Food sovereignty is an issue we will likely hear a lot about in coming years. Basically, it is the right a community has to determine where its food comes from. Outbreaks of food-borne illness receive great attention, but concerns about our food system are growing even when it is ‘working.’ We need to take a hard look at the system that stocks our grocery store shelves with products full of chemical fertilizers, pesticides and preservatives – and see if we can come up with a better way to feed a nation.
It is no secret that pesticides and chemical fertilizers have far-reaching consequences. Trace amounts of toxins remain in fruits and vegetables that can build to dangerous levels after years of exposure. Runoff from fields gets into streams, soaking fish in chemicals, and contaminating drinking water for other animals that work their way up the food chain.
In many places, people have no real option to get chemical-free food. To be fair, chemical fertilizers and pesticides have helped farmers to increase yields and have ensured convenience and variety of food that is unequaled in human history. But it seems they may also be contributing to a host of health conditions and disorders as well. At the very least, shouldn’t people be able to have a choice.
The Connecting for Change Conference to be held in New Bedford October 22-24, 2010, will be on the front lines of this discussion. Many of the presenters are passionate about food. In one workshop, the participants literally start with an empty bowl and build a diet based on nutrients the body needs to survive. In another the presenter is Nikki Henderson, whose work with People’s Grocery is one of the best examples of a community taking control of its food supply in the country.
And if that is not enough to chew on, attendees will dine on the bounty of the New England harvest. The best in local and sustainable fare is on the menu. Weston Lant of Lucky Field Organics in Rochester, MA is supplying the lettuce. Jim Ward of Wards Berry Farm, in Sharon MA, is bringing a sauce made from his Trophy Tomatoes. Jim Knieriem of Cape Abilities Farm grew Long Pie Pumpkins while Jimmy Nardello took care of the peppers and speckled lettuce. Peter Readings of Billingsgate Farm in Plympton, run by Peter Readings, is providing 1st place award-winning sweet corn and green bell peppers. Golden Rule Farm, Middleboro, run by Frank Albani, grew organic onions. Web of Life Organic Farm in Carver, run by Donna Blischke grew organic peppers. And Oakdale Farm in Rehoboth, run by Richard Pray, grew bell peppers in assorted colors.
As you can see, all of these farms cater to people who care about local, and sustainable food. In this way, food plays an important role in local economies as well. Not just farms but, particularly in New England, seafood businesses stand to benefit from a return to local control of production as local fishermen tend to have a better understanding of the best practices for sustainability, than do the executives of giant fishing companies.
Finally, looking at whether a sustainable food business can grow large and remain true to sustainable values is a subject of some debate. And who better to lead that debate than Seth Goldman, Founder and “TeaEO” of Honest Tea. Honest became the first organic and Fair Trade brand to move into the world’s largest beverage distribution system. Recently, Honest Tea was included on The Better World Shopping Guide’s list of “ten best companies on the planet based on their overall social and environmental record.”
So what is the recipe for the new American food system? It will be as local and unique as the farms, restaurants, grocery stores, and ultimately – you – want it to be. You have the power to create the system that should exist. So let me invite you to come to Connecting for Change, and join the conversation.
I actually went and read your other posts and checked out the Marion Institute website. Really interesting and awesome stuff to learn about the conference sounds fantastic.
<
p>One thing I’d ask is how can we get Govt hip to the MI agenda. What can state and local govts do?
<
p>I’m interested in learning more and will keep checking the MI site. Please keep blogging here.
both directly and indirectly. Think:
* school lunches
* military
* cafeterias in gov’t buildings
<
p>There’s no reason why the government can’t mandate that they buy more local, organic, or otherwise healthier food. No reason except will and money, of course.
<
p>As for me, I use Boston Organics to help make sure I’m eating more (organic) fruits and veggies, supplemented by the local farmer’s market when in season and the occasional Trader Joe’s trip (notwithstanding excessive packaging).
I can’t afford to pay almost twice the price for my food to ensure it’s local, organic, and delivered. Though I am lucky to live where local farms still exist and offer their produce at local farm stands. From ground to table with only one change of hands, grower to consumer, and at reasonable prices.
Long live farm stands.
<
p>For two straight deliveries, my wife and I went to our local grocer and purchased the exact same basket of goods. Both times the price was within 10% of the grocery store price.
