Andreatta argues that the globalization of the agrofood industry has had a significant negative impact on producers and consumers alike. She asserts that due to the homogenization and industrialization of the food system, society has become more reliant on fast food in its convenience. It has freed people from their kitchens (formerly “centers of pleasure, culture, and conviviality”), and left them ignorant of the origins of the easy meals that land on their plates. Andreatta states that because of standardization and the infinite number of “middle men” involved in the modern day food process, there has been an immense loss of the quality, diversity, authenticity, culture, and integrity associated with food. Quoting Axelrod, she believes that “efficiency, biotechnology, and other global forces erode our abilities to savor our food, but not only our lives…”Andreatta evidently feels it is crucial that society strengthens its interconnectedness with nature, so as to ensure the good health of both humans and the environment. Consequently, her chapter discusses the growing awareness amongst people in European nations and the United States of the need to change the overly industrialized agricultural world, so as to emphasize the importance of maintaining the integrity, diversity, and authenticity of food. Over time many urban movements have formed for this purpose, including Slow Food International, an organization dedicated to “bringing back the kitchen” and “supporting local, authentic cuisine and artisan food makers.” Its members protest the act of eating fast, eating without consciousness, and eating without recognizing taste or respect for local cuisine. Andreatta also talks about how direct marketing outlets give urban consumers the chance to aid farmers in maintaining their livelihoods, while simultaneously fortifying environmental sustainability and cultural diversity.

Much like PlaNYC, many of the possible actions outlined in Urban Connections to Locally Grown Produce consumers may do in order to help battle the effects of “McDonaldization” involve a bit of sacrifice, consideration, and contribution. Both the site and article support their respective, researched claims with a great deal of evidence stemming from the opinions and thoughts of the masses, taking into consideration not only the voices of field specialists, but those of ordinary citizens as well. Andreatta’s survey, which she conducted in a North Carolinian farmer’s market on a busy Saturday, revealed that many shoppers were willing to travel out of their way just so that they could buy purchase produce from the farmer’s market, citing freshness and an appreciation for an atmosphere that generated a sense of intimacy, community, and wholesomeness unavailable at a chain grocery store. Andreatta also cites statistics from secondary sources such as academic journals, historical material, government documents, weblogs, and organizations, such as the Organic Trade Association. I found it interesting that over recent years, the OTA has found that organic agricultural food commodities have generated a whopping $10.8 billion. I never thought organic goods would turn out that much revenue, believing the people almost always opted for the cheaper, more standardized and homogenized options. If everyone began to appreciate the true value of authentic food, strived to build connections with the farmers who produce them, and  re-recognized the sacredness of the kitchen, it would undoubtedly benefit the environment and society as a whole.

I personally found PlaNYC’s sources to be a bit less credible than Andreatta’s, mainly due to the fact that many of its sources are not explicitly stated. The website provides a plethora of information, however much of it comes from the City’s own governmental archives and research (for example the NYC Department of City Planning), unaccompanied by other sources to back up all the reports’ claims. Much of the information was therefore gathered from city organizations, along with a few national ones (such as the U.S. Census Bureau). I like the fact that Andreatta’s sources are more readily available, and that she used a variety of sources from several different mediums, as opposed to only obtaining her information from government associations. The fact that she cited more independent organizations as well as academic journals makes her presentation seem much more trustworthy than PlaNYC’s as well. I do not question PlaNYC’s facts, however,  so much as I wish they presented a wider range of sources in order to back up their claims. The facts mentioned on the PlaNYC site are probably accurate, but it wouldn’t kill for it to offer more reassurance in terms of the data’s credibility (…beyond the fact that it originates from the nation and city’s exceptionally trustworthy government).