'Localwashing'

[Michael]

'Localwashing' is an ugly word that is meant to evoke 'greenwashing' which it appears very similar to.

Localwashing: How corporate America is co-opting “local”

HSBC, one of the biggest banks on the planet, has taken to calling itself “the world’s local bank.” Starbucks is removing its name from at least three of its Seattle outlets, the first of which just reopened as “15th Avenue Coffee and Tea.” Winn-Dixie, a 500-outlet supermarket chain, recently launched a new ad campaign under the tagline “Local flavor since 1956.” The International Council of Shopping Centers, a consortium of mall owners and developers, has poured millions of dollars into television ads urging people to “Shop Local”—at their nearest mall.
...
Shopping malls, chambers of commerce, and economic development agencies from Orlando to Spokane also are appropriating the phrase “buy local” to urge consumers to patronize nearby malls and chain stores. In March, leaders of a new Buy Local campaign in Fresno, California, assembled in front of the Fashion Fair Mall for a kickoff press conference. Flanked by stores like Anthropologie and The Cheesecake Factory, officials from the Economic Development Corporation of Fresno County explained that choosing to “buy local” helps the region’s economy and cited a study that found that for every $100 spent locally, $45 stays in the community.

Article (http://www.utne.com/Environment/Localwashing-How-corporate-America-is-co-opting-local.aspx)

Can't say I'm surprised. The "buy local" movement originates with consumers as an environmental policy - originally driven by food buyers.

If the consumers want local, the big multinational corporations are going to pretend to be local. But the reality is that huge multinational corporations are the categorical opposite of "buy local".

Anyway, if big corporations are rolling out a new propaganda blitz in order to attempt to subvert this new 'buy local' trend, that's pretty much proof that the "buy local" trend is gaining traction.

I've certainly started to make myself conscious of what is "local" and what is not and trying to make adjustments.

Anyone else becoming more aware of "localism"?

[drgoodtrips]

I've been aware of the trend, but I don't really care about it. I don't feel any specific connection to anyone because of their current geographic proximity to me.

[Donkey]

I've been aware of the trend, but I don't really care about it. I don't feel any specific connection to anyone because of their current geographic proximity to me.
That's not really the point. The bottom line of localism, especially the local food movement is that if you are at point A, it takes more energy to move an apple from point C to point A, than it does from point B.


A____B____________________________________________ ________C

[dilettante]

We have a really beautiful little shopping district just down the street from us, cobblestone street, lots of old stone buildings, cheese shop, spice shop, bakeries, crafts, etc and a few diners and pubs. There's even a co-op grocer. Of course there's also a Starbucks, a Borders, and half a dozen chain clothing stores.

We try to give them business whenever we can (even though its a bit more expensive) just to keep them from going under; several of the shops have shut down over the last year. It'd be a shame if it disappeared and we had to drive 15 minutes to a mega-mart or a shopping center to buy anything.

[drgoodtrips]

That's not really the point. The bottom line of localism, especially the local food movement is that if you are at point A, it takes more energy to move an apple from point C to point A, than it does from point B.


A____B____________________________________________ ________C

I don't care about that either, unless it saves me money. And, 'local' this and 'organic' that don't seem to do any sort of money saving. In fact, I get the sense that those things are specifically priced for maximum profit, since they are essentially fashionable/status symbols of sorts.

I should say that I very much enjoy farmer's markets with locally farmed food, and I tend to patronize them heavily in the summer. But, this is because (1) they're cheap and (2) (more importantly) I like the fresh food, selection, and variety.

[drgoodtrips]

Also, farmer's markets have been around since long before the trendiness of slapping a "local" label on something in the grocery store and marking it up 20 or 30 percent.

So, by my estimation, the phenomenon isn't new, but the fashion is.

[The Drunk Guy]

Also, farmer's markets have been around since long before the trendiness of slapping a "local" label on something in the grocery store and marking it up 20 or 30 percent.

So, by my estimation, the phenomenon isn't new, but the fashion is.
Exactly my opinion. Another way to "guilt" people into trying to one-up the Jones'.

I like buying fruits and veggies from roadside vendors in the summer, but I know damn well they get their shipments from Mexico, or at least out of state. (Kentucky produce now gets a pretty sticker and a front door placement in all groceries.) I also like to shop at the home-owned store for single-meal-type stuff. However, when I go shopping for food to stock up for weeks on, I go to Wal-Mart. A wider variety and cheaper prices is an unbeatable combination.

