Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development

Enantiomorphs no more: Indigenous agroecology and the future of food sovereignty

Devon Peña — 2024-05-09

First paragraph:

I was part of a plenary panel on “Bridge Builders” at the 2023 Colorado Food Summit in Denver in December 2023. Echoing a statement I first made at the U.S. Agroecology Summit 2023, I explained how the first “bridge” we are building at The Acequia Institute (TAI) is between Indigenous Knowledge (IK) and so-called Western Science (WS). TAI does this work not to verify and legitimize IK by invoking the presumably more rigorous and mathematical methods and materials of WS. TAI enunciates and practices IK through autonomous place-based food sovereignty initiatives. In this work we have determined how best to integrate the methods and materials of selected domains of Western knowledge systems in forms useful for us and the locality. These issues were discussed at the U.S. Agroecology Summit, but in the end they were left largely unresolved. The entire Summit was, as Carmen Cortez and others have rightly observed, plagued by being “Devoid of this spirit of place and people…” (Agroecology Summit ‘Outside Empire’ Subgroup, 2024, p. 2). In my view, it was a gathering fractured by pre-existing and possibly inadvertent and unconscious acts of epistemic violence reminding me of the difference Michael Redclift (1987) observed between top-down environmental managerialism and bottom-up collaborative environmental management. . . .

Finding synergies between agroecology and industrial ecology toward sustainable agricultural systems

Christine Costello — 2024-05-09

First paragraph:

The question of how humans will co-create better food and agricultural systems is extremely complex, and responses vary significantly due to experiences, worldviews, and values. Those of us working on this question typically agree that the goal is to realize systems that are equitable, just, minimize harm to, and ultimately support healthy ecosystems for current and future generations. I will refer to this goal as sustainability. My training is in industrial ecology and civil and environmental engineering, and my professional research focuses on questions of the climate and nutrient impacts associated with agriculture and food products as they are in our time, i.e., dominated by commodity crops. I was introduced to agroecology about 15 years ago while looking into ways to reduce nutrient runoff and improve soil and ecosystems, such as alternative cropping systems, integrated farming practices, permaculture, and more. Eventually, I learned of agroecology as a science, movement, and practice, which increased my interest to learn more. Both industrial ecology and agroecology, and the many branches within them, earnestly pursue facets of sustainability in agriculture, food, and other bio-based systems, and collaboration could lead to synergistic efforts. . . .

Online tools helped direct market farmers during the COVID-19 pandemic, but resources are needed for equitable adoption

Sasha Pesci — 2024-05-07

This paper examines the use by California’s direct market farmers (DMFs) of online sales and marketing during the early onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, from March through December 2020. The pandemic caused market disruptions that accelerated the trend toward market digitalization. This paper reports quantitative findings based on 364 responses to an online survey of DMFs in California and qualitative findings from participant observation and 33 semi-structured interviews with DMFs and technical assistance providers. We found that online sales and marketing tools, such as social media and websites, were important for withstanding economic disruptions associated with the pandemic, and farmers who had an online presence were more likely to increase their sales and profitability during its early onset. However, we also found that many farmers lacked the necessary resources to access these tools and use them effectively, and that technical assistance providers experienced challenges in helping farmers with online technology use. We argue that DMFs need reliable access to the internet, as well as advice, resources, and training to access and benefit from online sales and marketing tools. These resources must be available in languages other than English (e.g., Spanish). Research-informed programs and policies can help DMFs navigate market digitalization and strengthen their resilience to future economic disruptions.

Food democracy as food security strategy

Mary Little — 2024-05-07

Tourism communities such as Monteverde, Costa Rica, the site of this study, have been profoundly impacted by the loss of tourism revenue during COVID-19. Faced with intensified food insecurity caused by the cascading impacts of this pandemic, the community has organized initiatives to stimulate local, sustainable food production to increase food security during the COVID-19 economic recovery. This paper adopts a food democracy framework to analyze restaurants’ regional food purchases, barriers to local purchasing, and tourists’ interest in and ability to identify local food products. Our findings show that nearly all restaurant owners identified benefits of purchasing regional food but reported multiple barriers to buying locally. Tourists reported high interest in eating locally produced food but do not have enough information to identify farm-to-fork options. Local food initiative stakeholder interviews show that emergent strategies demonstrate a move toward food democracy actions by promoting communication and co-learning between restaurants, food producers, and tourists to reinforce principles of food democracy. Based on our findings, we recommend (a) strengthening producer-to-restaurant networks, (b) enhancing communication of local food production benefits and responsibilities to restaurants, and (c) promoting the locally made certification for restaurants to strengthen localized food networks and direct tourists to transformative food strategies underway in Monteverde.

