Can the transport of food over vast distances be justified? Discuss.

The twentieth and the twenty-first century will go down in the books of history as the period of
possibilities for it marked the advent of globalisation. Globalisation is defined as the interweaving
of economical, information and communication systems due to the improvements in
communication and transportation systems. With the latter, it has made the transport of food over
vast distance a reality. Though some may say that the transport of food over vast distances is
justifiable due to food aid to disaster-stricken areas and being able to improve a countrys
economic wellbeing, I would like to argue that it is not justifiable. This is so as the harms it has
caused to the environment, economy and society outweighs the benefits that it brings.For this
essay, transportation over vast distances is defined as Trans-Atlantic shipments of food.
Whereas, the mode of transport taken into consideration will be that of that of trucks and planes
as these are the only modes of transport that are fast enough to prevent the decomposition of
food while being transported and they are widely used today.
Firstly, the transport of food over vast distances is not justifiable as its cost to the environment
outweighs the benefits it brings. This is so as current modes of transport used today are not
efficient in terms of their greenhouse gases emitted per kilometre. According to recent studies,
there is a direct link between the amount of greenhouse gases released and the global warming
situation. Thus the use of an inefficient transportation system will imply that the situation is only
getting worst. In a Financial Times report in the year 2000, it states that a kiwi fruit flown from the
New Zealand to the United Kingdom emits five times its own weight in greenhouse gases. This
comes to show that the transport of food is emitting unnecessary greenhouses gases into the
atmosphere and causing the current global warming crisis to worsen further. With the global
warming crisis worsening, it may only lead to more related natural disasters happening like the
disastrous flooding in Pakistan in August 2010 due to torrential rainfall. Thus, with these
explanations and little being seen by transportation companies to greatly increase their efficient
of their vehicles, the transportation of food is not justifiable as its environmental costs are too
significant and simply outweigh the benefits it brings.
Secondly, the transport of food over vast distances is not justifiable as it breeds wastage and
excessive consumerism which may have dire implications to ones health. With the transportation
of food, food is increasingly available everywhere, whether is it in the markets, supermarkets or
even ones nearby convenience store. With this proliferation of the availability of food, people are
starting to disregard the value of food and as such, buying more than they actually need, leading
to the wastage of food or excessive consumption of it. As stated on foodwasterepublic.com, in
2008, the amount of food wasted in Singapore could fill up 10000 double decker buses.
Additionally, with the increasingly availability of food, the number of obese people are set to rise
from its current 300 million as stated in a WHO report. These examples imply that the increasing
availability of food due to the transport of food is only breeding more wasting of food resources
and an increasing unhealthy society which could cause serious implications like a decrease in
ones life expectancy. Therefore, the transport of food over vast distances is not justifiable due to
the negative implications it has on societies.
However, some may say that the transport of food over vast distances can be justified in the
advent of humanitarian disasters, the transportation of food over vast distances as aid is vital for

relief efforts. In times of disaster, especially for the impoverished countries, the country may not
have enough food to support its own citizens during relief efforts. Thus, with the transport of food
over vast distances, its allies from far away may also aid in relief efforts in addition to the help it
may be receiving from nearby countries, therefore relieving human sufferings to a greater extent.
This can be seen from the Singapore Red Cross sending food supplies over long distances to
Haiti in 2010 when it was recovering from a major earthquake. Therefore the transport of food
over long distances is justified.
Though this may be true to a large extent, it is worth taking note that such acts of long distance
food transport may not be justified if countries around the disaster zone are already providing
sufficient food supplies to the disaster-stricken areas. As by doing so will only lead to more
wastage of resources and the emission of unnecessary greenhouse gases. Thus, the
government may instead aid in the search and rescue, reconstruction operations instead of food
supplies as it will be more productive and helpful to the victims of the event, as seen from the
same Haitian earthquake where food supplies were plentiful however reconstruction efforts are
still needed to kick start the economy and society since the incident took place 7 months from the
time of writing.
Some may also say that the transport of food over vast distances can be justified as the aid in
the production of jobs and revenue for local agricultural firms. With the ability to transport their
goods to countries far away, firms are able to sell their goods to more markets than in the past
therefore expanding the market and potential consumer base. Thus, firms are likely to reap high
profits and therefore leading to the expansion of firms and creation of new jobs. This is so for
India, as with the ability to transport food overseas, the agricultural industry expanded from
encompassing 16.6% of Indias gross domestic product in 2007 to 17.0% of that in 2009.
Therefore the transport of food over long distances is justified.
Though this sound logical, it is only limited to countries that have an agricultural sector that has
the potential to grow. In addition, the generation of jobs and revenue may be limited as since the
agricultural sector is a primary industry, its goods and services produced are usually lower
valued as compared to those in the secondary and tertiary industries. Therefore, the positive
impacts as mentioned may not be as optimistic as painted.
The transport of food over vast distances may on the other hand threaten the countries local
agricultural industries therefore proving that it is not justifiable. Countries with huge agricultural
sectors as compared to other countries such as Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand have
suffered greatly from competition from abroad. As with food being imported, it may be cheaper
and better than the local produce. Thus, locals may switch to foreign goods, causing local firms
profits to drop and in turn resulting in unemployment. This is so for Great Britain, as cheap
products from foreign competitors like India have caused its agriculture sector to shrink by 44%
since 1995 as mentioned in a report by the Britains Department for Environment and Rural
Affairs (DEFRA). Thus, this implies that the sector has decline and unemployment in this sector
is increasing. Thus with the decline of economies due to foreign competition form the
transportation of food over vast distances, the transportation of food over vast distances is not
justifiable.
Therefore, all in all, the transport of food over vast distances is not justifiable due to its
environmental costs, the harm done to a countrys economy and the undesirable attitude it
breeds in the society. In addition, based on current trends, the results are unlikely to deviate

much as this multidimensional issue is currently degrading silently without people realising the
serious implications it has, for people only change or correct their mistakes when the situation is
dire. As what the late US President John F Kennedy once said The time to change ones roof is
when the light comes in.