3 ms·
(1) variety across regions; (2) variety across seasons; (3) harder to scale up, and therefore less likely to be refined/processed/unnatural; (4) forces people t
by jeffdavis 12y ago
(1) variety across regions; (2) variety across seasons; (3) harder to scale up, and therefore less likely to be refined/processed/unnatural; (4) forces people to be creative about food, which adds to the culture.
Of course, those might not be true, but they are plausible enough to be attractive reasons.
One might argue that, technically, importing strictly increases options, and therefore makes it easier for an individual to eat a wide variety. But it also makes it easier for someone to get a little too comfortable eating exactly the same things for too long without thinking.
- primroot 12y agoIn practice importing diminishes options, both for the locations that find their market flooded with the standard supermarket-optimized foods, and the for the poor countries that are compelled to make their land produce the "best" for the sake of profits. In the last century 75% of crop diversity was lost, and in the decades after the Green Revolution poor countries became net importers of food. Simplistic logic that looks at effects completely abstracted from the system, would make such outcome look impossible.