<
p>Boston Organics is price competitive. The upside is the home delivery (esp. good for those of us without cars) and year round produce of all kinds. The downside is that you can’t choose what you get (though you can choose what not to get).
and the Massachusetts Public Health Association is onto it. They successfully shepherded passage of the School Nutrition bill in the last legislative session.
<
p>Here in Worcester, Food Justice is a major program component of our local environmental justice organization. (Full disclosure: I’ve been on REC’s board for 11 years and am its immediate past president.) Our farmers markets make local, organic food available and affordable in two of Worcester’s most challenged neighborhoods.
I’m all for people excercising choice in what they eat. I shop at my town’s farmers’ market. But the “Biological Medicine Network” has all of the earmarks of a scam. If anyone offers to cure your child’s cancer with diet, run, run, runaway fast.
This strikes me as the height of parochialism in an age where communication is instantaneous and it can take just several hours even to get to the remotest parts of the world by plane. I would understand if this were about trade and keeping jobs here, but this sounds more of a chauvenistic attitude of if it comes from nearby it’s somehow inherently better. I like living in a time and place where we can pretty much access all food year-round regardless of season.
* Lower transportation costs ($, pollution, congestion, etc)
* Local jobs
* Local tax multipliers
* Preserving local farms & fighting local sprawl
* Preserving far away rain forests, etc
* Preserving local recipes, hence part of local culture
* Food picked fresh has more vitimins, minerals, and flavor than food picked under ripe and allowed to ripen on a truck
<
p>I’m not arguing that a local high polluting farm which abuses workers and grows genetically modified foods is superior to a fair trade organic Cavendish banana from Panama. I am arguing that labor practices and land management being equal, local is indeed far superior.
While I truly like the model of “eat local,” I know that it is a near impossibility for major areas of our country to eat balanced diets 12 months a year if you limit yourself to some arbitrary geographical radius of products. I am sorry to say that the agricultural bounty of the Northeast cannot feed Boston and NYC, let alone all the other communities in the region in the middle of February.
<
p>Where the local food movement becomes very practical is that it exposes the current system of mega agriculture to be dangerously flawed from several points of view:
<
p>1) Food safety. Remember the 2006 organic e coli 157 spinach from California that killed peopled and put dozens of other on kidney dialysis for life across the nation? The consolidation of agriculture with speedy delivery has made our food sources dangerous. Contamination simply cannot be detected quickly enough to stop products from being purchased and consumed before the first sign of trouble. Local and regional food limits the exposure to such problems, and tends to have less of the serious issues simply because of the processes involved.
<
p>2) Geographic Collapse. Instead of agribusiness spreading diversity around the country so that drought or blight in one area does not affect the entire crop, most conventional large scale produce is being grown in only a few areas per crop. Lots of rain in California’s central valley can screw up lettuce prices nationwide because well over half of the nations salad greens are grown there. Lettuce is one of the crops that be grown anywhere, but the big producers don’t want to have to deal with nationwide farm logistics. Imagine a hoof and mouth breakout in Nebraska and/or Iowa. 75% of the beef market would disappear. Regionalization of agriculture eliminates many of those pressures.
<
p>3) Biological Diversity. It only takes a drive through the midwest to realize that if there was a serious blight to the corn and/or soy bean crops, major havoc would ensue. There are thousands of square miles of the northern plains that have nothing else planted. It seems that people have forgotten the lessons of the Great Potato Famine in Ireland. If you depend too heavily on one thing, you risk everything.
<
p>Fortunately for me, I live in the best agricultural region of New England, the Berkshires, and have the luxury of actually knowing the local farmers and their products. 95% of America simply does not live near enough to, or have the time to actually be conscious of the food they purchase. Hence solid public policy is crucial to reforming the system to a regional model and swinging the pendulum back away from the Monsantos and Cargills of the world.
I’m a fan of locally grown food. I enjoy visiting my local Farmer’s Market, and I subscribe to a CSA program that delivers locally grown produce. However, I have to say that the term “food sovereignty” has a nasty ring to it. I get the food I like, even though it does cost more in terms of dollars and time (and gasoline, too). I know I’m lucky to live in a place where I have the option, but I see my choice of food sources as a matter of personal discretion.
<
p>So, I’m confused by the seeming implication that we need more governance to correct a problem. The word, “sovereignty” implies legal powers of enforcement. So, what would we be enforcing, exactly? Are we going to make people grow certain foods? Are we going to make people buy certain foods, but not other foods? Are we going to draw up borders and say, “food shall not cross these lines”? What is this “sovereignty” of which you speak?