Agreed. Buying local is counter productive because it destroys competative advantage (less transport expenses). However, there is one caveat; Externalities, which are by definition not accounted for by the market. So if we're shipping strawberries from, say, California to New York and strawberries are cheaper to grow in, harvest in, and transport from California that all sounds great right? But, then there are externalities that the market doesn't take into account, like pollution(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality). If pollution from the gas burned to ship the strawberries was taxed to correct the market failure we might (or still might not) be buying local a lot more.
True. But the benefits of markets (in a different capacity) far outweigh the costs of externalities like pollution (refrigeration, high speed transportation, pesticides, genetic engineering, coordination/distribution channels, etc...).
Footnote: Maybe it's just me, but why is pollution always the only externality ever cited by market critics?
My comment was glib and did nothing to "educate and enlighten (the writers as well as the readers!) while fostering civil discussion and debate."
What do you mean by benefits of markets (in a different capacity)? Whether they outweight the externalitites is a matter of value to individuals and method of calculation.
Maybe I should have clarifed and said national or global markets. An international market for strawberries, yes, probably creates more pollution than say a subsistence farmer, town or county, but the larger market provides the product to many more people at a much cheaper price in a much faster time. And they're probably tastier and more more healthy/safer as well. It's a trade off, but I think the benefits of global markets far out outweigh the costs and alleged benefits of local markets.
Welcome to Non Incautus. This is a blog written by a group of Washington & Lee graduates that focuses on contemporary issues, economics, politics, philosophy, movies, music, television and everything in between. It aims to educate and enlighten (the writers as well as the readers!) while fostering civil discussion and debate.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAgreed. Buying local is counter productive because it destroys competative advantage (less transport expenses). However, there is one caveat; Externalities, which are by definition not accounted for by the market. So if we're shipping strawberries from, say, California to New York and strawberries are cheaper to grow in, harvest in, and transport from California that all sounds great right? But, then there are externalities that the market doesn't take into account, like pollution(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality). If pollution from the gas burned to ship the strawberries was taxed to correct the market failure we might (or still might not) be buying local a lot more.
ReplyDeleteTrue. But the benefits of markets (in a different capacity) far outweigh the costs of externalities like pollution (refrigeration, high speed transportation, pesticides, genetic engineering, coordination/distribution channels, etc...).
ReplyDeleteFootnote: Maybe it's just me, but why is pollution always the only externality ever cited by market critics?
cause it's easy and people get mad about baby seals
ReplyDeleteMy comment was glib and did nothing to "educate and enlighten (the writers as well as the readers!) while fostering civil discussion and debate."
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean by benefits of markets (in a different capacity)? Whether they outweight the externalitites is a matter of value to individuals and method of calculation.
Maybe I should have clarifed and said national or global markets. An international market for strawberries, yes, probably creates more pollution than say a subsistence farmer, town or county, but the larger market provides the product to many more people at a much cheaper price in a much faster time. And they're probably tastier and more more healthy/safer as well. It's a trade off, but I think the benefits of global markets far out outweigh the costs and alleged benefits of local markets.
ReplyDeleteStop hating on my blog description.
I wasn't hating. I like it. I was just pointing out that my comment was making fun of environmental zealots without actually adding any insight.
ReplyDeleteI still think the devils in the details with respect to whether it's better to buy local or not. No easy answers.
It's not an easy answer for you or me, the lucky individual who has the opportunity to distinguish between different types of food and various prices.
ReplyDeleteBut for the poor individual with a limited disposable income, it's a very easy answer. The best food for the cheapest price is what they will take.
Thank God for markets.