000			01746nam a22002417a 4500
003			ZW-GwMSU
005			20221111133856.0
008			221111b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_aMSU _cMSU _erda
100			_aPeterson, Gregory R _eauthor
245			_aIs Eating Locally a Moral Obligation? _ccreated by Gregory R. Peterson
264			_aUSA _bSpringerlink _c2012
336			_2rdacontent _atext _btxt
337			_2rdamedia _aunmediated _bn
338			_2rdacarrier _avolume _bnc
440			_vVolume , number ,
520			_aAdvocates of eating locally offer a wide range of arguments in favor of the practice, but their ethical import is not always clear. Some locavore statements and arguments seem to imply a strong form of moral obligation; that eating locally is not merely instrumental to some other good, but has intrinsic value in its own right. This article examines standard arguments on behalf of eating locally, including arguments linked to the value of small farms and agrarianism, the environment, taste and health, trust, and relational markets. Most arguments put forward on behalf of eating locally value it instrumentally, the main exception being arguments based on relational markets. Although these arguments provide important motives for eating locally, the strength of obligation varies widely, and even the strongest arguments possess significant qualifications. While eating locally can play a role in reducing environmental impacts, this is not necessarily so, and once removed from instrumental considerations, eating locally is more likely at best an imperfect duty.
650			_aeating locally
650			_alocavore
650			_afood ethics
856			_u10.1007/s10806-01293978
942			_2lcc _cJA
999			_c160374 _d160374