It is sometimes said that countries should produce all the food for their populations to eat and import as little as possible. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is sometimes believed that one country should try to be self-sufficient in food with minimal imports.

While

I understand the logic behind

this

suggestion, I still firmly disagree with it for several reasons. Those who believe that the state should be more self-reliant in producing feed than importing it may have several arguments. They may well argue that domestic feed management can boost the economy by creating job opportunities in rural areas. It can

also

contribute to the

overall

economic growth of a country. Another possible argument is that local feed administration can reduce the carbon footprint associated with feed transport,

as well as

decrease the greenhouse effect and preserve biodiversity.

Nevertheless

,I still oppose

this

view for several reasons. Chief among these is that some nations may experience difficulties in fare administration

due to

climate conditions and geographical inconvenience.

For instance

, nations in Africa and Scandinavia live in areas with poor weather conditions, which are critical for fair administration; in the opposite direction, Singapore has small areas to grow crops. The second reason is that some nations may face insufficiency because some nutrients cannot be produced locally. Another example is that countries in tropical climates cannot grow cherries or grapes, and some landlocked countries cannot produce salt, which leads to a lack of feed choices in some countries. In conclusion, it is understandable why some may argue that self-sufficiency regarding food requires minimal import.

However

, I cannot support

such

a view given the aforementioned reasons.