Toward a justice approach to emergency food assistance and food waste

Christopher Bacon — 2024-04-25

The 60,000 food pantries in the United States are well known for charity-based emergency food assistance and edible food recovery, serving 53 million people in 2022 (Feeding America, 2023a). Thousands of urban gardens emphasize vegetable production and food justice, but lack strong connections to food pantries. We explore how food pantries and urban gardens could partner to transform pantries into distribution sites that also become food justice education and organizing spaces. To assess this potential, we engaged in participatory action research with a leading social services provider that offers programs supporting both organized urban gardeners and a large urban food pantry in San Jose, California. We conducted and analyzed 21 interviews with food pantry volunteers and urban gardeners affiliated with the same agency, and eight interviews with other urban gardeners and food pantry staff from external organizations. We found that while both food pantry volunteers and urban gardeners expressed concerns about increasing healthy food access and reducing food waste, pantry volunteers were often unfamiliar with food justice and uncomfortable talking about race and culturally rooted food preferences. These findings were similar with the informants from external organizations. To support urban gardener and food pantry volunteer collaboration, we developed a food justice approach to emergency food assistance and food waste management in which both groups co-create onsite vermicomposting infrastructure and partner with a university to design a training program focused on diversity, justice, and systemic change.

Reversing food-land relationships in the city

Carol Ramos-Gerena — 2024-04-24

First paragraph:

The Seeding East Buffalo Fellowship (SEBF) program, co-founded by community and academic organizations from Buffalo, NY in 2022, supported residents in Buffalo’s Black neighborhoods to grow their own food, emerge as urban agriculture (UA) leaders, and engage in and advocate for UA policy. This article reflects on the lessons learned from this pilot program. The authors, all of whom are either co-founders or team members of the SEBF program, drew from field notes and qualitative interviews with SEBF growers in this article. Key lessons for policy change are that programs must be rooted in the community’s history, pedagogical strategies must be tailored to the local context, and long-term relationships must be fostered. . . .

Growing change at the intersection of art and agroecology

Ana Fochesatto — 2024-04-24

First paragraph:

Agroecology in the U.S., as commonly institutionalized, remains firmly rooted in its techno-scientific approaches centered on quantitative biophysical data and natural science research methodologies that flatten the richness of its relationality, land-based practices, and social movements. The crucial role of art and popular forms of artistic expression are often undervalued within the walls of academia and higher-education institutions, while elsewhere, it embodies the steady pulse of anti-colonial resistance and the daily pursuit of life-affirming practices. . . .

Broadscale diversification of Midwestern agriculture requires an agroecological approach

Nicholas Jordan — 2024-04-24

First paragraph:

We write to highlight the potential for academic agroecology to address the crucial challenge facing agriculture in the Upper Midwest region of the U.S.: diversification. Integrative forms of agroecology—often framed as “science, practice, and movement” (Wezel et al. 2018)—can make important and unique contributions to expanding the scale at which diversified farming systems are adopted in the region. After outlining the current situation in the Upper Midwest region, we identify particular roles—currently not robustly practiced—that academic agroecologists can play to advance diversification.

Reflections on research agendas in agroecology

Ivette Perfecto — 2024-04-16

First paragraph:

Dismantling the Capitalist Industrial Food System Should Be a Priority

Food systems are crucial to the stability of our planet’s ecosystems and the future of humanity. The industrial capitalist global food system has generated multiple crises that pose a significant threat to the future of our planet. The environmental, health, and social impacts of this system of agriculture are multifaceted and well-documented. Pesticides poison us and destroy the world’s biodiversity (Ali et al., 2020; Beaumelle et al., 2023; Beketov et al., 2013; Kumar et al., 2023). Pesticides and fertilizer runoff pollute our water and create dead zones (Craswell, 2021, Diaz & Rosenberg, 2008). Greenhouse gas emissions from the global food system contribute up to a third of total global emissions (Crippa et al., 2020). Land concentration and land grabbing condemn millions to poverty (DeShutter, 2011). Food insecurity persists even as food production continues to increase (Long et al., 2020l; Müller et al., 2021). Not only is our current agri-food system environmentally and socially damaging, but it is also extremely cost-inefficient. Diet-related health problems, for example, overburden global public health systems and affect workers’ productivity, costing an estimated 9 trillion dollars annually (Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO], 2023). . . .

Agroecology and corporate power in the U.S.

Sarah Lloyd — 2024-04-16

First paragraph:

Introduction

In reflecting on the U.S. Agroecology Summit 2023, we want to bring a key issue to the fore: corporate power and how agroecology can address it in the food system. Taking on existing power structures was an important theme running through the conference, from confronting legacies of colonization and slavery in the food system to battling the marginalization of affected communities in agricultural and food sciences. The corporate dominance of agricultural markets and its corresponding influence in the political realm was certainly present throughout our discussions, but here we want to center the role of corporate power in future discussions of agroecology in the U.S. . . .