[Greendruid]

I am a part-time farmer, I sell local produce to local consumers and I am always appalled at seeing this as a selling point in big chain grocery stores when we have to frequent them. The greenwashing was enough for me. Now making things seem like your neighbour grew them so that you can support a local economy is plainly pulling the wool over the consumers' eyes.

The other phenomenon that I've had my attention drawn to lately is products labelled things like "beef-free beef" and "chicken-free chicken", implying to the consumer that this new product was raised using feed that contained no parts of the same species that the meat was derived from. In other words, the cows aren't being fed other dead cows. This hasn't happened in this country for decades now. It was banned ages ago and suddenly the supermarkets are going to capitalise on it as though its a) new and b) green. I'm disgusted.

I wanted to add to Donkey's point of the local products is also that the money a local consumer spends stays locally, at least for a time longer than it might if you spent it at a chain store. This is of supreme importance to places like where I live when so much of our local money leaves for other, more densely populated places almost as soon as it hits our bank accounts.

[Zarquon]

There is no overwhelming scientific evidence supporting the idea that 'organic' food is any better than conventional food, and nor is locally grown food using less carbon than regular food. In fact, sometimes its local food that, having been produced by more energy(non-renewable)-intensive techniques, that generates more CO2.
Critics of the local food movement point out that transport is only one component of the total environmental impact of food production and consumption. In fact, any environmental assessment of food that consumers buy needs to take into account how the food has been produced and what energy is used in its production. For example, it is likely to be more environmentally friendly for tomatoes to be grown in Spain and transported to the UK than for the same tomatoes to be grown in greenhouses in the UK requiring electricity to light and heat them
Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_food#Environmental_impact)

[The Drunk Girl]

There is no overwhelming scientific evidence supporting the idea that 'organic' food is any better than conventional food, and nor is locally grown food using less carbon than regular food. In fact, sometimes its local food that, having been produced by more energy(non-renewable)-intensive techniques, that generates more CO2.

Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_food#Environmental_impact)

I know this isn't directly talking about organic foods, but it does show the effects of what manure does, which is where most of the CO2 emissions come from regarding livestock.
At the same time, the livestock sector has assumed an often unrecognized role in global warming. Using a methodology that considered the entire commodity chain (see box below), FAO estimated that livestock are responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, a bigger share than that of transport. It accounts for nine percent of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions, most of it due to expansion of pastures and arable land for feed crops. It generates even bigger shares of emissions of other gases with greater potential to warm the atmosphere: as much as 37 percent of anthropogenic methane, mostly from enteric fermentation by ruminants, and 65 percent of anthropogenic nitrous oxide, mostly from manure.
Source (http://www.fao.org/ag/magazine/0612sp1.htm)

Also, somewhat informative and fun:

Penn and Teller: Organic Foods (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsuT3mndOKE)

[Michael]

There is no overwhelming scientific evidence supporting the idea that 'organic' food is any better than conventional food, and nor is locally grown food using less carbon than regular food. In fact, sometimes its local food that, having been produced by more energy(non-renewable)-intensive techniques, that generates more CO2.

Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_food#Environmental_impact)
Yes, this argument can be made and the multinational food industry is going to make it.

But it can only be made successfully in particular 'cherry-picked' items (such as the example for English supermarkets).

But you can't tell me that New Zealand lamb is less carbon intensive than North American lamb.

And the whole point about "food localism" is not to compare oranges from South America vs greenhouse oranges in North American winters. The real principle is to get people to stop/slowdown/reduce demand for oranges in winter (with all the high cost and carbon emissions) and learning to eat locally again.

And carbon emissions is only part of the argument for localism in food. Petrochemicals are the largest source of food cost. The short, medium and longterm forcast on petrochemical prices is 'non-stop rising'. That means non-stop price rises for food - unless one eats local food.

But it is only possible to buy local food if enough people actually buy local food to support the local production. Thus the 'local food' campaign has been going for several years now. Local food is a 'win-win' for local economies on several different measures.

