Pub Date : 2023-03-07DOI: 10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.007
Hannah Dankbar, C. Long, Dara Bloom, Kaley Hohenshell, Emma Brinkmeyer, Bre Miller
In 2019, a national group of local food system educators and practitioners identified over 140 foundational core competencies critical to local food system development work and began to identify existing educational resources related to these competencies. This process resulted in a new aggregated resource: the Local Food System Practitioner and Educational Resource Database. Included in this database is a core competency matrix that distinguishes three levels of learning for each competency so that practitioners can identify learning opportunities most closely tailored to their educational needs. It also serves as a framework and competency matrix for educators to use to help assess and communicate the learning outcomes of their curricula. This framework is the overall concept for understanding the competencies, and the matrix is the tool developed to assess and evaluate the level at which an educational resource teaches a competency. In this article we apply the newly create core competency matrix to two existing local food system development courses. We share lessons learned from applying the matrix and insights gained from comparing two introductory level courses. We conclude with recommendations for improving the resource database and matrix to a more user-friendly model for educators and local food system practitioners.
{"title":"Applying emerging core competencies to extension training courses for local food system practitioners","authors":"Hannah Dankbar, C. Long, Dara Bloom, Kaley Hohenshell, Emma Brinkmeyer, Bre Miller","doi":"10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.007","url":null,"abstract":"In 2019, a national group of local food system educators and practitioners identified over 140 foundational core competencies critical to local food system development work and began to identify existing educational resources related to these competencies. This process resulted in a new aggregated resource: the Local Food System Practitioner and Educational Resource Database. Included in this database is a core competency matrix that distinguishes three levels of learning for each competency so that practitioners can identify learning opportunities most closely tailored to their educational needs. It also serves as a framework and competency matrix for educators to use to help assess and communicate the learning outcomes of their curricula. This framework is the overall concept for understanding the competencies, and the matrix is the tool developed to assess and evaluate the level at which an educational resource teaches a competency. In this article we apply the newly create core competency matrix to two existing local food system development courses. We share lessons learned from applying the matrix and insights gained from comparing two introductory level courses. We conclude with recommendations for improving the resource database and matrix to a more user-friendly model for educators and local food system practitioners.","PeriodicalId":51829,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2023-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79631868","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-06DOI: 10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.006
M. Syukron, Ye Su
Promoting local food systems is crucial to providing a more viable economy, eco-friendly production, and equal opportunities for producers, consumers, and communities. Meat processors are critical to local meat producers and the meat supply chain. However, various barriers have restricted small-scale meat processors and challenged the local meat supply chain. Although local food systems have gained enormous scholarly attention, little attention has been devoted to specifically exploring the meat processing sector. This study investigated the characteristics and challenges of small-scale (<750 employees) and very-small–scale (<200 employees) meat processors in Missouri. Twenty-six meat processors participated in an online survey through Qualtrics, a mail survey, or a structured phone interview between May 2021 and March 2022. We identified the characteristics and constraints related to their businesses. The analysis revealed that 76% of meat processors perceived that their business was in better or much better condition than before the COVID-19 pandemic, reflecting their adaptability to the disrupted meat supply chain. However, small-scale meat processing facilities were limited by the labor shortage, complicated regulations and high regulatory compliance costs, a lack of consistent supply, and limited access to tools and equipment. More integrated work is needed to aid smaller processors in positively impacting the local community and environment through locally sourced meat production. This study contains helpful implications for state-level policymaking, extension programs, and future research directions.
