From sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.eduFri Mar 31 21:29:44 1995 Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 12:40:32 -0800 (PST) From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture Subject: local food securtiy & the concept of a "foodshed" (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 15:11:25 -0500 From: tjakin@pssci.umass.edu To: sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu Cc: sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.edu Subject: local food securtiy & the concept of a "foodshed" Fred Kirschenmann, an organic grain farmer from North Dakota, spoke this past week at a Northeast Region SARE Ch. 3-sponsored conference on sustainable agriculture. He touched on the subject of local agriculture, local food security and the concept of a "foodshed" (conceptual equivalent of a watershed). Could someone point out further reading on the "foodshed" concept? I would appreciate examples of projects that have increased consumer awareness of the importance and benefits of local/regional food production? What's the best way for the getting the message out? Thanks in advance, Tom Akin Thomas Akin Extension Specialist Plant & Soil Science Dept. Bowditch Hal Box 30910 University of Massachusetts TEL: (413) 545-5236 Amherst, MA 01003-0910 FAX: (413) 545-0260 From cjarden@ucdavis.eduFri Mar 31 21:41:58 1995 Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 15:26:15 -0800 (PST) From: Colehour Arden To: tjakin@pssci.umass.edu Cc: sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu, sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.edu Subject: Re: local food securtiy & the concept of a "foodshed" On Fri, 31 Mar 1995 tjakin@pssci.umass.edu wrote: > Fred Kirschenmann, an organic grain farmer from North Dakota, spoke > this past week at a Northeast Region SARE Ch. 3-sponsored > conference on sustainable agriculture. He touched on the subject > of local agriculture, local food security and the concept of a > "foodshed" (conceptual equivalent of a watershed). Could someone > point out further reading on the "foodshed" concept? Tom, Arthur Getz wrote a short article on this topic in the Oct, 1991 Permaculture Activist #24 (pages 26-7). It might be of interest to subscribe to the new group on direct marketing also: > To subscribe to direct-mkt, send the following message to > majordomo@reeusda.gov: > > subscribe direct-mkt Good luck, Colehour Arden +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + COLEHOUR JORDAN ARDEN + + International Agricultural Development & + + Master of Education Graduate Groups + + University of California at Davis + + POST: P.O. Box 73392, Davis, CA 95617 + + PHONE: 916/759-0497 + + EMAIL: cjarden@ucdavis.edu + +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ From sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.eduSat Apr 1 11:38:07 1995 Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 21:55:19 -0800 (PST) From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture Subject: info leads: foodshed concept (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 18:20:40 GMT -0600 From: Michele Gale-Sinex/CIAS To: sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.edu Subject: info leads: foodshed concept Howdy, all-- This is a reply to Tom Akin on the foodshed concept query he passed along from Fred Kirschenmann and augmented with his own questions. We have a bunch of work going on here at UW-Madison and the Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems on this topic. I'm writing to share a few highlights of that. 1. CIAS sponsors a monthly Regional Food Systems Seminar that has brought diverse folks together to explore topics like the economic impacts of changing diets to meet USDA food guidelines, the feasibility and impact of regionally reliant food systems, various alternative and value added marketing projects taking place in the upper Midwest, and more. We are still in an exploratory mode (meaning we not only have more questions than answers, we're still formulating the questions), but some interesting perspectives have emerged from this seminar. John Hendrickson is the coordinator of this seminar. You can reach him via e-mail as jhendrik@macc.wisc.edu He is the keeper of much of the Center's information traffic on this topic and can also refer you to UW-Madison researchers and contact folks and Madison-area and Wisconsin/Upper Midwest collaborators on this work. Steve Stevenson, CIAS assistant director, is also deeply involved in foodshed activities. He is at: stevenson@ae.agecon.wisc.edu 2. A few suggestions on readings. Prof. Jack Kloppenburg (UW-Mad Dept. of Rural Sociology) and John have authored a paper called "Coming Into the Foodshed" which lays out a framework for foodshed issues. John can give you more details; I don't know whether it's available in other than draft form at this point, but John can tell you, or you can dink Jack at kloppenb@ssc.wisc.edu Jack has a number of graduate and undergraduate students involved in foodshed research, as well, and has taught seminars on the topic. 