And let us not forget that the reason that New Zealand lamb or Spanish tomatos are so much cheaper than North American lamb or English tomatos has everything to do with agricultural subsidies, not actual market fundamentals. As a general rule, the price of fresh food in the supermarket is a mere fraction of the actual cost. Until agricultural subsidies are factored out, it is impossible to make reasoned decisions based on actual market information and as such, all food prices are essentially established by governments (including the USA).

[Michael]

One additional point about the 'local food' movement. I think it may also be driven by the idea of 'peak oil' and the various possible problems for agro-industrial-petrochemical farming in the future.

In this respect, supporting 'food localism' and especially local 'organic' farming, is a prudent social-survival strategy. At present, industrial farming is much cheaper in dollar-cost than organic or local farming. Given the likely future rise in the price of oil, that ratio is likely to turn around soon enough and thus, places with strong traditions and infrastructure for 'food localism' are going to be better placed to prosper than other less fortunate places.

Food sourcing on a large scale necessary to support our numbers is critically important. I certainly don't like the idea of having ALL of our 'eggs' literally dependent upon one type of agriculture that is in turn dependent upon a potentially fragile global supply line.

Diversity in itself is a good thing. Encouraging diversity in our food supply chain makes a lot of sense for a lot of different reasons. :)

(as you can tell, I've been getting somewhat interested in supporting 'local foodism') :D

[Americano]

I'm very proud of the results from my organic garden. With my crop there's always a major taste difference between growing organically and using chemicals.

[Donkey]

There is no overwhelming scientific evidence supporting the idea that 'organic' food is any better than conventional food, and nor is locally grown food using less carbon than regular food. In fact, sometimes its local food that, having been produced by more energy(non-renewable)-intensive techniques, that generates more CO2.

Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_food#Environmental_impact)
That's missing the point as well. The idea behind local food isn't just that you eat food grown next door. You eat seasonal as well. That means if you live in Toronto, you don't get to eat fresh peaches in February.

[drgoodtrips]

One additional point about the 'local food' movement. I think it may also be driven by the idea of 'peak oil' and the various possible problems for agro-industrial-petrochemical farming in the future.

In this respect, supporting 'food localism' and especially local 'organic' farming, is a prudent social-survival strategy. At present, industrial farming is much cheaper in dollar-cost than organic or local farming. Given the likely future rise in the price of oil, that ratio is likely to turn around soon enough and thus, places with strong traditions and infrastructure for 'food localism' are going to be better placed to prosper than other less fortunate places.

Food sourcing on a large scale necessary to support our numbers is critically important. I certainly don't like the idea of having ALL of our 'eggs' literally dependent upon one type of agriculture that is in turn dependent upon a potentially fragile global supply line.

Diversity in itself is a good thing. Encouraging diversity in our food supply chain makes a lot of sense for a lot of different reasons. :)

(as you can tell, I've been getting somewhat interested in supporting 'local foodism') :D

How far do you propose that the idea be taken?

The reason I ask is that it seems quite likely to me that there are places whose populace cannot be sustained with locally grown food? Do you advocate that people "go local" when the option exists otherwise they import, or would you advocate that people in such places be encouraged to move?

[drgoodtrips]

That's missing the point as well. The idea behind local food isn't just that you eat food grown next door. You eat seasonal as well. That means if you live in Toronto, you don't get to eat fresh peaches in February.

That seems like a strike against the idea to me (if you were trying to sell me on it).

Buy local - fewer options, more effort to sustain a balanced diet.

There aren't a whole lot of fruits or vegetables growing in Chicago during the winter. I'd be subsisting on locally manufactured twinkies and canned goods with locally engineered preservatives.

[Michael]

How far do you propose that the idea be taken?

The reason I ask is that it seems quite likely to me that there are places whose populace cannot be sustained with locally grown food? Do you advocate that people "go local" when the option exists otherwise they import, or would you advocate that people in such places be encouraged to move?

I stress the idea of diversity. I think it is absurd for the whole planet to just abandon cheap industrial agriculture because nothing else can produce food in sufficient volumes at a low enough price to feed the billions of people on this planet.

But at the same time, we ought to encourage more diversity in our food supply chain. Organic and/or local food represents only a tiny fraction of our food sourcing. We really do need some diversity in food sourcing and that in itself is a good thing - independent of 'peak oil' or 'environmentalism' concerns.

