In the Guardian today, a great article: "Residents join forces to feed themselves". Quote: "We are not interested in the wholesale market. We are only interested in the Martin market," Is Britain as much ahead of the States as I perceive it is? If so, why? In any case, an inspiring example, and perhaps a message, that the point is not so much to "eat organic", or even to "eat local", but to *grow* local.
I think the reason Britain is ahead is that they have experience of growing their own gardens to prevent food shortages, within one human lifetime (WWII). We have nothing like this in our history. Also I suspect that the level of corporate control over every aspect of human life is somewhat less there than it is here (although I can't prove this).
The US had victory gardens during WWII, but we didn't get bombed.
I do think the UK may understand limits to growth more than the US because it's had to deal with being on an island. So you've had conservation of some form or another since the middle-ages (the invention of coppicing trees for instance).
Americans are still full of post-WWII hubris. We think we are the world's superhero. There is no problem we can't solve. No wrong we can't right. No vista we can't climb. If we don't feel that way, we feel bitter that we don't, and nostalgic for it (think tea-party).
Obviously I'm generalizing, but that's my feeling.
I'm sure the locally made hummus is delicious and nutritious and excellent. But, I have to say that before anyone goes out to harvest their own lupines they should do some research on what varieties to use and how to prepare the seeds for eating. Some contain high levels of a toxic alkaloid and specific pretreatments are required to make them safe to eat.
The same sort of understanding applies to many edible wild plants...poke shoots, elderberry, acorns....