3. Community Supported Agriculture, community gardening/urban sustainable agriculture, farmer's markets, alternative value-added/direct marketing, and development of seasonal/regional restaurant menus are several of the areas that the Center has had a strong interest in and/or supported research and other activities on. I can offer further leads if you have specific questions. 4. Here are suggestions for readings that we've found useful in thinking about regional and seasonal food systems issues. I'm knocking this out quickly on a Friday evening, so it isn't perfectly edited format-wise. Kate Clancy. The role of sustainable agriculture in improving the safety and quality of the food supply. /Am J of Alt Ag/ 1:1, 11-18 (1986) Kenneth Dahlberg. Regenerative food systems: broadening the scope and agenda of sustainability. In Patricia Allen, ed., /Food for the Future./ NY: John Wiley & Sons, 1993, pp. 75-102 Harriet Friedmann. After Midas' feast: alternative food regimes for the future. In Patricia Allen, ed., /Food for the Future./ NY: John Wiley & Sons, 1993, pp. 213-233. Arthur Getz. Urban foodsheds. /Permaculture Activist/ VII:3:26-27, 1991 Joan Dye Gussow and Kate Clancy. Dietary guidelines for sustainability. /J. of Nutrition Education. 18:1-5, 1986 Marcia Herrin and Joan Dye Gussow. Designing a Sustainable Regional Diet. /Journal of Nutritional Education/ 21: 270-275, 1989 (good biblio) Interfaith Hunger Coalition. /Seeds of Change: Strategies for Food Security for the Inner City./ Los Angeles: Interfaith Hunger Coalition, 1993 Brewster Kneen. Distancing: the logic of the food system; Going shopping; and Industrial food. Chapters 3-5 in /From Land to Mouth: Understanding the Food System./ Toronto: NC Press Ltd. (Sorry I don't have the newer edition on hand to update this.) David Orr. Prices and the life exchanged: costs of the US food system. In /Understanding the True Cost of Food./ Washington, DC: Institute for Alternative Ag, 1991, pp. 1-13. Toronto Food Policy Council. /Developing a Food System which is Just and Environmentally Sustainable./ Toronto: TFPC, 1993 There is much much much more...but this'll give you a start. 5. Prof. Sally Leong, UW-Madison Professor of Plant Pathology, organized and continues to be a guiding spirit behind a foodshed working group here in Madland. She is at: sal@plantpath.wisc.edu This group engages researchers, food and hunger activists, people with interests in sustainable ag., farmers, and many others in a variety of foodshed-related issues. Hope this gets you started. We're finding it an incredibly rich and complex area of inquiry. Peace-- Michele <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Michele Gale-Sinex Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems Agricultural Technology and Family Farm Institute UW-Madison--Voice: (608) 262-8018 FAX: (608) 265-3020 Don't pray when it rains if you don't pray when the sun shines. --Satchel Paige From sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.eduSat Apr 1 12:12:27 1995 Date: Sat, 1 Apr 1995 08:33:29 -0800 (PST) From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture Subject: concept of a "foodshed" (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 1 Apr 1995 10:43:15 -0500 From: Jennifer L. Wilkins To: tjakin@pssci.umass.edu Cc: sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu, sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.edu Subject: concept of a "foodshed" >Fred Kirschenmann, an organic grain farmer from North Dakota, spoke >this past week at a Northeast Region SARE Ch. 3-sponsored >conference on sustainable agriculture. He touched on the subject >of local agriculture, local food security and the concept of a >"foodshed" (conceptual equivalent of a watershed). Could someone >point out further reading on the "foodshed" concept? > The first place I heard about the concept of a Foodshed was in 1993 at the Association for the Study of Food in Society/ Agriculture and Human Values conference at The Penn State University in the following presentation: Hendrickson, J. A. 1993. The foodshed: Heuristic device and sustainable alternative the food system. Paper presented at the "Environment, Culture, and Food Equity", organized jointly by the Agriculture, Food and Human Values Society, the Association for the Study of Food in Society, and The Penn State University, College of Agricultural Sciences, June 3-6, State College, PA. But Hendrickson credited Hedden with coining the term in the early 1990s! Hedden, W. P. 1929. How Great Cities Are Fed. Boston: D. C. Heath and Co. I would also recommend Hamm's work since he addresses the ever-important, but all too aften ignored issue of carrying capacity (for humans!) - Hamm, M. W. The potential for a localized food supply in New Jersey. Paper presented at the "Environment, Culture, and Food Equity", organized jointly by the Agriculture, Food and Human Values Society, the Association for the Study of Food in Society, and The Penn State University, College of Agricultural Sciences, June 3-6, State College, PA. >I would appreciate examples of projects that have increased >consumer awareness of the importance and benefits of local/regional >food production? I am in the process of developing a food guide for the Northeast which will have a series of fact sheets about the benefits of eating