Local Food Movement

Over the years, a new culinary adventure has developed where guests in a restaurant celebrate the local food artisans and farmers. Through these ongoing relationships, the guests at these restaurants get the freshest of seasonal produce and ethically fed meat products. Moreover, by working with local farmers, locavore has substantially, supported agricultural sustainability. In such restaurants, over 95% of their delicacies are locally sourced and produced with the aim of reducing the huge carbon footprint through organic food. In addition, such movements of using sustainable, agro-ecological, organic foods compared to the faster-growing inorganic foods, has boosted the fight against childhood obesity, climate change and has helped local farmers to develop. Locavore movement not only aims to connect food producers to consumers within the same geographic region but also, to reduce the huge carbon footprint.

Have any questions about the topic? Our Experts can answer any question you have. They are avaliable to you 24/7.
Ask now

In the early, 21st century, new initiatives amongst people have seen a shift in diet. According to a research conducted by Saint Joseph’s University professors; Stanton, Wiley, Ferdinand and Wirth, they concluded that “a segment of the population that purchases the locally grown produce describes the locavore segment representative of market segmentation” (248). This shows the impact of local production on organic production. The concept of locavore and its movement has targeted eating foods which are farmed relatively close to the places of preparation and sale. Moreover, to be a locavore implies that you are a consumer who values healthy lifestyle attributes such as organic and local attribute. Locavores are not price sensitive but rather they embrace the locally produced product which is more expensive due to their quality and taste. The publishers of Emerald Group, a renowned publishing company in the United States, argue that for locavores “social links and traceability are positively related to involvement with local food products that positively influences utilitarian shopping values.” (Spielmann and Berlin 617). Locavores have substantially promoted organic and sustainable farming practices. Additionally, they have developed a more self-resilient food network within the health environment, improve local economies, and developed a self-reliant market on quality food.

The global food model that often sees food traveling long distances before the consumer eats the food, has been replaced by a new alternative that entails local food networks. Supporting the local food movement is beneficial to humans. It involves relationships between the retailers, producers, distributors, and consumers that work together to increase food security. Local food movements have been associated with the spawn of agricultural price supports and subsidies that have encouraged an increase in local food production. A new research on local food movements done by Brain, a renowned professor in the Department of Environment and Safety at Utah State University, argues that “the reasons why Americans purchase locally grown food was to increase positive relationships with producers, and to get higher quality products thereby increasing the nation’s food security” (Brain 2). This implies that among the solutions imposed in trying to mitigate the risk of facing a food crisis, is the development of a local food movement. The adoption of this movement locally would increase the most diverse and largest food resources; which are crucial in countering the multitude of food security issues.

Additionally, supporting the local food movement is beneficial to the environment since organic food has been commonly associated with agricultural and environmental sustainability. According to a research conducted by Feensta, a United Nations Food and Environment expert, “locally and sustainably grown foods have resulted in a decrease of greenhouse gases that have been emitted on a day to day basis” (Feensta 99). The benefit of locally grown products is therefore commonly associated with agricultural sustainability. It maintains our ecosystems and at the same time improves soil health and its fertility because of the use of available livestock manure that nourishes the soil. Moreover, through the use of available compost, it enhances anaerobic digestion that sustains the ecosystem. Thus, supporting the local food movement is a sustainable measure that is critical in saving the planet from the effects of global warming. Paarlberg, a renowned food blogger in Newyork, argues that factory farms waste is extremely concentrated and “since it is hard to properly dispose of the tonnes of waste produced by such farms, the wastes often pollute the environment” (Paarlberg 1). Supporting the local food movement will, therefore, have an impact on free-range farming methods that decrease the need to have large factory farms.

In conclusion, locavore implies eating locally grown produce and supporting agricultural sustainability. Local food movements have huge impacts not only on humans but also to the surrounding environment. Buying locally increases the nation’s food security and has proven to be a successful strategy in promoting the local farmers and local produce. In addition, when purchasing local foods, more of the money revolves within the local community, therefore, boosting the local economy.


Works Cited

Brain, Roslynn. The Local Food Movement: Definitions, Benefits & Resources. Sustainability Report. Utah: Utah State University, 2018.

Feenstra, G. “Creating Space for Sustainable Food Systems: Lessons Learned from the Field.” Agriculture and Human Values 19.2 (2014): 99-106.

Paarlberg, Robert. Attention Whole Foods Shoppers. 26 April 2010. 14 November 2018.

Spielmann, Nathalie and Margot Bernelin. “Locavores: Where You Buy Defines Who You Are.” International Journal of Retail 7Dstribution Management 43.7 (2015): 617-633.

Stanton, John, James Wiley, and Ferdinand Wirth. “Who Are the Locavores?” Journal of Consumer Marketing 29.4 (2012): 248-261.