A better balance than "99 to 1" I think is something we ought to consciously try to improve. Food sourcing is just way too important for human survival and human prosperity for us to rely upon one single industrial-based farming system with a global supply line for all of our food.

So, as a short answer, I would only counsel that it is good advice for all people to at least try to increase their support for local food production, if possible for them to do so. I think their grandchildren will be the primary beneficiaries if they do.

[Donkey]

That seems like a strike against the idea to me (if you were trying to sell me on it).

Buy local - fewer options, more effort to sustain a balanced diet.

There aren't a whole lot of fruits or vegetables growing in Chicago during the winter. I'd be subsisting on locally manufactured twinkies and canned goods with locally engineered preservatives.
First, not really anybody is suggesting a complete switch to local. At least, not anyone realistic. It's a matter of reduction. So you can still have your far away tropical food, you just don't necessarily want to eat as much, when there are more sustainable options. It's like turning some of your lights off to save electricity. Nobody is asking you to live by candlelight.

And it's not about dietary health. That's a pretty important misconception: it's about sound environmental and economic policy. The (definite) health benefits are a fringe bonus.

And sure, some of it doesn't have good selling points. But sound policy isn't necessarily as appealing as bad policy.

[drgoodtrips]

First, not really anybody is suggesting a complete switch to local. At least, not anyone realistic. It's a matter of reduction. So you can still have your far away tropical food, you just don't necessarily want to eat as much, when there are more sustainable options. It's like turning some of your lights off to save electricity. Nobody is asking you to live by candlelight.

And it's not about dietary health. That's a pretty important misconception: it's about sound environmental and economic policy. The (definite) health benefits are a fringe bonus.

And sure, some of it doesn't have good selling points. But sound policy isn't necessarily as appealing as bad policy.

I understand that it's not about dietary health (at least for anyone who has done some research into the notion and isn't simply adopting a fad). My point along those lines was that asking people to change their lifestyles is a tough sell - asking them to forgo balanced/nutritional meals out of social conscience is a very tough sell (i.e. give up fruit and veggies for the winter).

I can offer my own perspective on the matter. I work full time and go to school part time. I have a routine when it comes to eating that involves cooking foods that I enjoy on the weekends and eating out of pure utility during the week. I have managed, over the course of time, to create a diet for myself during the week that, while quick and functional, is nutritionally sustaining.

For me to alter that, in my eyes, is simply a waste of the time of which I have little right now. Perhaps I'm jaded, but that tends to trump my social conscience. Provided that I don't view my actions as unethical or more damaging than those of others, I'll make changes like that time permitting.

[drgoodtrips]

I stress the idea of diversity. I think it is absurd for the whole planet to just abandon cheap industrial agriculture because nothing else can produce food in sufficient volumes at a low enough price to feed the billions of people on this planet.

But at the same time, we ought to encourage more diversity in our food supply chain. Organic and/or local food represents only a tiny fraction of our food sourcing. We really do need some diversity in food sourcing and that in itself is a good thing - independent of 'peak oil' or 'environmentalism' concerns.

A better balance than "99 to 1" I think is something we ought to consciously try to improve. Food sourcing is just way too important for human survival and human prosperity for us to rely upon one single industrial-based farming system with a global supply line for all of our food.

So, as a short answer, I would only counsel that it is good advice for all people to at least try to increase their support for local food production, if possible for them to do so. I think their grandchildren will be the primary beneficiaries if they do.

Thanks for the explanation - that seems like a very rational approach.

I do tend to see people advocating various social matters like this with some degree of extremism (I've heard people claim that we should look to phase out/ban all non-organic farming, for instance). I wouldn't have had you pegged as advocating ala an ideologue, but I was curious as to the degree that you thought policy should reflect this kind of thing.

[Michael]

That seems like a strike against the idea to me (if you were trying to sell me on it).

Buy local - fewer options, more effort to sustain a balanced diet.

There aren't a whole lot of fruits or vegetables growing in Chicago during the winter. I'd be subsisting on locally manufactured twinkies and canned goods with locally engineered preservatives.

If you were to give your patronage to local farming produce initiatives, there is the cascading effect of the market that will come into play.