locally and how to achieve a more local diet in an area with significant seasonal variation. This guide, poster, plus supplementary materials will be available by the end of September. Much of the information provided is supported by data we gathered through a survey of Northeastern consumers as to their knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and practices with respect to local foods - awareness and use of winter vegetables, perceived attributes of locally-grown foods, comparison with imported foods, connection between purchases and local agriculture, barriers to eating locally, etc, etc, etc. Results are being prepared for publication. What's the best way for the getting the message >out? Good question - we're working on that, too! Jennifer L. Wilkins, Ph.D., R.D. Senior Extension Associate jlw15@Cornell.edu Ishmael knows. From GALE-SINEX@AE.AGECON.WISC.EDUTue Apr 4 09:49:23 1995 Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 11:22:26 GMT -0600 From: Michele Gale-Sinex/CIAS To: sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu, sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.edu Subject: Foodshed concept/leads Howdy, all-- This is a reply to Tom Akin on the foodshed concept query he passed along from Fred Kirschenmann and augmented with his own questions. I sent it out Friday p.m. but apparently it bounced, so am trying again. We have work going on here at UW-Madison and the Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems on this topic. I'm writing to share a few highlights of that. 1. CIAS sponsors a monthly Regional Food Systems Seminar that has brought diverse folks together to explore topics like the economic impacts of changing diets to meet USDA food guidelines, the feasibility and impact of regionally reliant food systems, various alternative and value added marketing projects taking place in the upper Midwest, and more. We are still in an exploratory mode (meaning we not only have more questions than answers, we're still formulating the questions), but some interesting perspectives have emerged from this seminar. John Hendrickson is the coordinator of this seminar. You can reach him via e-mail as jhendrik@macc.wisc.edu He is the keeper of much of the Center's information traffic on this topic and can also refer you to UW-Madison researchers and contact folks and Madison-area and Wisconsin/Upper Midwest collaborators on this work. Steve Stevenson, CIAS assistant director, is also deeply involved in foodshed activities. He is at: stevenson@ae.agecon.wisc.edu 2. A few suggestions on readings. Prof. Jack Kloppenburg (UW-Mad Dept. of Rural Sociology) and John have authored a paper called "Coming Into the Foodshed" which lays out a framework for foodshed issues. John can give you more details; I don't know whether it's available in other than draft form at this point, but John can tell you, or you can dink Jack at kloppenb@ssc.wisc.edu Jack has a number of graduate and undergraduate students involved in foodshed research, as well, and has taught seminars on the topic. 3. Community Supported Agriculture, community gardening/urban sustainable agriculture, farmer's markets, alternative value-added/direct marketing, and development of seasonal/regional restaurant menus are several of the areas that the Center has had a strong interest in and/or supported research and other activities on. I can offer further leads if you have specific questions. 4. Here are suggestions for readings that we've found useful in thinking about regional and seasonal food systems issues. I'm knocking this out quickly on a Friday evening, so it isn't perfectly edited format-wise. Kate Clancy. The role of sustainable agriculture in improving the safety and quality of the food supply. /Am J of Alt Ag/ 1:1, 11-18 (1986) Kenneth Dahlberg. Regenerative food systems: broadening the scope and agenda of sustainability. In Patricia Allen, ed., /Food for the Future./ NY: John Wiley & Sons, 1993, pp. 75-102 Harriet Friedmann. After Midas' feast: alternative food regimes for the future. In Patricia Allen, ed., /Food for the Future./ NY: John Wiley & Sons, 1993, pp. 213-233. Arthur Getz. Urban foodsheds. /Permaculture Activist/ VII:3:26-27, 1991 Joan Dye Gussow and Kate Clancy. Dietary guidelines for sustainability. /J. of Nutrition Education. 18:1-5, 1986 Marcia Herrin and Joan Dye Gussow. Designing a Sustainable Regional Diet. /Journal of Nutritional Education/ 21: 270-275, 1989 (good biblio) Interfaith Hunger Coalition. /Seeds of Change: Strategies for Food Security for the Inner City./ Los Angeles: Interfaith Hunger Coalition, 1993 Brewster Kneen. Distancing: the logic of the food system; Going shopping; and Industrial food. Chapters 3-5 in /From Land to Mouth: Understanding the Food System./ Toronto: NC Press Ltd. (Sorry I don't have the newer edition on hand to update this.) David Orr. Prices and the life exchanged: costs of the US food system. In /Understanding the True Cost of Food./ Washington, DC: Institute for Alternative Ag, 1991, pp. 1-13. Toronto Food Policy Council. /Developing a Food System which is Just and Environmentally Sustainable./ Toronto: TFPC, 1993 There is much much much more...but this'll give you a start. 