Growing concern regarding environmental, social, economic and food quality outcomes of the modern global industrial food system as well as the implications of climate change on food security and food system sustainability have fomented interest in, and action to advance localized food systems. Environmental stewardship is an oft-touted benefit of food system localization. However, few studies have comparatively examined actual environmental benefits of local versus global supply systems and most focus on only one aspect (e.g., GHG emissions). The study reported here comparatively analyzes land, water, carbon and ecological footprints of a localized food supply and contemporary global food supply for the South-West British Columbia (Canada), bioregion (SWBC). The footprint family approach utilized allows measuring overall biophysical loads for the studied region. We quantified regional rates of reliance on imported biophysical services; measured the performances of specific food products grown locally in comparison with their imported counterparts; and identified those commodities that have better and worse local biophysical performances. For the SWBC bioregion, only 35% of the food consumed in the region is locally produced. Supplying the region's food demands requires 2 million hectares of land and 3 billion m3 of water, generating approximately 2.8 million tons of CO2e, with an eco-footprint of 2.5 million gha. Examining a large number of commodities grown and consumed in the bioregion revealed that only some commodities grown locally have absolute or significant biophysical advantages, while the rest have very little to no local advantage. Our analysis challenges the notion that local food systems are necessarily more environmentally sustainable from a biophysical resource use perspective and therefore may not represent the most compelling argument(s) for food system localization. We call for better and more comprehensive comparative analysis of existing and desired food systems as a mean to advance sustainability.

Are strong local food systems better for the environment than conventional food systems where relatively close proximity between points of production and consumption is not a defining characteristic? Despite growing support for efforts to strengthen local food systems, surprisingly little is known about the relationship of local food to environmental sustainability. In particular, the relationship of local food systems to the use of agricultural chemicals to manage pests, weeds and disease has not been a subject of systematic research. In this paper, I use longitudinal data from the US Census of Agriculture to explore whether growth in local food systems is associated with decreased on-farm use of agricultural chemicals. Drawing on county-level data from 1997 to 2012, I find that an increase in the strength of local food systems—whether measured as the number of farms that market products directly to consumers, or as the total value of direct market products—has been broadly associated with a decrease in spending on agricultural chemicals in the USA as a whole. But the magnitude of the relationship between direct marketing to consumers and changes in agricultural chemical use has dwindled over time, to the point where it is not clear whether contemporary local food systems are still incentivizing farmers to reduce their use of pesticides. Overall, this study lends new credence to the idea that robust local food systems can benefit the environment. But even where just one dimension of agriculture's impact on the environment is concerned, the characteristics of local food systems appear to have varied over time—a qualification that argues strongly for further research into the relationship of local food to agricultural practice.

Rural communities have faced significant socio-economic challenges for the past several decades due to structural shifts and changing social expectations regarding the management, production of, and markets for natural resources, including production agriculture. The New Natural Resource Economy (NNRE) is an economic development approach to the use of natural resources, including agriculture, in ways that can build healthy environments and healthy, resilient local economies (Hibbard and Lurie, 2013). A major attribute of the NNRE is its focus on very small businesses, the predominant business type in rural settings. Emerging trends, such as regional food networks (RFNs) that connect food producers to consumers within a state or local region, may provide opportunities for rural communities to diversify and expand local businesses around the use of natural resources, thereby helping to restore greater capacity for self-direction and adding to local community vitality. Thus, we address whether RFNs in rural Oregon counties display characteristics of an NNRE development strategy through the relationships between agricultural producers and consumers that support very small agricultural enterprises. Based on analysis of Oregon producer survey data from 2016 in the more rural resource-dependent Oregon counties, we find that the RFN producer survey respondents are indeed very small businesses engaged in small-scale, multifunctional agriculture. They are motivated by economic, social, and environmental concerns as they contribute to the economic activity in their communities. We also surveyed Oregon consumers, finding that although consumer survey respondents in the same region are not primarily driven to buy local based on environmental considerations, they are nonetheless interested in supporting agriculture and local businesses. The demand for local products can create a virtuous cycle contributing to the economic, social, and environmental sustainability of the community. Given appropriate policy and program support, there is fertile ground to create new opportunities to generate farm income and acquire food within the NNRE healthy environment-healthy economy paradigm for rural economic development.

Local food systems are frequently touted as economic development strategies for rural communities. In this study, we estimated the local economic impacts of local compared with conventionally produced and marketed food in two regions of Missouri and one region in Nebraska. We found that local food systems generated substantial increases in value added for their local economies.

Consumer interest in locally grown produce continues to increase in the USA. Small, diversified vegetable farms, including those managed organically, have been important contributors to meet this growing demand for local product. To be profitable in these markets, farmers must be able to appropriately price their products to cover production costs and provide themselves and their employees a living wage. Questions remain, however, as to the most effective method of assessing the cost of production of specific crops on these farms, in part due to the variability in labor inputs associated with diversified farming strategies. This study used a participatory approach to investigate both methodologies for varied widely, with high coefficients of variation calculated for all values, indicating high farm-to-farm variability in labor required for seasonal activities. Farmers reported both challenges with data collection, as well as successes in using data analysis to guide management decisions. This ongoing work highlights the value of collecting farm-specific data for use in cost-of-production determinations.

