Did the lettuce in your sandwich travel one mile or thousands of miles to reach your table? Was the farmer who harvested your banana paid a fair price for his or her labor? The production, distribution, and consumption of food links people from around the world in a complex web. Thus, our eating habits affect not only our own health and environment, but also the health and environment of other nations.

Three trends aim to make our diets more eco-friendly, animal-friendly, and ethical.

The average food item in the United States travels 1,500 miles (2,414 kilometers) from the farm to the supermarket. Critics argue that this process harms the environment, favors corporate agribusiness over small farms, and deprives food of flavor and nutrients.

The 100-Mile Diet and local food movement try to address these concerns. Two early proponents were Alissa Smith and James MacKinnon, who in 2005 ate only foods produced within 100 miles (161 kilometers) of their home in Vancouver, British Columbia. Their experiences were published in the book The 100-Mile Diet. Gary Paul Nabham is another pioneer of the local eating movement and is the author of Coming Home to Eat. For a year, 90% of Nabham's diet consisted only of native flora and fauna found within 250 miles (402 kilometers) of his Arizona home.

A March 2, 2005 article by the BBC quoted a study saying that Britain would save £2.1 billion (approximately US$4.2 million) annually in environmental costs if all food was produced within 20 kilometers (12 miles) of where it was consumed. The study also found that purchasing local produce was better for the environment than purchasing organic food that had been transported a long distance.

In addition to being eco-friendly, buying local foods also brings other benefits. Purchasing local produce gives consumers greater knowledge of, and control over, how their food was produced. For example, a drive to the farm and a conversation with the growers can confirm if your lettuce is pesticide-free or if those chickens are really free-range. Locavores (people who buy locally produced foods) say that they eat more fresh fruits and vegetables, experiment with a wider variety of regional foods, and enjoy more flavorful, home-cooked meals. And money spent on local produce stays in the local economy, and is reinvested to support local growers.

Strict adherence to the 100-mile rule is, however, extremely difficult. Smith and MacKinnon gave up wheat for seven months until they found a local grower. Finding local suppliers and preserving food for the winter can also be a time-consuming process. Rather than eliminating all ingredients that need to be transported long-distance, many proponents simply urge consumers to buy as much local produce as possible.

Free-range animals are allowed to roam instead of being confined in cages. Today, the term free-range is often informally used as a synonym for "low stocking density" or "pasture-raised." Consumers who choose free-range products generally believe that the animals were raised under more humane conditions, and that the meat, eggs, or milk they produce will be healthier and more nutritious. Critics argue that these beliefs are largely false. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) criteria on what constitutes free-range farming is vague. They specify that free-range chickens raised for meat must have access to the outdoors. Thus, chickens may be labeled free-range even if they are raised in a crowded facility with only one opening, which permits only a few birds to go outside at a time. The USDA definition for free-range eggs, beef, pork, and dairy products is equally vague, and relies on "producer testimonials to support the accuracy of these claims."

Free-range chickens have disease levels similar to conventionally raised chickens. A news item published on September 20, 2004 by the USDA and a paper published in the November 2005 edition of the Journal of Food Protection found no discernible difference in Salmonella levels between free-range and conventionally raised chickens.

Many of the food staples we rely on – such as coffee, tea, cocoa, and bananas – are produced in developing countries. Fair trade is a social movement that seeks to make international trade between developed and developing countries more equitable. Fair trade is concerned with social, economic, and environmental sustainability, and aims to create an ongoing trading relationship that improves the lives of disadvantaged producers.

Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International sets standards for fair trade certification, and regularly inspects producers in more than 50 countries. Fair trade proponents include Oxfam and Amnesty International. The Fair Trade Federation is the fair trade body for the US and Canada.

The specific objectives of The International Fair Trade Association are: