04 June 2007, 17:32 PM

  • Current supermarket proposals to label products with food miles information have come into question after a study found that just two percent of an item's carbon footprint is generated by the journey.

Research into the carbon footprint of the average shopping basket in Britain found that the majority came from packaging, processing, storage and growing conditions.

This means locally sourced food could be more harmful to the planet than an item transported by air.

Chains such as Tesco and Marks & Spencer have been told to find “less simplistic” ways to include a food item’s environmental credentials to allow customers to make ethical shopping choices.

Dr Ruth Fairchild from the University of Wales Institute, in Cardiff, said, “I’m a bit worried about the food miles debate because it is educating the consumer in the wrong way. It is such an insignificant point. Those foods could have been produced using pesticides that have travelled all the way around the world. If you just take food miles, it is the tiny bit on the end.”

The findings, published in the journal, Sustainable Food Consumption, support the protestations made by industry bodies in countries where the economy is dependent on the export of food. Representatives from New Zealand told a corporate climate conference last week that their lamb and dairy produce was more carbon-friendly than the British equivalent - despite the food miles.

Paul Watkiss, author of a Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs report, said, “The discussion around food miles is too simplistic. We should be more interested in food vehicle kilometres, the environmental impact of a tonne of food varies with issues such as load factors,” he said.