Oxfam has warned shoppers that basing purchasing decisions on so-called ‘food miles’ can have the effect of destroying the livelihoods of some of the world’s poorest people. 

The comments come during Fairtrade Fortnight, which seeks to highlight the inequalities of modern international trade.

The term ‘food miles’ refers to the distance that a product has travelled to get on to UK shop shelves. But Oxfam says that simply refusing to purchase one product becomes it comes from further away than another does not take into account many of the factors involved that product’s carbon footprint.

Duncan Green, head of research at Oxfam said:

“Buying green is rightly at the forefront of consumers’ minds but rejecting foods on the grounds of how far they have travelled oversimplifies the issue, unfairly punishes farmers from poor countries, and may even lead to higher emissions.”

Green uses the example of roses, which are flown in from Kenya, but also grown under lights in Holland, which uses six times more carbon.

He says:

“Oversimplified concepts about how to tackle climate change are not only failing to give consumers the whole picture, but jeopardising the livelihoods of people who are already facing terrific challenges due to climate change. They are the least responsible for climate change and should not have to pay the highest price.

“The food miles debate needs to be looked at again to ensure consumers have the information they need to buy green without undermining the, often fragile, livelihoods of poor farmers around the world.”