🔥0日⭐Lv.1

何を身につけたい?(目的からさがす)

迷ったら

動画を見つける

勉強法・道具

英語学習YouTube・サイト

🔎 動画をさがす
SUMMARY DOJO

✍️ 地元産の食べ物は常に良いのか

🌾 食・農業・水資源|★★★ 難関|英文 約402語

1読む

Is Local Food Always the Better Choice?

In recent years, a preference for local food has spread among consumers who worry about the environment. The idea is appealing in its simplicity: food that travels a short distance should cause less pollution than food carried across oceans, and buying from nearby farmers also keeps money within the community. Farmers’ markets and labels that show where a product was grown have become common in many towns. Many people therefore treat “local” as a synonym for “good.”

Yet this assumption deserves closer examination. The distance food travels is only one part of its environmental cost, and often not the largest part. The methods used to grow it may matter more. A tomato raised in a heated greenhouse during winter in a cold region may require far more energy than one grown outdoors in a sunny country and shipped by boat, since large ships can move enormous quantities of goods efficiently. Similarly, some regions are simply better suited to certain crops, needing less water and fewer chemicals, so growing those crops elsewhere may waste resources. Judging food by distance alone can therefore mislead us. In addition, food that is wasted on the way, through spoilage or poor storage, increases the burden of production without adding any benefit for consumers, and this loss is rarely visible in the price we pay.

This does not mean that the local food movement lacks merit. Buying from nearby producers can strengthen relationships between farmers and eaters, preserve traditional varieties, and keep farmland from being turned into buildings. Furthermore, a region that produces at least part of its own food is better prepared when supply chains are disrupted by bad weather, conflict, or sudden changes in demand. Such resilience is a benefit that is difficult to measure but easy to appreciate when it is missing.

The most reasonable conclusion is that neither “local” nor “global” is automatically superior. What we need is a way to compare foods by their full effects: energy, water, land, working conditions, and the strength of communities. This is a demanding task, because information about production is often hidden from ordinary shoppers, and the results differ by product and by season. Nevertheless, asking better questions is the first step. Instead of asking only “Where does this come from?”, we might also ask “How was it produced, and who benefits?” Such habits allow us to make choices that are not simply fashionable but genuinely thoughtful.

※この英文は原田英語のオリジナルです。

📝 語彙ヒント 6語

💡 ヒント:「distance だけで判断するな」は筆者の主張の半分にすぎません。第3段落の This does not mean で、地元産の利点も認めている点まで含めると、偏らない要約になります。

2書く → 3答え合わせ

次の英文を150字以内の日本語で要約しなさい。
Summarize the passage in about 70 words in English.

🤖 AIに採点してもらう(コピペ用)おすすめ

自分で書いたあと、下のプロンプトをコピーして、お使いのAIに貼り付けます。【私の答案】の所に、自分の要約を入れてください。

日本語で要約した答案を採点してもらう
あなたは大学入試の要約問題の採点者です。次の【英文】を150字以内の日本語で要約した【私の答案】を、100点満点で採点してください。

配点:内容(要点)50点/構成と論理20点/表現20点/字数と形式10点

次の順番で、やさしい日本語で答えてください。
1. 各観点の得点と、その理由
2. 減点された箇所の具体的な指摘(該当部分を引用して)
3. 直した例(1つだけ)
4. 次に直すべき点を3つ

採点の注意:原文の言い回しの丸写しは減点。具体例や数字を入れすぎていたら減点。自分の意見が混ざっていたら減点。字数は制限の90〜100%が理想。

【制限字数】150

【英文】
In recent years, a preference for local food has spread among consumers who worry about the environment. The idea is appealing in its simplicity: food that travels a short distance should cause less pollution than food carried across oceans, and buying from nearby farmers also keeps money within the community. Farmers’ markets and labels that show where a product was grown have become common in many towns. Many people therefore treat “local” as a synonym for “good.”