{"title":"Understanding small- and very-small-scale size meat processors in Missouri to strengthen the local supply chain","authors":"M. Syukron, Ye Su","doi":"10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.006","url":null,"abstract":"Promoting local food systems is crucial to providing a more viable economy, eco-friendly production, and equal opportunities for producers, consumers, and communities. Meat processors are critical to local meat producers and the meat supply chain. However, various barriers have restricted small-scale meat processors and challenged the local meat supply chain. Although local food systems have gained enormous scholarly attention, little attention has been devoted to specifically exploring the meat processing sector. This study investigated the characteristics and challenges of small-scale (<750 employees) and very-small–scale (<200 employees) meat processors in Missouri. Twenty-six meat processors participated in an online survey through Qualtrics, a mail survey, or a structured phone interview between May 2021 and March 2022. We identified the characteristics and constraints related to their businesses. The analysis revealed that 76% of meat processors perceived that their business was in better or much better condition than before the COVID-19 pandemic, reflecting their adaptability to the disrupted meat supply chain. However, small-scale meat processing facilities were limited by the labor shortage, complicated regulations and high regulatory compliance costs, a lack of consistent supply, and limited access to tools and equipment. More integrated work is needed to aid smaller processors in positively impacting the local community and environment through locally sourced meat production. This study contains helpful implications for state-level policymaking, extension programs, and future research directions.","PeriodicalId":51829,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development","volume":"48 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2023-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83503112","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-22DOI: 10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.005
Charles Z. Levkoe, Peter Andrée, Patricia Ballamingie, Kirsti Tasala, Amanda D. Wilson, Monika Korzun
Civil society organizations (CSOs) commonly experience food systems governance as imposed by governments from the top down and as unduly influenced by a small group of private sector actors that hold disproportionate power. This uneven influence significantly impacts the activities and relationships that determine the nature and orientation of food systems. In contrast, some CSOs have sought to establish participatory governance structures that are more democratic, accessible, collaborative, and rooted in social and environmental justice. Our research seeks to better understand the experiences of CSOs across the food systems governance landscape and critically analyze the successes, challenges, and future opportunities for establishing collaborative governance processes with the goal of building healthier, sustainable, and more equitable food systems. This paper presents findings from a survey of CSOs in Canada to identify who is involved in this work, key policy priorities, and opportunities and limitations experienced. Following the survey, we conducted interviews with a broad cross-section of CSO representatives to deepen our understanding of experiences engaging with food systems governance. Our findings suggest that what food systems governance is, how it is experienced, and what more participatory structures might look like are part of an emergent and contested debate. We argue for increased scholarly attention to the ways that proponents of place-based initiatives engage in participatory approaches to food systems governance, examining both current and future possibilities. We conclude by identifying five key gaps in food systems governance that require additional focus and study: (1) Describing the myriad meanings of participatory food systems governance; (2) Learning from food movement histories; (3) Deepening meaningful Indigenous-settler relationships; (4) Addressing food systems labor issues; and (5) Considering participatory food systems governance in the context of COVID-19.
{"title":"Civil society engagement in food systems governance in Canada: Experiences, gaps, and possibilities","authors":"Charles Z. Levkoe, Peter Andrée, Patricia Ballamingie, Kirsti Tasala, Amanda D. Wilson, Monika Korzun","doi":"10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.005","url":null,"abstract":"Civil society organizations (CSOs) commonly experience food systems governance as imposed by governments from the top down and as unduly influenced by a small group of private sector actors that hold disproportionate power. This uneven influence significantly impacts the activities and relationships that determine the nature and orientation of food systems. In contrast, some CSOs have sought to establish participatory governance structures that are more democratic, accessible, collaborative, and rooted in social and environmental justice. Our research seeks to better understand the experiences of CSOs across the food systems governance landscape and critically analyze the successes, challenges, and future opportunities for establishing collaborative governance processes with the goal of building healthier, sustainable, and more equitable food systems. This paper presents findings from a survey of CSOs in Canada to identify who is involved in this work, key policy priorities, and opportunities and limitations experienced. Following the survey, we conducted interviews with a broad cross-section of CSO representatives to deepen our understanding of experiences engaging with food systems governance. Our findings suggest that what food systems governance is, how it is experienced, and what more participatory structures might look like are part of an emergent and contested debate. We argue for increased scholarly attention to the ways that proponents of place-based initiatives engage in participatory approaches to food systems governance, examining both current and future possibilities. We conclude by identifying five key gaps in food systems governance that require additional focus and study: (1) Describing the myriad meanings of participatory food systems governance; (2) Learning from food movement histories; (3) Deepening meaningful Indigenous-settler relationships; (4) Addressing food systems labor issues; and (5) Considering participatory food systems governance in the context of COVID-19.","PeriodicalId":51829,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development","volume":"69 3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2023-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83924373","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-20DOI: 10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.004
