The Myth of One-Size-Fits-All Solutions
by Vicki Tardif
A few months ago, the Oxford University Press named “locavore” the 2007 word of the year. I first heard the word “locavore” last spring as I started reading more about the local-food movement. I have mixed feelings about the locavore movement. All of the locavore advocates I found supported eating food grown within the somewhat arbitrary limit of 100 miles. Conveniently, these people all seemed to live in the San Francisco area, which just happens to be within 100 miles of Salinas Valley, otherwise known as the “Salad Bowl of the World”. Last month, one of these California-based locavores blogged about the spinach growing at a local farm. I am a life-long New Englander; the only things I expect to grow in December are the snow banks.
Recently, NPR’s Here and Now did an an interview with James McWilliams on this topic. (It is the first 15 minutes of the audio clip on that page.) James McWilliams is a visiting scholar at Yale and author of an upcoming book on the history of pesticides. In this interview, he talks about how there is more to determining how “green” your food is than simply adding up the miles your food traveled to get to your plate. For example, is it better to eat food grown locally with the use of pesticides or to eat organic food that was grown farther away? If I live in a drought area, should I eat locally-grown tomatoes or tomatoes grown in an area where water is more plentiful?
There is no one-size-fits-all answer to these questions. The “greenest” way for my uncle in Texas to eat is different than it is for me here in Massachusetts. My friends in California may find a different solution than either of us. We may also have different priorities. I may care about preserving the land by keeping local farms alive. My uncle may care about how to live responsibly in drought conditions. My California friends may be focused on curbing the use of pesticides. These are all environmentally-friendly goals.
So what is a consumer to do? If we are willing to take a step back, it turns out that there is a common solution — education. Go to local farmers’ markets and talk to the farmers. They can tell you which crops are in season, which ones are doing well, and which ones are struggling that growing season. If your grocery store lists the origin of its produce, take note. If it doesn’t, ask the manager why they do not provide this information to consumers. If your grocer provides organic produce, look at that option. Regardless of our goals, education is the first step to working toward greening our diets, even if the solutions we settle upon are not the same.
on January 24th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
Maybe you (we) shouldn’t live in New England. Just because it’s your (our) home, and you (we) like it, doesn’t mean it’s the smartest thing to do…
on January 25th, 2008 at 2:37 am
Vicki–
I think that this is a great way to frame the issue. It gives me a lot to think about.
Dean–
Why not? It seems that Vicki’s point is that there are ways to live environmentally in may–if not all–places. Having everyone moving to within 100 miles of Salinas doesn’t seem like it’ll fix anything.
on January 25th, 2008 at 7:05 pm
Dean, I did not mean to suggest that people should move from New England or that our location precludes us from “being green”. I just think that the best approach to limiting our environmental footprint may be different than someone who lives in CA. And that is fine.
Here is another example. As I said, I grew up in New England — Maine to be more specific. The high school I attended was built shortly after the height of the energy crisis in the 70s, so energy use was high on the list of concerns. To this end, a West Coast architect was chosen to design the school and to his specs, they built a modern, ranch-style building.
The only problem is that Maine is not California. In California, conserving energy often means efficiently cool the building. In Maine, it means efficiently heating it. So, instead of taking advantage of heat rising to upper floors, we lost that energy. The building ended up being more of an energy sink than many other, older schools because it was designed for the wrong climate.
We should remember what works in CA may not work the same way here and if we look across the country at one another and say, “Live like me! I am green!”, we are going to work at cross purposes.
on February 5th, 2008 at 2:36 am
Vicki,
This time of year, I get *real* tired of the Salinas perspective, too.
There are locavores in New England, and they blog too.
You might enjoy reading the archives at http://pocketfarm.com or keeping up with http://foodonthefood.com, who’s right in your backyard.