Yet this assumption deserves closer examination. The distance food travels is only one part of its environmental cost, and often not the largest part. The methods used to grow it may matter more. A tomato raised in a heated greenhouse during winter in a cold region may require far more energy than one grown outdoors in a sunny country and shipped by boat, since large ships can move enormous quantities of goods efficiently. Similarly, some regions are simply better suited to certain crops, needing less water and fewer chemicals, so growing those crops elsewhere may waste resources. Judging food by distance alone can therefore mislead us. In addition, food that is wasted on the way, through spoilage or poor storage, increases the burden of production without adding any benefit for consumers, and this loss is rarely visible in the price we pay.

This does not mean that the local food movement lacks merit. Buying from nearby producers can strengthen relationships between farmers and eaters, preserve traditional varieties, and keep farmland from being turned into buildings. Furthermore, a region that produces at least part of its own food is better prepared when supply chains are disrupted by bad weather, conflict, or sudden changes in demand. Such resilience is a benefit that is difficult to measure but easy to appreciate when it is missing.

The most reasonable conclusion is that neither “local” nor “global” is automatically superior. What we need is a way to compare foods by their full effects: energy, water, land, working conditions, and the strength of communities. This is a demanding task, because information about production is often hidden from ordinary shoppers, and the results differ by product and by season. Nevertheless, asking better questions is the first step. Instead of asking only “Where does this come from?”, we might also ask “How was it produced, and who benefits?” Such habits allow us to make choices that are not simply fashionable but genuinely thoughtful.

【私の答案】
(ここに自分の要約を貼る)
英語で要約した答案を採点してもらう
You are a strict but kind grader for university entrance exam summary tasks. Grade my summary of the passage below out of 100 points.

Scoring: Content (key points) 50 / Structure and logic 20 / Language (grammar, vocabulary, paraphrasing) 20 / Length and format 10.

Please answer in Japanese in this order:
1. Score for each category with reasons
2. Specific problems (quote the words in my summary)
3. One improved version of my summary
4. Three things to fix next time

Rules: copying whole sentences from the passage loses points. Use third-person, present tense. The ideal length is 90–110% of the target.

Target length: about 70 words

Passage:
In recent years, a preference for local food has spread among consumers who worry about the environment. The idea is appealing in its simplicity: food that travels a short distance should cause less pollution than food carried across oceans, and buying from nearby farmers also keeps money within the community. Farmers’ markets and labels that show where a product was grown have become common in many towns. Many people therefore treat “local” as a synonym for “good.”

Yet this assumption deserves closer examination. The distance food travels is only one part of its environmental cost, and often not the largest part. The methods used to grow it may matter more. A tomato raised in a heated greenhouse during winter in a cold region may require far more energy than one grown outdoors in a sunny country and shipped by boat, since large ships can move enormous quantities of goods efficiently. Similarly, some regions are simply better suited to certain crops, needing less water and fewer chemicals, so growing those crops elsewhere may waste resources. Judging food by distance alone can therefore mislead us. In addition, food that is wasted on the way, through spoilage or poor storage, increases the burden of production without adding any benefit for consumers, and this loss is rarely visible in the price we pay.

This does not mean that the local food movement lacks merit. Buying from nearby producers can strengthen relationships between farmers and eaters, preserve traditional varieties, and keep farmland from being turned into buildings. Furthermore, a region that produces at least part of its own food is better prepared when supply chains are disrupted by bad weather, conflict, or sudden changes in demand. Such resilience is a benefit that is difficult to measure but easy to appreciate when it is missing.

The most reasonable conclusion is that neither “local” nor “global” is automatically superior. What we need is a way to compare foods by their full effects: energy, water, land, working conditions, and the strength of communities. This is a demanding task, because information about production is often hidden from ordinary shoppers, and the results differ by product and by season. Nevertheless, asking better questions is the first step. Instead of asking only “Where does this come from?”, we might also ask “How was it produced, and who benefits?” Such habits allow us to make choices that are not simply fashionable but genuinely thoughtful.

My summary:
(paste your summary here)

→ AI採点のやり方(くわしく) → かんたん採点くん(英語の答案の朱書き添削)

同じテーマ:食べられる食品を捨てる理由