Susanna Klassen, Lydia Medland, Poppy Nichol, H. Pitt
The crucial roles that workers, especially seasonal and migrant workers, play in our food systems have come under renewed attention in recent years. The coronavirus pandemic resulted in food workers being recognized as critical or essential workers in many countries. In 2021, this coincided with the UN International Year of Fruits and Vegetables (IYFV), highlighting the importance of horticultural crops to healthy lives globally. Yet, workers’ quality of life in this most labor-intensive form of food production is often disregarded, or in the case of the UN IYFV, misconstrued. The agriculture-migration nexus—on which food systems depend—remains recognized as a challenge, yet there is limited debate about how it could be ameliorated and a lack of articulation of desirable alternatives. While alternative food and peasant movements propose food system transformation and alternative labor futures based on agroecology, labor lawyers and other advocates propose regulation and formalization of workplace regimes to ensure fair working conditions. Most recently, a third possibility has emerged from agri-tech innovators: a techno-centric future with far fewer agricultural workers. These three archetypes of agricultural labor futures (agroecological, formally regulated, and techno-centric) have the potential to leave food scholars and activists without a unified, coherent vision to advance. Addressing this gap, this paper reports and builds on insights harvested from the international Good Work for Good Food Forum, organized by the authors with the aim of shaping consensus on positive visions for work in food systems. About 40 scholar-activists across three continents discussed the current challenges facing food workers and crafted a collective vision for good food work. This vision is documented in the form of nine principles supported by a framework of seven enabling pathways. We conclude by emphasizing the need for a people-centered incorporation of technology and a re-valuation of food workers’ contributions to global food systems. We offer the vision as a collective platform for action to advocate for and organize with workers in food systems.
{"title":"Pathways for advancing good work in food systems: Reflecting on the international Good Work for Good Food Forum","authors":"Susanna Klassen, Lydia Medland, Poppy Nichol, H. Pitt","doi":"10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.004","url":null,"abstract":"The crucial roles that workers, especially seasonal and migrant workers, play in our food systems have come under renewed attention in recent years. The coronavirus pandemic resulted in food workers being recognized as critical or essential workers in many countries. In 2021, this coincided with the UN International Year of Fruits and Vegetables (IYFV), highlighting the importance of horticultural crops to healthy lives globally. Yet, workers’ quality of life in this most labor-intensive form of food production is often disregarded, or in the case of the UN IYFV, misconstrued. The agriculture-migration nexus—on which food systems depend—remains recognized as a challenge, yet there is limited debate about how it could be ameliorated and a lack of articulation of desirable alternatives. While alternative food and peasant movements propose food system transformation and alternative labor futures based on agroecology, labor lawyers and other advocates propose regulation and formalization of workplace regimes to ensure fair working conditions. Most recently, a third possibility has emerged from agri-tech innovators: a techno-centric future with far fewer agricultural workers. These three archetypes of agricultural labor futures (agroecological, formally regulated, and techno-centric) have the potential to leave food scholars and activists without a unified, coherent vision to advance. Addressing this gap, this paper reports and builds on insights harvested from the international Good Work for Good Food Forum, organized by the authors with the aim of shaping consensus on positive visions for work in food systems. About 40 scholar-activists across three continents discussed the current challenges facing food workers and crafted a collective vision for good food work. This vision is documented in the form of nine principles supported by a framework of seven enabling pathways. We conclude by emphasizing the need for a people-centered incorporation of technology and a re-valuation of food workers’ contributions to global food systems. We offer the vision as a collective platform for action to advocate for and organize with workers in food systems.","PeriodicalId":51829,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development","volume":"89 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2023-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79477417","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-13DOI: 10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.003
Claire Whitehouse, David Conner, Lisa Chase, Travis W. Reynolds
The COVID-19 pandemic tested the resilience of food system actors at all levels and across all geographies. This study focuses on the experience of Vermont local food businesses by combining two surveys conducted in the first half of 2021: one of foodservice operations that procure food locally and one of Vermont farms that sell directly to consumers. We analyzed descriptive statistics, open responses, and conducted Kruskal-Wallis rank sum tests to assess which factors were related to businesses’ financial statuses before and since the pandemic. Pre-pandemic financial status was related with business type, whether the business went on to receive emergency funds, and financial status since the pandemic. The only significant factor for financial status since the pandemic was prepandemic financial status. We close with recommendations for policy and future research.
