing out the local diet completely, I think we need to clarify our point. Ideally, we should be eating proportionately to how abundantly the food can be grown here sustainably. Thus, lots of potatoes, squash, honey, maple syrup and leeks, not so much garlic, alcohols, and spinach, very little wheat, exotic herbs and others (though these might grow in small quantities in well-designed permacultural gardens) and no bananas, mangoes or coconut milk. In other words, honest 'food mile activist' isn't looking for everything we eat NOW to be grown locally, they are asking for a change in the types of foods we eat. And trust me, that food can be down-right delicious...
Tim
P.S. Check out the article on us in the McGill Daily: http://mcgilldaily.com/article/6001
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Really awesome post Tim. I think that sums it up pretty well in that the 100 mile diet isnt necessarily meant to replace our current food/agircultural system entirely but rather allow for people to make smart, healthy, and informed decisions based on a knowledge of where their food comes from and the true costs. I like how you distinguish market price from factors such as social and ecological impacts. It's not that I think capitalism doesn't work, I just think it will be time before people learn the true value, yes that means in dollars, which represents what a given product may mean to them.
"But lets look at a less extreme example than bananas."
Bananas are always the most extreme example!
You make a good point, and congrats on going through two weeks of eating local. I'd like to take the challenge too, I think I might be able to do it but I would probably go crazy if I can't get some good Thai long grain rice for a while!
There's always your vanity item!
Like what you guys are doing, I think its healthy and responsible to get as miuch food as you can from the local area. Not sure why the hate on the "free market" however. Free market choices allow you to make your own buying decisions even if it isn't technically more ecological in all situations.
On the origional food network 100 mile challenge one family totally missed the point and used a propane stove to boil local seawater into salt. Do you mean to tell me that burning a tank of propane to get a spoonfull of local salt?
Not to mention roaming around the 100 mile area burning fossil fuels to go farther for food than had you gone bought something at the grocery store.
Don't get me wrong, I really like the idea of buying locally, and I intend to make a reasonable (key word) effort to buy things locally.
That said I don't think you understand the true nature of the free market enough to make comments against it. If you are interested in being educated about free markets and how they are probably more friendly to your chosen way of life than your prefered economic/political ideology (I'm assuming some form of socialism/communism) you may want to check out www.mises.org .
Just FYI our current economy is not a free market - the mere appearance of capitalism does not a free market make. Generally socialist nations do not care much about ecological impact or 100 mile diets, they are big on efficently maximizing their exploitation of natural resources to feed their massive starving populations. Check out the "aral sea" and you'll see what I mean.
Free markets allow the choices of consumers (choices made in part by their values) to be answered by entrepreneurs. Free markets can't force people to make ecological and health choices but should they be educated towards their benefits it allows their new choices to be answered efficently.
But I guess its much easier to use socialist tyranny to force people at gunpoint to go dumpster diving and ride fixed gear bicycles?
Post a Comment