People can eat a wide variety of food that can be grown in other areas.

As a result, people eat more

food produced in other regions than local food.

Do you think the advantages of this trend outweigh the disadvantages?

Opinions are divided on whether the fact that people consume more food grown in other agrarian
regions rather than local food is beneficial or harmful. While the short-term benefits of this trend are
clear, they are outweighed by its long-term disadvantages.

The immediate benefits of the shift in consumers’ preferences towards food produced in other areas are
indeed in plain sight. Firstly, we can now enjoy a much wider range of food options than before. A
personal example would be that I used to have to wait until summer to drink coconut water since the
cold weather in winter in Hanoi was and still is not suitable to this kind of fruit, but it grows vigorously in
the Southern regions of Vietnam all year round. Secondly, food companies are finding it much easier to
expand their business to potential markets where their products are on demand.

However, the long-term ramifications of people eating more food from other regions than locally-
produced food could be problematic. The delivery and refrigeration of food require a large amount of
natural resources being consumed in the form of petrol in planes and gas and coal in electrical power
stations. To make matters worse, long flights also emit a significant amount of carbon dioxide, which is
the primary cause of global warming. Therefore, it is logical to say that people eating more products
from other regions is likely to accelerate global warming and the depletion natural resources.

In conclusion, while I acknowledge the benefits of the trend towards consuming more food produced in
other regions, I believe that the repercussions of this development are very undesirable and therefore
could negate any possible benefits.