{"title":"The experience of Vermont local food businesses during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic","authors":"Claire Whitehouse, David Conner, Lisa Chase, Travis W. Reynolds","doi":"10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.003","url":null,"abstract":"The COVID-19 pandemic tested the resilience of food system actors at all levels and across all geographies. This study focuses on the experience of Vermont local food businesses by combining two surveys conducted in the first half of 2021: one of foodservice operations that procure food locally and one of Vermont farms that sell directly to consumers. We analyzed descriptive statistics, open responses, and conducted Kruskal-Wallis rank sum tests to assess which factors were related to businesses’ financial statuses before and since the pandemic. Pre-pandemic financial status was related with business type, whether the business went on to receive emergency funds, and financial status since the pandemic. The only significant factor for financial status since the pandemic was prepandemic financial status. We close with recommendations for policy and future research.","PeriodicalId":51829,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2023-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74542155","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-12DOI: 10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.002
J. Ikerd
First paragraph: Why do industrial agricultural operations continue to displace smaller family farms in spite of their continued pollution of the natural environment and degradation of rural communities? Large-scale, specialized agricultural operations, such as concentrated animal feeding operations (or CAFOs), persist because they have an economic advantage over smaller, diversified farming operations. They have higher ecological and social costs but lower economic costs. This economic advantage is commonly referred to as economies of scale. In economic theory, there are two types of economies of scale. Internal economies of scale refer to differences in the costs of production associated with different sizes of production units. In animal agriculture, “scale” refers to the number of hogs, poultry, milk cows, or beef cattle in a single farming operation or production unit. In field crop and pasture-based animal production, scale refers to the acres of land in a single production unit. External economies of scale, on the other hand, refer to differences such as the costs of fertilizer or feed, or the cost of complying with government regulations, for different sizes of management units. Management units may include one or more production units under single management or control (Ross, 2022). A single farm or production unit may comprise multiple parcels of land, but a farm management unit may comprise multiple farms that are managed as a single economic entity or unit. . . .
{"title":"THE ECONOMIC PAMPHLETEER: Economies of scale in food production","authors":"J. Ikerd","doi":"10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.002","url":null,"abstract":"First paragraph: Why do industrial agricultural operations continue to displace smaller family farms in spite of their continued pollution of the natural environment and degradation of rural communities? Large-scale, specialized agricultural operations, such as concentrated animal feeding operations (or CAFOs), persist because they have an economic advantage over smaller, diversified farming operations. They have higher ecological and social costs but lower economic costs. This economic advantage is commonly referred to as economies of scale. In economic theory, there are two types of economies of scale. Internal economies of scale refer to differences in the costs of production associated with different sizes of production units. In animal agriculture, “scale” refers to the number of hogs, poultry, milk cows, or beef cattle in a single farming operation or production unit. In field crop and pasture-based animal production, scale refers to the acres of land in a single production unit. External economies of scale, on the other hand, refer to differences such as the costs of fertilizer or feed, or the cost of complying with government regulations, for different sizes of management units. Management units may include one or more production units under single management or control (Ross, 2022). A single farm or production unit may comprise multiple parcels of land, but a farm management unit may comprise multiple farms that are managed as a single economic entity or unit. . . .","PeriodicalId":51829,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2023-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87577103","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-28DOI: 10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.001
Linfu Xie, Z. Qiu, Mei Fu
While agricultural services are shrinking, the number of nontraditional farms run by immigrant farmers is rising in U.S. suburban regions. This study attempts to understand Chinese immigrant farmers’ experience accessing agricultural services and resources in the New York metropolitan area and explores the need for changes in agricultural services to meet changing demand. Thirteen Chinese immigrant farmers in the region were recruited to participate in a semi-structured interview to understand their shared experiences of accessing agricultural services and resources. The study identified diverse ways of accessing agricultural services and resources in four critical areas of farming operations: agricultural technology, financial services, farm labor, and farming machinery; and also revealed the existence of “liability of newness” among those new immigrant farmers in operating farms. Most participants felt that they were isolated, with limited access to available services as new immigrant farmers, which constitutes the liabilities to their success in farming. Language barriers, cultural differences, distrust, and isolation were the main obstacles to access adequate services and resources. As farms and farmers are becoming more diverse in U.S. suburban regions, the provision of agricultural services needs to adapt accordingly to meet the growing needs of groups of farmers with varying farming experiences and demographic backgrounds and help them to overcome the liabilities as new immigrant farmers. This study contributes to understanding the farming experiences of minority farm groups, which help develop more inclusive agricultural services.