5. Prof. Sally Leong, UW-Madison Professor of Plant Pathology, organized and continues to be a guiding spirit behind a foodshed working group here in Madland. She is at: sal@plantpath.wisc.edu This group engages researchers, food and hunger activists, people with interests in sustainable ag., farmers, and many others in a variety of foodshed-related issues. Hope this gets you started. We're finding it an incredibly rich and complex area of inquiry. Peace-- Michele From bbwetzel@franc.ucdavis.eduTue Apr 4 09:52:02 1995 Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 13:45:47 -0700 From: Barbara Wetzel To: sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu Subject: "Foodshed" resource: CSA Proceedings SANET-ers: PROCEEDINGS. COMMUNITY SUPPORTED AGRICULTURE CONFERENCE. Please note that the statewide University of California Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program (UC SAREP) has published proceedings from a very popular conference on Subscription Farming or Community Supported Agriculture (CSAs). This concept is part of a successful Foodshed. The conference was co-sponsored by the UC Small Farm Center. >From a standing-room-only conference at the University of California Davis in December 1993 comes this collection of farmer presentations about the Community Supported Agriculture or CSA concept. In CSAs consumers buy "subscriptions" to local or nearly local farms, and farmers are able to plan ahead with prepaid customers. Subscription farming began in Western Europe and Japan in the mid-1960s, first appeared in the U.S. in the mid-1980s, and has been gathering momentum ever since. The consumer group CSA North America is calling for 10,000 subscription farms by the year 2000. The proceedings includes the presentations of four farmers experienced in operating CSAs, who discussed their farms and the history and philosophy behind Community Supported Agriculture. The 37-page proceedings includes bibliography and resource guide. Editor: Gerry Cohn. Price $8.00. Available from: UC Small Farm Center, University of California, Davis, CA 95616. Checks or money orders payable to UC Regents; include name, address and telephone on order. Price includes tax and shipping. UC SAREP is working to develop a program area in community food systems. If you have questions or comments about foodsheds or local food systems, please contact Gail Feenstra, food systems analyst, 916-752-8408, gwfeenstra@ucdavis.edu. Snail mail: Gail Feenstra, UC SAREP, University of California, Davis, CA 95616. Barbara Wetzel UC SAREP From sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.eduTue Apr 4 09:52:47 1995 Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 15:17:21 -0700 (PDT) From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture Subject: Re: concept of a "foodshed" (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 3 Apr 95 17:16:32 -0400 From: Bob Engelman To: sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.edu Subject: Re: concept of a "foodshed" (fwd) On "foodsheds" Alasdair McKay writes: >If this term were presented in such a >way that my understanding of a piece of writing depended wholly upon my >interpretation of the meaning of the word "foodshed", I would find no >other sense in the word than that of : > > " an artificial structure for storing food in " > >I would recommend that the term be abandoned for any other purposes. > > I wholeheartedly agree. It's hard enough getting watershed understood. There must be better ways of getting the concept out. From Shirley=Hoffmann%BHR.OFDA.SA14%AIDW@usaid.govTue Apr 4 10:07:27 1995 Date: Tue, 4 Apr 95 8:29:11 EDT From: AAAS Fellow -- PMP To: sanet-mg@amani.ces.ncsu.edu Subject: food sheds To Tom- more on food sheds. Long ago (1983) I did a food self suffiency study for the state of Minnesota as part of a larger plan for each state in the country. This massive study was sponsored by Rodale Research Inst. in Emmaus, PA. I don't know if they were all finished. I do know that the PA study was very complete (as was Minnesota's, I believe!). Rodale was concerned with regional food self suffiency at that time and was encouraging states to become more self suffient in their food needs via these studies. I did a lot of number crunching and data collecting; they had some conversion figures and a general guide on how they wanted it to be done. I would call Rodale and ask about their studies if you are interested. Good luck! From gwfeenstra@ucdavis.eduTue Apr 4 22:15:08 1995 Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 09:28:56 -0700 From: by way of bbwetzel To: sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu Cc: tjakin@pssci.umass.edu Subject: Foodsheds etc. Dear Tom and other interested sanet-ers, It looks like you've gotten excellent feedback on the foodshed question. There is, indeed, a network of us out here who are very interested in the concept of foodsheds. Here at the UC Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program (SAREP), we are developing an RFP that focuses on community food systems. We are trying to encourage research and education in California that supports the development of sustainable production and distribution practices, community economic