All of us have a carbon footprint. Some big, some small. Having awareness of your carbon footprint size is an important part of what it means to be a conscious consumer. To be one, is in my opinion, to recognize the importance of your own dollar and how you spend it. Do the products you purchase support sustainable practices? Do they support your local economy?

These are questions a conscious consumer must ask themselves when shopping but sometimes it’s not that easy. There are numerous factors that steer an individual or family toward a certain product. Many times they aren’t in control of where they are steered.

The root of being a conscious consumer is to understand how the way we consume goods and services affects our lives and environments, locally and globally.

For a frame of reference, bananas are healthy, right? There is plenty of potassium and other health benefits. It doesn’t come in plastic wrapping. It sounds like a win-win. Not exactly. There currently is no commercial banana production in the U.S. This means odds are whenever you pick up that yellow fruit, it was exported out of Central or South America.

As I write this, I’m looking at a banana in my living room (kind of weird I know), the label reads Chiquita, Guatemala. A quick Google Maps search tells me that these bananas were cropped roughly 2,500 miles away from St. Paul and roughly 1,000 miles away from the nearest U.S. border. Nearly all bananas eaten in the U.S. come from Central and South America.

This is the indirect cost of what you consume. For you to bite into a banana, it first had to travel thousands of miles. One could do the math or guesstimate that, on an annual basis, this adds millions of miles traveled, gallons of oil used and emissions of greenhouse gases released to our consumption. You hear the cheesy phrase “shop local,” but this is the weight behind it.

Besides for the environment, we can look at the business side of things. You might hear the argument: “Well, banana crop production in Central America provides the basis of an economy that provides jobs for the people of those countries.” I’d say not quite.

When you hear the name Chiquita you might think to yourself, “Oh, it’s a national company of Guatemala for its people, by its people.” Again, not quite. Chiquita is a small part of a private global conglomerate that is owned by a Brazilian firm but has headquarters in the U.S. and Switzerland. Doesn’t really scream Guatemala, does it? Even if that’s what’s on the label.

Although I’m not digging deep on investigative research for this line of thought, I think it’s fair to assume that by creating a crop for the world, the people of Guatemala aren’t getting its fair share. Even though a sizable amount of the lucrative banana trade comes from Guatemala, it’s still one of the poorest countries in the region for Gross Domestic Product (GDP). With low wages, high levels of poverty and its biggest exporter controlled by foreign powers, maybe the keys should be turned over to the people?

Tangent aside, there are some takeaways on how behavioral change on an individual level and systematic change on a global level can decrease these issues. I’m not saying stop buying bananas. I am saying be more informed of where you’re getting your products from. These issues can be fought from both sides.

Although there isn’t commercial banana production in the U.S., there is a movement toward a more local and organic banana production. This movement is growing in the south, and if consumers pick up on these trends, they can change the dynamic. I’ve been using bananas as the only example, but this applies to all consumer goods, especially food.

Now, I’m not saying Capitalism is the enemy here (yes, I am), but imagine a world where we don’t exploit communities to get the cheapest product out of some vain notion that we’re helping people move up the economic ladder. Imagine a world where we just give the ladder to them instead? They might need some advice or help on the climb, but it should be their ladder, not ours.

This type of globalization is not sustainable for the future. Consumer goods that can be created in our own backyard should be done so. And if the product isn’t local to our region, maybe ease up on consumption.

Another factor is the cost. When shopping locally and more sustainably, it can come at a price that only some are privileged enough to afford. The globalization of consumer goods has created a competitive market where the cheapest product is often the one most unsustainable, most unhealthy and least local. But it is the only product that less fortunate individuals and families can afford.

That’s why I want to call on action from two fronts. The first being that if you are able to budget away from unsustainable products and lean toward more local goods, please do so. Consume less products that you know have a larger footprint. If you’re feeling really ambitious, start creating products of your own. Plant a garden or research household DIY practices.

Secondly, encourage government economic policies and subsidies to move away from unsustainable globalized consumer goods. Instead, put resources in place to support making local initiatives affordable for more people. Ironic as it is, this is the type of economy Trump has been advocating for. Does he recognize the eco-friendliness of these economics? Well, that’s for another column.

There was a time that a globalized, connected world was seen as a crowning achievement for humanity, but now, in hindsight, we see that this had unintended consequences. A globalized world has increased inequality and taken the tools away from thousands of communities to help themselves.

We need to make a transition back to a more localized and sustainable lifestyle for farming, manufacturing and retail. Look inward to your own community and region. If your own backyard can support it, do it. Remember to look around and measure your carbon footprint every once in a while. You might be surprised by its size.

Zaid Khan can be reached at khan8548@stthomas.edu.