{"title":"Suburban agriculture, immigrant farmers, and access to agricultural services and resources","authors":"Linfu Xie, Z. Qiu, Mei Fu","doi":"10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2023.122.001","url":null,"abstract":"While agricultural services are shrinking, the number of nontraditional farms run by immigrant farmers is rising in U.S. suburban regions. This study attempts to understand Chinese immigrant farmers’ experience accessing agricultural services and resources in the New York metropolitan area and explores the need for changes in agricultural services to meet changing demand. Thirteen Chinese immigrant farmers in the region were recruited to participate in a semi-structured interview to understand their shared experiences of accessing agricultural services and resources. The study identified diverse ways of accessing agricultural services and resources in four critical areas of farming operations: agricultural technology, financial services, farm labor, and farming machinery; and also revealed the existence of “liability of newness” among those new immigrant farmers in operating farms. Most participants felt that they were isolated, with limited access to available services as new immigrant farmers, which constitutes the liabilities to their success in farming. Language barriers, cultural differences, distrust, and isolation were the main obstacles to access adequate services and resources. As farms and farmers are becoming more diverse in U.S. suburban regions, the provision of agricultural services needs to adapt accordingly to meet the growing needs of groups of farmers with varying farming experiences and demographic backgrounds and help them to overcome the liabilities as new immigrant farmers. This study contributes to understanding the farming experiences of minority farm groups, which help develop more inclusive agricultural services.","PeriodicalId":51829,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development","volume":"409 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76492345","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-15DOI: 10.5304/jafscd.2022.121.015/016
D. Hilchey
First paragraph: This fall of 2022 issue includes open-call papers on a wide range of food systems topics, with a cluster focused on the concept of economies of community. Economies of community occurs when stakeholders in a collective action project or program scale up, not by growing individually, but by growing as a group—by treating each other as equal partners, maintaining transparency in communications and in other transactions, and generating regular feedback for continuous improvement. Several examples of economies of community are provided in this issue.
{"title":"In This Issue: Scaling up through economies of community","authors":"D. Hilchey","doi":"10.5304/jafscd.2022.121.015/016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2022.121.015/016","url":null,"abstract":"First paragraph: This fall of 2022 issue includes open-call papers on a wide range of food systems topics, with a cluster focused on the concept of economies of community. Economies of community occurs when stakeholders in a collective action project or program scale up, not by growing individually, but by growing as a group—by treating each other as equal partners, maintaining transparency in communications and in other transactions, and generating regular feedback for continuous improvement. Several examples of economies of community are provided in this issue.","PeriodicalId":51829,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78756613","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-13DOI: 10.5304/jafscd.2022.121.015
M. Hoffman
First paragraph: The steady drumbeat of headlines this year revealing the harms caused by concentrated ownership in the food system (Anderson & Weaver, 2022; Gutman, 2022; Hope-D’Anieri, 2022; Krupnick, 2022; Qiu, 2022; Snodgrass, 2022) shows renewed interest in a topic that was a central concern of American politics in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The revised edition of Philip Howard’s Concentration and Power in the Food System comes just in time to help us understand not only the degree and nature of concentration in our food system, but also how various kinds of concentration enable the exercise of power in ways that were unanticipated by earlier anti-trust legislation and which need to be addressed in new ways.
