I've just come back from a food industry conference debating whether food miles are too simplistic a measure of sustainability.
Listening to - and taking part in - the debate, it was clear that there is no one simple answer and that yes there are indeed flaws with food miles as a concept.
Certainly the New Zealanders who tuned into the event live from Auckland think so. They fear food miles is just protectionism by the back door, and they're at pains to point out that if you look at the whole life-cycle analysis of their production, taking into account maritime transport to the UK, they are much more carbon friendly.
That may be so, but are we comparing apples with...well apples!
My inside sources tell me that their lamb production figures for example have been compared with the John Nix lowland sheep production figures.
Mmm. I have cousins farming in the Kaikoura mountains in the south island and I do not for a minute think their system is equivalent to sheep farming in Kent. It is however much more akin to Welsh hill lamb, or sheep production in the Highlands of Scotland.
So what would the figures look like then, I wonder? Would the Kiwi's be quite so vociferous?
Clearly the debate will continue, but what was clear from today's conference is that there's no easy way to find a measure that is equitable and easily understood.
One thing I do maintain, however, is that since we raised the profile of the food miles issue last year, more people are thinking about carbon footprints and environmental sustainability than ever before.
In that regard I do not think food miles have had their day. But clearly the ante is being upped for a "son of" food miles measure.
So what might it be?