First of all, our local agricultural systems are able to produce a whole lot more diversity than they presently engage in. If there is market demand, there will be some market response. There are a whole lot more local vegetables that can be grown near Chicago that aren't because it is slightly cheaper at the moment to import them from other places on the other side of the planet.

Secondly, no one is saying that you must change your diet entirely. The idea is that you should consider trying to support the process - where possible. If you must have peaches or strawberries in February, so be it. The name of the game here is not to replace the industrial-agriculture-based global supply system, but rather to supplement it with some other type products that are not dependent upon a global supply chain.

It takes long term efforts to establish 'infant' industries like local organic farming. Governments and big business are going to do their best to squash it. Thus, the enterprise does need a bit of conscious help from those who are willing and able to support it.

For example, wild rice is an ancient, native and natural crop here in southern Ontario. It is a wonderful product that is way better than the white rice the grocery store shelves are stocked with. One doesn't need any industrial agricultural techniques to harvest it - but it still has only a fraction of 1% of Ontario rice market share in sales (because it is more expensive because it doesn't get any agricultural subsidies from anyone). I personally make it a point to buy this product as regularly as possible (since I do like the product). As a result, I'm helping this product become established in the local marketplace. As local production increases over time, the unit cost of the product will drop to more directly competitive prices. I can easily afford the extra dollar for this product in the meantime, so the cost to my pocket is tiny, but the longer term effects are much larger - the next generation may grow up getting accustomed to eating Ontario-grown wild rice and that's a generally good thing for the local economy and local economic diversity (and food-supply security).

Btw, this this thread topic seems to be migrating... :ummm:

[Donkey]

Migration perhaps. ;) But I think we're discussing a similar thing. We can all say "fuck you you're shady" if you localwash, but that's about as far as that thread might go?

[Greendruid]

There are a couple points in this thread that I'd like to respond to and it has everything to do with lost knowledge.

To address Zarquon's concern about CO2 emissions and local vs. imported, industrial scale agriculture always uses a lot more fuel than the "old way". I farm almost entirely by human power. I use manure from my animals to enrich the nutrients in the soil. Now, not each of these animals is productive but most are. We have a miniature donkey (39" high at the whithers), who is being trained to pull a plough, and a miniature horse, who is basically there to keep the donkey company. We also have three milking doe goats and a buck (for more goats in the future). We also have about 22 laying hens and a few roosters. All of these produce manure that is fed back into the soil to grow food for us and them. I am guilty of tilling with a hand-driven tiller in the spring as a time-saving device since farming is not what I live by. The rest involves no machinery though.

To address the good Dr.'s point about seasonality and the lengths to which this should be taken, I would like to remind everyone about the ways in which our ingenious little monkey brains came up with ways to preserve food into the months when it was not available fresh long before the discovery of chemical preservatives. This is especially necessary the closer you get to the poles of course and I am pretty familiar with the shortness of the growing season in Atlantic Canada as our first snow squalls arrived today. Canning is probably the most ubiquitous method of preservation that we use in our household. No machinery is required for this and it can even take place on a wood stove whereby the carbon-neutral practice of burning wood takes the place of a fossil fuel. This includes pressure canning as well. Drying is another popular one with us and it allows us to enjoy tomatoes, apples and any fruit well into the winter months. We have also never run short on beans using this method. The third method of preservation is simply cold storage. Freezing is one extreme you can go to for this. We currently use a standard chest freezer only because I don't have my ice house built yet. Ice here is pretty much free if it is collected in the winter months. In a good ice house this can store all year round. You can also use a cold storage cellar that uses some basic principles of physics to cool it to the right temperature using valves and vents.

There is also the great possibility afforded by the use of greenhouses. These lengthen the growing season immensely, especially for cold-loving crops like the lettuces and brassicas (cabbage, kale, Brussels sprouts, etc.) The insulting quality of a double-glass greenhouse is unmatched at extending the growing season in most well-populated northern climates. The praises of this approach are sung most loudly by Elliot Coleman in his Four Season Harvest (http://www.amazon.ca/Four-Season-Harvest-Organic-Vegetables/dp/1890132276).

Anyway, in a nutshell, there are lots of ways to eat out of season while still eating locally and reduce your carbon footprint immensely. Of course, there is the point the Americano made that is well-worth reiterating. The taste of our own home-grown food ... and other products ... is by far superior to anything I've ever tasted from a store.