Ashlea Scholl

AP English Language

Locavore Movement Essay Revision

In recent times, a food movement has been increasing in popularity in the United States

of America. It is called the locavore movement, appropriately named as it centers around people

purchasing produce that is grown in their local area. A common misconception is that is healthier

for the consumer than the food found in large, brand-name stores. Similarly, people falsely believe

that locally grown food is better for the environment than large agricultural projects. However, they

fail to realize the many repercussions that arise as a result of this growing movement such as its

inaccessibility and the resulting impact on the environment, concerns pertaining to the treatment

of animals, and nutrition concerns are all problematic factors one should consider.

There is no question that a fresh bunch of apples that came right off the tree are preferable

alternative to the generic apples sitting on the market’s shelves, however finding a source to attain

those apples poses an issue for many Americans. The United States is becoming increasingly

urbanized, with “80 percent of [Americans] living in large, densely populated urban areas” that

don’t have orchards anywhere within the immediate proximity of their residency (Source F). It’s

unrealistic for people to have the ability and the disposable income in order to drive “hundreds of

miles, often thousands” in order to obtain organic produce from the countryside where farms are

primarily located (Source F). Consequently, longer drives equates to more carbon dioxide being

put into the atmosphere in the form of emissions from motor vehicles. This also accelerates the

rate at which oil is being consumed in the form of gasolines to fill the tanks of the cars, another

detriment to the health of the environment as it depletes a nonrenewable resource. The lack of

accessibility on its own proves to be problematic for a majority of the population, but is worsened

by environmental concerns.
 The production of foods grown locally raise some concerns about the unfair treatment of

animals should urbanized centers transition to the locavore movement. As discussed previously,

urbanized settings have a problem with obtaining locally grown foods as they are too far from

agricultural centers. The obvious solution would be to introduce farms, orchards, or other

agricultural projects into these urban areas to encourage consumers to purchase produce grown

immediately near them under sustainable conditions. However, people still have a need for meats

which rears a multitude of issues. The first and foremost being a lack of space. Cities are densely

populated by both people and concrete buildings; there is no room to incorporate pastures where

animals could graze and roam. Otherwise, animals would be forced into confined quarters and

treated “under intensive factory like conditions” that would be detrimental for the wellbeing for the

animals (Source C). Needless suffering on the behalf of the animals is cruel, and most people

would agree. Not only is it a humanitarian issue that is accompanied by a variety of ethical

concerns, but there is also the question of sanitation. Packing animals into tiny spaces increases

the spread of disease which, if not regulated or caught early, could contaminate unknowing people

who consume the meat harvested from the diseased animals. There are numerous concerns

about converting urban spaces to allow local agricultural products, that both impact the animals

and the people who eat them.

A growing misconception regarding locally grown food is that is provides nutritional

benefits that one can’t find from commercially grown products. However, locavores don’t receive

a substantial enough nutritional benefit to justify the inane price mark-up of food grown locally.

Studies show that “food begins to lose nutrition as soon as it is harvested”, regardless of where it

is grown (Source B). By the time it reaches shelves or local markets, “close to a maximum of

nutrition” is lost (Source B). Regardless of how it is grown or where, it still takes a prolonged

duration of time to harvest, clean, and package foods from local farms that, by the time they arrive

at distribution location, they have lost the nutritional benefits that locavore enthusiasts praise. The
reality of it is, they both experience the loss of nutritional benefits before they can be consumed,

eliminating that debate.

The falsehoods surrounding the locavore movement should be rectified and corrected

before a person decides to convert to that lifestyle as many of the things they believe to be true

actually aren’t. There are many repercussions that are presented by the locavore movement,

revolving around lack of accessibilities and complications with trying to alleviate that issue.

Additionally, the small difference in nutritional benefits of locally grown food does not rationalize

the exuberant prices as compared to commercial products.