Cutting 'food miles' doesn't necessarily pay

April 29, 2011, Cornell University

As food suppliers attempt to meet the growing demand for local products, a new study finds it's not always economically or environmentally viable for multi-product industries to focus heavily on local sales.

"The dairy sector is an excellent example for examining the of increased localization of food supply chains," said Miguel Gomez, professor of applied economics and management and co-lead author of "Cost of Localizing a Multi-Product Food Supply Chain: Dairy in the United States," published in the April issue of the journal .

The study developed an for the U.S. dairy industry that examined assembly, interplant transportation, processing and distribution for all dairy products, including milk, yogurt, cheese and butter. It showed that the average distance traveled for all U.S. dairy products was about 320 miles from farm to market. Scenarios were developed to compare effects of increasing local sales, focusing on reducing weighted average source distance, a unit of measurement comparable to food miles.

"We find that increased localization reduces assembly costs while increasing processing and distribution costs," said Gomez. "The weighted average source distance for some products decreased at the expense of increases in other products."

The study also found that although small reductions in food miles are not relatively costly to the supply chain, reductions of more than 45 miles produce larger cost increases. In one scenario, reducing the average distance traveled of beverage milk by 10 percent required a 30 percent increase in overall food miles for all other dairy products.

"This study is one of the first to examine food miles from a systems perspective, and to explicitly account for the short-term costs of localization across multiple related products. It shows there are tradeoffs, that localizing is not as simple to achieve as it might seem," said Charles Nicholson, adjunct professor of and management and co-lead author of the study.

The study provides insights to the U.S. , which in 2008 planned to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions 25 percent by 2025, in part through supply chain reductions.

"Our study highlights that localization initiatives must be considered carefully. In fact, localization may not be the best venue to reduce carbon footprint in the case of dairy," said Gomez.

Explore further: Scientists study how climate change impacts food production

Related Stories

Scientists study how climate change impacts food production

April 21, 2008

The old adage, “We are what we eat,’’ may be the latest recipe for success when it comes to curbing the perils of global climate warming. Despite the recent popular attention to the distance that food travels from ...

FDA issues contaminated cheese warning

January 31, 2008

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has issued a consumer warning and recall of possibly contaminated Grassy Meadows Dairy Co. cheeses.

New labels might decrease overall demand for milk

October 2, 2009

( -- Recent increases in organic and hormone-free milk labeling might negatively affect sales of milk without such labels, and could lead to a decreased demand for all milk types, according to a new economic study ...

Tainted milk shows China's food safety challenges

February 4, 2010

(AP) -- The resurfacing of tainted milk products in China highlights the challenges of policing the food supply in a country where close ties between local authorities and companies hamper regulation while producers are ...

Recommended for you


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

1 / 5 (1) Apr 29, 2011
Are they confusing what is the pay off, carbon footprint for dollar footprint? We got to high food-mileage by minimizing food-dollars not concerned with food-carbon footprint. Minimizing one footprint will only enlarge the others.
1 / 5 (3) Apr 29, 2011
Big business reducing costs, who would have thought that. Once environmentalists get their hands on food processing, based on their track record, food prices will go up, more harm will occur to the environment, more people will starve.

BTW, even though the government states there is no inflation, if you like higher food prices, thank Obama and the democrats. Their policies are increasing food prices.
3 / 5 (2) Apr 30, 2011
even though the government states there is no inflation
The government has never maintained a stance that there was no inflation.
1 / 5 (2) May 24, 2011
SH, you must either be on the payroll of the DNC or just dumb. I was using hyperbole when I said government states there is no inflation. Hyperbole is a figure of speech not intended to be taken literally. To a person who is more enlightened, they would have known that I meant the government is hiding the true inflation rate. The government says 2011 inflation is 2.4-3%. If you believe inflation is at 3% you must be smoking somthing...


Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.