At the moment, people from many counties have access to a variety of food transported from around the world. There are both benefits and drawbacks associated with this shift from all the economic, cultural and ecological perspectives, thus it’s hard to generalize that whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages and vice versa.
From the economic standpoint, globalization of food boosts a country’s GDP and also squeezes the market share owned by local farmers. Many agricultural countries take advantage of this trend and a lion’s share their GDP growth stems from increased exported products. While at the same time, local farmers of those imported countries are on the verge of losing the market dominance, with increased imported market entering into customer’s choices.
Culturally, importing food allows consumers to experience exotic culture, which accompany with the advent of cultural commodity trap. Food has long been a carrier of culture, and a significant number of people are keen on trying out customs from other countries via purchasing food produced all over the world. Businessmen grasp this consumption habit swiftly and disguise some local products as imported ones to make a good fortune. In the long term, the valuable traditions behind those imported products lose their appeal.
Finally, transporting products overseas reduce the need for arable land but its’ environmental impact cannot be overlooked. Crops planted in tropical area don’t have to be introduced to other area, so there’s no need to develop additional land for cultivate these crops. However, the transporting process leads to growing carbon footprint, exacerbating the climate change.
In conclusion, the merits and negative aspects of food globalization are in equilibrium. Thus, this’s a context-sensitive issue needs to be handled carefully. Practices like green subsidies, cultural protection and sustainable transportation can help the world harness the positive aspects while mitigating its harms.