Despite the heightened efforts to implement eco-labeling schemes as the market-based vehicle for improving environmental quality, the overall effectiveness of eco-labels are still uncertain due to complex and sometimes unexpected market responses. In this paper, we assess the overall changes in carbon emissions resulting from two types of labeling on fresh apples, carbon labels and location designation labels (e.g., locally grown), both of which can have mixed implications for carbon emissions due to fluctuating supply chain factors. We employ an equilibrium displacement model that integrates existing estimates of differences across production systems, and our own estimates of consumer responses to labels in order to simulate the changes in prices, trade flows and estimate carbon impacts across several scenarios in the US fresh apple market. We find that both labels ultimately affect market outcomes and overall carbon emissions. With location designation labels, consumers’ preference for local products leads to a net decrease in carbon emissions during the local growing season, while the interaction of various market dynamics results in a subsequent net increase in carbon emissions during the local off-season. The interaction of a carbon label with the location label lowers the overall attractiveness of products and reduces the quantity demanded, and thus, reduces the carbon emissions in both seasons. Overall, providing the location designation label increases annual carbon emissions, whereas providing both the location designation and carbon labeling decreases annual emissions. In short, the dynamics and interdependency of labeling strategies are important to consider in the context of eco-labeling.

Demand for locally and regionally produced meat has stimulated increased interest in livestock production among New England farmers. The region's livestock producers lament lack of access to slaughter and processing infrastructure. However, there is very little research on New England's slaughter industry to document this perceived problem. For this reason, we tested the hypothesis that a shortage of slaughter and processing infrastructure constrains the production of livestock for meat in New England. The region's large animal slaughter facility owners and managers were surveyed to determine current slaughter and processing capacity and identify challenges facilities face in meeting increased producer demand. The estimates of current capacity were then compared to USDA data on livestock slaughter and large animal marketings. The region's existing abattoirs could slaughter 63–84% of all animals marketed, but could process only 29–43%. New England's infrastructure for slaughter operated at only 38% of total physical capacity in 2009, while on-site processing infrastructure operated at 66% of total physical capacity (78% if only on-site inspected capacity is considered). Moreover, surveys with facility operators showed that the primary constraints faced by existing slaughterhouses are a shortage of skilled labor and the seasonality of the livestock industry, with periods of very high demand for slaughter in the fall and very low demand in the spring and early summer. Additional infrastructure, particularly for processing, would be needed were regional livestock production to increase. However, simply increasing physical capacity will not address the issues of labor availability and demand seasonality expressed by slaughter facility owners.

Public interest in local food continues to grow, but few analyses have examined the capacity for the US population to be supplied through local and regional food systems. This paper extends earlier work that demonstrated a method for mapping potential foodsheds and estimating the potential for New York to meet the food needs of the state's population centers. It provides a methodology for addressing the question, ‘If land is limited, which foods should be grown locally?’ A spatial model was developed to allocate the available agricultural land of New York State (NYS) to meet in-state food needs for six distinct food groups (grains, vegetables, fruits, dairy, meat and eggs) across the eight largest population centers. An optimization routine was used to allocate land to maximize economic land use value (LUV). Eleven scenarios were examined, ranging from a baseline level of consumption of New York produced foods to a 100% local diet. Across the 11 scenarios, the amount of food supplied, the LUV attained, and the area of land allocated increased as the ‘willingness’ to consume local products increased. This approach dictated that land was preferentially devoted to higher-value food groups relative to lower-value groups, and no scenario used all available land. Under the 100% local scenario, 69% of total food needs (on a fresh weight basis) were supplied in-state with an average food distance of 238 km. This scenario provided food from only four of the six groups, namely, dairy, eggs, fruit and vegetables. These results suggest that a much larger proportion of total food needs (on a weight basis) might be provided from in-state production than was found in previous work. LUV serves as a compelling optimization function, and future work should investigate the degree to which maximizing returns to land complements or conflicts with social and environmental goals of local and regional food systems.

This article illuminates the geographic concept of ‘place’ in local foods. Because the social aspects of local food have been more fully addressed in previous literature, this review focuses instead on the ecological aspects of farming and food. First, the literature on natural resource use in agriculture provides contextual understanding of water use, biodiversity, soils and agro-ecological methods. The complex relationship between climate change and agriculture is described and models assessing the impacts of climate change on agriculture are detailed. The geography of local food is specifically addressed by describing methods for assessing natural resource use in local food, including food miles, consumer transportation, scale and community, agricultural methods and diet. Finally, future research paths are suggested to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the environmental impact of local food. Such research would encompass the geography of local food through development of broader, more inclusive strategy, including the concept of the ‘ecological appetite’ of crops and foods, the union of both social and ecological aspects of resource use, the linkages between rural and urban producers and consumers and the inclusion of farmers’ ecological knowledge. Overall, the geography of local food seeks to assess the where of food production and consumption, while incorporating key issues of how (agro-ecological methods benefiting the community) and what (locally appropriate crops).

