When we discussed the concept of “local” in relation to french fries and Burgerville, I realized how incredible impossible it is to be completely “local.” Just in the room I am sitting in, I can’t see anything that I would in any way consider “local.” Shoes from Germany, a water bottle purchased in Idaho, chairs manufactured… somewhere that is probably NOT Portland, books, paper, steal, plastic. In a school that prides itself on international affairs and study abroad, there seems to be a contradiction between the global perspective and advocating for the trendy “local.” Our institutions and systems are so global. Lamb Weston, a corporation with its humble beginnings in Oregon grew up in the global age and capitalized greatly on the globalization and exportation of potato products. I mean, ever since the Colombian Exchange, humans have preferred and enjoyed the globalization of food, so it makes sense that our food systems today have developed globally. Is this wrong??
Last year in Boise, there was this huge fad about the book Tomatoland by Barry Estabrook. The book discusses the business of growing tomatoes in South Florida, wrought with Monsanto, labor exploitation, and unhealthiness. Many of the major proponents of Tomatoland‘s message advocated for growing your own tomatoes on your own backyard, or buying from “local growers” such as the Boise Co-Op. However, they were preaching to people in Idaho, a state and region characterized by water scarcity and arid, high mountain desert. While we CAN grow tomatoes in Boise (we do in my backyard), we may not be able to afford the water intensity needed for every household to grow their own little patch of tomatoland in their backyards. In Boise, if we ate local, we would be eating sagebrush.
This week in class, we discussed actions that we as students, consumers, and activists can do to solve some of the problems posed by french fries and E-waste. I don’t know if we can really do anything, because I think the problem lies inherently within the systems that govern our consumption, particularly surrounding food consumption. I refer back to our readings from the first half of the course – Guthman’s “Commentary on teaching food,” Maniates’ “Individualization,” and Lach et al “Crisis and Creativity in California” – and emphasize the need for political and policy action to alter the systems and institutions that pose many of the major issues. I think that regulation, transparency, and a genuine interest of politicians who CAN influence the laws and regulations that can alter the practices and impact of our institutions in fundamental.