Farm-to-table is a mark of quality for gourmets because the food tastes better and has more nutrition when it has more expensive inputs. Feed a pig nothing but

Farm-to-table is a mark of quality for gourmets because the food tastes better and has more nutrition when it has more expensive inputs. Feed a pig nothing but acorns and he's gonna taste great, but he's gonna be really expensive. Feed a pig nothing but hyperprocessed nutrient foam or whatever and he's gonna taste bad but he's gonna be cheaper. >On a long enough timeline, I see this as the future of the industrialization/technology trend that touches everything, including ag. While the "old" industrial-ag model shows that bio-mass reduces over time with fossil-fuel inputs and mass production, so won't stay viable forever. Higher end consumers will support the fully-organic small farm sustainable rural modal, but it remains to be seen if/how they can scale and be price-competitive for mass-consumption vs cheaper alternatives. Why? When people can afford it, they tend to want to upgrade what kinds of food that they eat. The quality issue is not something that is easy to sidestep just because of the law of conservation. Output can't exceed input. It is a huge operation to move soil and fertilizer around. It is expensive even in rural areas. Hydroponics have certain fertility, plant type, and plant quality limitations and cost more money to set up. Not to mention the issue of devoting expensive urban real estate to agricultural production.