That's the title of the article I wrote with Henry Miller of the Hoover Institute at Stanford University, and just published in the Institute's journal, Defining Ideas.
Here is the last little bit:
The underlying principle is—or should be—this: Your local farmer is probably better at growing some things than ours is, and vice versa.
We favor eating delicious and nutritious foods, but if we are to live by the locavore’s mantra, and only consume what can be made locally, we had better resign ourselves to an expensive, narrow and boring diet—especially if we live in climates with harsh winters and short growing seasons.
No one should be opposed to patronizing nearby farmers’ markets for fresh products in season—or, for that matter, to individuals opting to adopt fad diets or home remedies. But it is abusive for governments to subsidize the locavore movement, in which the state has scant economic interest and for which legislators should have little appetite.