Results from research on controversial topics are often interpreted according to the world view of the reader. With conflicting results from different researchers or institutions, it is likely that vested financial interests or adherence to conventional wisdom will lead to rejection of science-based conclusions. An example from the past is the comparison of multiple cropping with monocrop systems, where clear advantages of complex systems are discounted by those committed to the monoculture paradigm. A current example is comparison of organic with conventional farming systems and food products, where food price, suspicion about certification and philosophy about perceived ‘non-scientific’ results cloud the technical conclusions. An emerging example is comparisons of local versus global food systems, where multiple issues including comparative advantage and food preferences obscure the key questions of energy investment, food equity and local well-being. A proposed solution to this dilemma is to instead focus scarce research funds on improving the development of alternative agroecosystems, rather than invest human energy into futile comparisons that are unlikely to convince the skeptics. In this way, more creative alternatives can be explored and greater progress made toward food equity and sufficiency.

This paper explores hidden problems amid the impressive expansion of farmers' markets in Oregon and throughout the United States. Although markets are growing in number, a surprisingly large number of them fail. A challenge for many markets is inadequate revenue to support market operations such as paying for the management personnel to perform functions necessary to grow and sustain markets. Smaller markets may enter a downward spiral in which they cannot attract additional customers because they do not have sufficient vendors but cannot attract additional vendors because they do not have sufficient customers. The analysis identifies five intertwined factors associated with markets that fail: small size, a high need for products, low administrative revenue, a volunteer or low paid manager and high manager turnover. The paper also examines the more general issue of why some markets struggle by exploring a correlation between new markets and inexperienced managers, and effort thresholds for volunteer managers. Recommendations to assist markets toward success include better planning, manager and board of director training and community financial support. The findings of this study have broad application.

Agricultural industrialization, Green Revolution technologies, environmental change and civil conflicts have all been cited as contributing to the erosion of crop biodiversity. An additional factor is change in the characteristics of markets, including distance to market. Proponents of sustainable agriculture claim that one benefit of local food systems is the preservation of crop biodiversity. This paper explores that claim, examining Ohio orchardists' understanding and valuation of apple varieties and relating these to the preservation of biodiversity. Growers provided lists of apple varieties and then performed pilesorts on them. Analysis using multidimensional scaling reveals the underlying dimensions growers use to distinguish those cultivars. Salient characteristics are taste, use and market focus. Demands of the conventional commercial market with regards to transportation, appearance and storage exclude the old varieties. On the other hand, there is a strong congruence between sales in local markets and production of old varieties. Local markets, such as roadside stands and ‘pick-your-own’ operations, play an important role in the preservation of heirloom varieties of apples.

One increasingly successful approach to enhancing small farm viability is for farmers to market their products directly to consumers and food-oriented businesses and institutions within their local area. This localized approach to food production and distribution is based on theoretical concepts often articulated as community, local or regional food systems. But is there sufficient consumer support to make local food systems viable? Do communities differ in their potential for developing a local food system based on their dominant socio-economic and/or political characteristics? This study reports on the results of a random mail survey of households in two Oregon communities. Although the two communities contrast socio-economically and politically, they show common but somewhat different support for local agriculture. The results demonstrate the potential for the development of more localized food systems in both communities. However, the type of products, their method of delivery and pricing will likely need to be tailored to fit each community.

Local food system potentials were studied in Washington County, Nebraska. As a departure from most studies of locally based systems, farmers were surveyed in addition to consumers for potential participation. Data about the current food system and opinions and preferences for local production, marketing, and purchasing of food were collected using self-administered mail questionnaires. The response rate was 35% for the farmer survey and 37% for the consumer survey. Results indicated that, on the farming side of the food system, conventional corn and soybean production and marketing predominated in Washington County, and farmer interest in producing for local markets was low. Consumers reported a high level of interest in purchasing food from farmers' markets, local grocery stores, local restaurants and directly from farms, and indicated a willingness to pay a price premium for local foods. They also reported that quality and taste were the most important factors in food purchase decisions, but environmentally friendly production and support for local farmers were also important. We conclude that there is tremendous potential for local marketing of farm products, but that there is a large gap between consumer demand and willingness of farmers to meet this demand. Further study of motivations and opinions of farmers is needed, in addition to determining production thresholds for the number of farms and farmers needed to meet local food demands.

The threat to sustainability posed byglobal economic integration and the surging interest in local and regional food systems provide an opportunity to unite the diverse constituencies of the sustainable agriculture movement behind a common political and economic agenda. Neither the campaign to influence the Farm Bill nor a romantic vision of bygone agrarian communities are sufficient to broaden the movement's existing political base and deepen its influence. This paper suggests an alternative approach: grassroots organizing guided by the vision of “community-controlled economic development.” Theory linking this new paradigm in local economic development to sustainable agriculture is presented, along with practical examples from innovative networks promoted by the California Alliance for Sustainable Agriculture (CASA). I analyze the experience of CASA organizations, both separately and as an alliance, to illuminate how a strategic vision of community-controlled economic development can enable the movement to meet three difficult political challenges: holding power accountable; unifying environmental and social agendas; and developing strong leadership accountable to the movement's community base.