Files
Abstract
It is well recognized that the production of many farm commodities, especially fruits and
vegetables, has become geographically concentrated, with larger but fewer farmers involved in
production. This concentration, according to critics, has resulted in the production of less
flavorful commodities and added unnecessary costs to marketing. To address these
shortcomings, several groups have advocated “local” production of farm commodities, especially
fruits and vegetables. According to proponents of “locals”, such production is preferred by
consumers because these commodities are fresher, more nutritious, better tasting, and grown
with fewer pesticides. Further, local commodities provide income opportunities for small
farmers and they serve to lower food miles and transportation costs. While acknowledging these
described attributes and benefits, this paper uses a specific commodity, potatoes, to illustrate the
true costs of “locals”. Results show efficiency gains from comparative advantage and other
factors that far exceed the most optimistic returns to “locals”. In dollars, “local” production of
potatoes would add, as a minimum, $3.8 billion of additional cost. Further, it would require an
additional 961,000 acres of land. Local production costs for all commodities that make up
consumers’ diets could possibly rival that of the $90 billion food stamp budget.