development and social equity within local food systems. Our new RFP will be out in early May and will be due in August. In the past couple of years, we have funded several projects that have attempted to incorporate these criteria in unique ways. One project is being developed in Placer County, called PlacerGrown. It is a local agricultural marketing program that is working to expand the production, distribution and consumption of local foods in Placer County. Two surveys--one for producers and one for consumers--are being used to gather information about what production and marketing strategies are being used now and to find out what farmers and consumers need to increase their use of locally grown foods. They are also developing a local food guide for consumers called "Reason for the Season" that will describe which foods are locally available in which seasons. A packet of information has just gone out to folks in the restaurant business, telling them about how they might "tap in" to this project. The Master Preservers are being utilized to do workshops with consumers about how to use and preserve local foods throughout the year. The PlacerGrown group is also attempting to collect data about how this project is impacting the community economically. Sharon Junge, county director in Placer County, is the contact person. Another project we have funded for several years now is up in Arcata. It is called the Arcata Community Farm. They are leasing land from the city and have developed a wonderful educational farm. It is being used as a learning laboratory for students studying sustainable agriculture at Humboldt State University; for developing a curriculum with elementary school children; as a community supported agriculture project (they now have about 30 subscibers) and as an educational facility for the community. The project has also involved the Hmong community (which has a substantial population in the area). Several Hmong families grow food for their families on the farm, supplementing their diets and making them less reliant on federal food programs to get nutritious food. The Hmong families and the Arcata farm staff are sharing information about sustainable production techniques and learning about each others' cultures. The contact person is Susan Ornelas. Both of these projects have involved both university and/or extension personnel and community members in their development. We have seen that good leadership and effective collaboration among several groups has been part of the reason for these projects' successes. We encourage other groups or individuals in California who are interested in the concept of foodsheds or community food systems to contact either Gail Feenstra (916/ 752-8408) or Dave Campbell (916/ 752-7541) and obtain a copy of our RFP. Gail Feenstra Food Systems Analyst SAREP UC Davis Davis, CA 95616 gwfeenstra@ucdavis.edu From sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.eduTue Apr 4 22:15:58 1995 Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 08:39:37 -0700 (PDT) From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture Subject: "Foodshed" as a term too difficult to understand (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 08:20:23 -0600 (CST) From: Bart Hall-Beyer To: sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.edu Subject: "Foodshed" as a term too difficult to understand Presumably those folks having trouble with 'foodshed' and even 'watershed' have equal trouble comprehending 'software' (Duh, is that a fabric treatment or something..?) and 'floppy.' The 3 1/2" floppies must cause apoplexy, because they're not very bendable. C'mon, people. I speak several languages, and the ongoing beauty and strength of English is its very maleability and adaptability; borrowing, adapting, adopting, shaping, modifying words to expand and introduce meaning. English has become the language of preference for international communication in large measure precisely _because_ its speakers can (and do) coin words like 'foodshed' to explain a concept. If you want to stand up and wave the flag for integrated, corporate, centralised, and heavily subsidised agriculture, by all means do it, and it can be discussed in those terms. Please don't, however, set up a term such as 'foodshed' as a straw-man and attack the term rather than discussing the concept. Bart Hall-Beyer Fayetteville, Arkansas From gwfeenstra@ucdavis.eduTue Apr 4 22:16:58 1995 Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 09:28:56 -0700 From: by way of bbwetzel To: sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu Cc: tjakin@pssci.umass.edu Subject: Foodsheds etc. Dear Tom and other interested sanet-ers, It looks like you've gotten excellent feedback on the foodshed question. There is, indeed, a network of us out here who are very interested in the concept of foodsheds. Here at the UC Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program (SAREP), we are developing an RFP that focuses on community food systems. We are trying to encourage research and education in California that supports the development of sustainable production and distribution practices, community economic development and social equity within local