• bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Do you have anything you can cite for that proposition? I fully acknowledge that there could be something I’m missing, but just thinking about it logically it doesn’t make sense.

    It takes X agriculture and Y livestock to feed a person for a year. Economy of scale would allow you to produce more with less in a larger centralized facility compared to many smaller farms. The implements required to support a large facility should be less than the sum of many smaller facilities that produce an equal output. The agriculture and livestock are brought to a central point (the city) as opposed to many decentralized towns.

    Happy to be wrong, would just need to see the evidence, because right now my intuition is saying no. Love to see whatever you have!

    • pm_me_some_serotonin
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      There are a couple articles I can link when I get home. They studied a similar phenomenon in some Brazilian cities. There are several factors involved, including food losses due to distance to consumption and the fact that smaller producers tend to grow more diverse food.

      • derpgon@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        And the fact that so much food is thrown out, because it spends 75% of it’s expiration date traveling between facilities. That’s why fresh food from big chains starts being bad way faster than local market bough.