第一段:今年不断出现的头条新闻揭示了粮食系统中集中所有权造成的危害(Anderson & Weaver, 2022;古特曼,2022;Hope-D 'Anieri, 2022;Krupnick, 2022;秋,2022;斯诺德格拉斯(Snodgrass, 2022)对19世纪末和20世纪初美国政治的一个核心问题重新产生了兴趣。菲利普·霍华德(Philip Howard)的《食品体系中的集中与权力》(Concentration and Power in The Food System)修订版来得正是时候，它不仅帮助我们理解了食品体系中集中的程度和性质，还帮助我们了解了各种各样的集中是如何以早期反垄断立法没有预料到的方式行使权力的，这些方式需要以新的方式加以解决。
{"title":"How power is created and exercised—often invisibly","authors":"M. Hoffman","doi":"10.5304/jafscd.2022.121.015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2022.121.015","url":null,"abstract":"First paragraph: The steady drumbeat of headlines this year revealing the harms caused by concentrated ownership in the food system (Anderson & Weaver, 2022; Gutman, 2022; Hope-D’Anieri, 2022; Krupnick, 2022; Qiu, 2022; Snodgrass, 2022) shows renewed interest in a topic that was a central concern of American politics in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The revised edition of Philip Howard’s Concentration and Power in the Food System comes just in time to help us understand not only the degree and nature of concentration in our food system, but also how various kinds of concentration enable the exercise of power in ways that were unanticipated by earlier anti-trust legislation and which need to be addressed in new ways.","PeriodicalId":51829,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development","volume":"94 2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78023051","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-12DOI: 10.5304/jafscd.2022.121.014
Caroline Paras, Tracy Michaud, Matthew Hoffman
Tourism generates billions of dollars in New England. Maine and Vermont rely heavily on the iconic imagery of lobstering and dairy farming to attract visitors to their states. The collapse of either industry would not only deal a direct economic and cultural blow to their respective states but be compounded by their impact on the tourism industry. How do these industries work in symbiosis with tourism? From the biological world, symbiosis is the close interaction of two different species in a mutually beneficial or parasitic relationship. To what extent do these primary sector industries benefit from tourism and how might the benefits of tourism be more effectively shared with farmers and fishermen? Using in-depth interviews, this exploratory study captures perceptions of tourism’s value to farmers in Vermont and fishermen in Maine as a place to start this important conversation. While tourists consume less than 10% of the bounty from Vermont dairy farmers and Maine lobstermen, producers capture a variety of other benefits from tourism, including such economic benefits as the opportunity to promote their company or industry brand, attract new customers, generate supplemental income, and create employment opportunities, along with non-economic benefits such as the opportunity to provide authentic experiences, create great places, showcase their conservation efforts, and highlight their family’s pride and heritage. Public policy could redistribute the benefits of tourism to facilitate a more mutually beneficial symbiosis, including direct subsidies to producers, preservation of working landscapes, marketing and branding activities, and investment in cooperative infrastructure.
{"title":"Sustaining New England's iconic tourism landscapes: An exploratory study to examine perceptions of value from farmers and fishermen","authors":"Caroline Paras, Tracy Michaud, Matthew Hoffman","doi":"10.5304/jafscd.2022.121.014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2022.121.014","url":null,"abstract":"Tourism generates billions of dollars in New England. Maine and Vermont rely heavily on the iconic imagery of lobstering and dairy farming to attract visitors to their states. The collapse of either industry would not only deal a direct economic and cultural blow to their respective states but be compounded by their impact on the tourism industry. How do these industries work in symbiosis with tourism? From the biological world, symbiosis is the close interaction of two different species in a mutually beneficial or parasitic relationship. To what extent do these primary sector industries benefit from tourism and how might the benefits of tourism be more effectively shared with farmers and fishermen? Using in-depth interviews, this exploratory study captures perceptions of tourism’s value to farmers in Vermont and fishermen in Maine as a place to start this important conversation. While tourists consume less than 10% of the bounty from Vermont dairy farmers and Maine lobstermen, producers capture a variety of other benefits from tourism, including such economic benefits as the opportunity to promote their company or industry brand, attract new customers, generate supplemental income, and create employment opportunities, along with non-economic benefits such as the opportunity to provide authentic experiences, create great places, showcase their conservation efforts, and highlight their family’s pride and heritage. Public policy could redistribute the benefits of tourism to facilitate a more mutually beneficial symbiosis, including direct subsidies to producers, preservation of working landscapes, marketing and branding activities, and investment in cooperative infrastructure.","PeriodicalId":51829,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79329829","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：