food systems. Our new RFP will be out in early May and will be due in August. In the past couple of years, we have funded several projects that have attempted to incorporate these criteria in unique ways. One project is being developed in Placer County, called PlacerGrown. It is a local agricultural marketing program that is working to expand the production, distribution and consumption of local foods in Placer County. Two surveys--one for producers and one for consumers--are being used to gather information about what production and marketing strategies are being used now and to find out what farmers and consumers need to increase their use of locally grown foods. They are also developing a local food guide for consumers called "Reason for the Season" that will describe which foods are locally available in which seasons. A packet of information has just gone out to folks in the restaurant business, telling them about how they might "tap in" to this project. The Master Preservers are being utilized to do workshops with consumers about how to use and preserve local foods throughout the year. The PlacerGrown group is also attempting to collect data about how this project is impacting the community economically. Sharon Junge, county director in Placer County, is the contact person. Another project we have funded for several years now is up in Arcata. It is called the Arcata Community Farm. They are leasing land from the city and have developed a wonderful educational farm. It is being used as a learning laboratory for students studying sustainable agriculture at Humboldt State University; for developing a curriculum with elementary school children; as a community supported agriculture project (they now have about 30 subscibers) and as an educational facility for the community. The project has also involved the Hmong community (which has a substantial population in the area). Several Hmong families grow food for their families on the farm, supplementing their diets and making them less reliant on federal food programs to get nutritious food. The Hmong families and the Arcata farm staff are sharing information about sustainable production techniques and learning about each others' cultures. The contact person is Susan Ornelas. Both of these projects have involved both university and/or extension personnel and community members in their development. We have seen that good leadership and effective collaboration among several groups has been part of the reason for these projects' successes. We encourage other groups or individuals in California who are interested in the concept of foodsheds or community food systems to contact either Gail Feenstra (916/ 752-8408) or Dave Campbell (916/ 752-7541) and obtain a copy of our RFP. Gail Feenstra Food Systems Analyst SAREP UC Davis Davis, CA 95616 gwfeenstra@ucdavis.edu From JHENDRIK@macc.wisc.eduTue Apr 4 22:20:55 1995 Date: Tue, 04 Apr 95 16:35 CDT From: john hendrickson To: SANET-MG@AMANI.CES.NCSU.EDU Subject: Reply to "How big is a foodshed" On Monday April 3 Sal Schettino wrote: >I like the idea of a foodshed and local buying local just hope >you folks back east will still be able to use some of the things >we raise here in Ca. I have lemons Cherimoyas ,white Sopote >,Macadamia Nuts Avocados and other subtropicals that I raise >organic and was hoping to send this fruit to some of the people >in like Madison, Wisconsin that cannot raise lemons etc. how big >can this foodshed be. Most of the people I am in dialog with about foodsheds and local food systems are interested in increasing regional *self-reliance* rather than promoting self-sufficiency. The difference is perhaps subtle -but significant. Basically, the distinction is that self-reliance does not dismiss the idea that there can be positive aspects of equitable and appropriate trade. What is equitable and appropriate?....we haven't gotten that far. What is the size of a foodshed? I don't have an answer. Me, I am not (quite) ready to give up dates and bananas and chocolate. But I have tried, through my own garden and my local food cooperative to change my eating habits to reflect the seasonal availability of locally grown fruits and vegetables. Wisconsin produces a relatively large amount of vegetables and could produce and market a lot more if supermarkets were not locked into contracts with large distributors that source produce from afar. So, no, we're not talking about a return to the 19 century when all one could eat in Wisconsin in winter was tubers and roots. But we do believe that there are opportunites to create more sustainable food systems around the concept of the foodshed. John Hendrickson Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems University of Wisconsin-Madison (608) 265-3704 jhendrik@macc.wisc.edu From sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.eduTue Apr 4 22:22:38 1995 Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 15:26:24 -0700 (PDT) From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture Subject: Foodsheds and Food Circles (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 16:23:42 -0600 (CST) From: Ed DeWan To: sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu, sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.edu, direct-mkt@reeusda.gov, tjakin@pssci.umass.edu Subject: Foodsheds and Food Circles From: "Nancy Lee Bentley" via Ed DeWan's computer: Local Food Security: Foodsheds and Food Circles Submitted in four parts: The Foodshed and The Food Circle The Foodshed and The Food Circle, cont More local food security and food systems info and issues References and Resources The foodshed and the food circle are two concepts gaining recognition as models or conceptual frameworks for describing local food systems. The foodshed concept, most often attributed to Arthur Getz's in his 1991 Urban Foodsheds article in Permaculture Activist , uses the analogy of a watershed to describe 'the area that is defined by a structure of supply'. Getz used the image of a foodshe Today the Madison, Wisconsin area Foodshed Working Group along with an active coalition of food coops, csa associations, farmer's markets, producer coops, bakeries and other food processors, a natural food warehouse/ distributor, UWMadison and other active participants is the best example of a local food system identifying with the foodshed concept. The Food Circle is a dynamic, community-based and regionally-integrated food systems concept/model/vision. In effect, it is a systems ecology. In contrast to the current linear producton-consumption system, The Food Circle is a production-consumption-r The graphic model is a wheel of concentric circles, illustrating how an integrated food system flows from ag inputs and production through consumption and waste recycling. Starting with the individual at the center and moving outward through the family end 1 of 4 Nancy Lee Bentley The Food Circle PO Box 3083 Champaign, IL 61826-3083 (217) 586-3846 xx200@prairienet.org For an info packet on The Food Circle, including linear and food circle models and a reprint of EcoCity Journal's "An Introduction to The Food Circle, please send $7.95 to the address above. The Foodshed and The Food Circle, cont. part 2 of 4 The goal of The Food Circle is to consciously develop networks of sustainable, community- based and regionally-integrated food systems, capable of providing the basic food needs of their members, providing markets for local food and agricultural producers The beauty of The Food Circle lies in its addressing a host of associated issues, making it adaptable to a broad range of multidisciplinary interests as an organizing vehicle, a teaching model, a community economic development and planning model, even an This Food Circle is a blueprint which I have been refining and nurturing for a number of years, first publicly used by myself and other organizers of New York's first organic conference, Closing the Food Circle, held at Ithaca in 1984. Since then the c Several communities, including Kansas City/Columbia, Missouri and Champaign-Urbana, Illinois are developing local food circles. The Kansas City model incorporates a food policy council and membership in a statewide foodsystems task force, including a d The Champaign-Urbana Food Circle, sprouting shoots in this Silicon Prairie testbed community, is still an informal consortium of csa's, food coop, vegetarian restaurant, farmer's market, farmer's market nutrition coupon project, UIUC, organic/sustainab One key component of the local food circle operating model is communication. As Food Systems Development Coordinator with U of I , this past year I have been working with the Sustainable Agriculture Network and other groups to develop specialty/organic/ The work takes time, growing organically, for the people must develop conviction in the ecological basis for the model and then reorient their working or consuming relationships. Barriers abound, from the centralized, technocratic structure of agriculture to consumer obsession with speed and convenience. Likewise, as end 2 of 4 see message 1 for reprints Nancy Lee Bentley The Food Circle PO Box 3083 Champaign, IL 61826-3083 (217) 586-3846 xx200@prairienet.org More Local Food Security and Food Systems Development Info and Issues part 3 of 4 Other approaches to local food security and food systems development have been focused on formation of local/municipal food policy councils. Ken Dahlberg, at the Dept. of Political Science, Western Michigan University, has done extensive research, In their paper "Community Food Security: A Food Systems Approach to the 1995 Farm Bill", Andy Fisher and Bob Gottlieb of UCLA's School of Architecture and Urban Planning, brought out key issues to those activists attending the first Community Food Security Coalition's organizational meeting, August 25th, 1994: "... the concept of food security is often associated with the phenomenon of hunger. However, food security differs from hunger in certain crucial ways. First, food security represents a community need rather than an individual's plight, as with hunger. non-emergency (conventional) sources at all times.' Second, whereas hunger measures an existing condition of depravation, food security is decidedly prevention-oriented, evaluating the existence of resources -- both community and personal -- to provide A food security analysis extends .. into an examination of the food system. Questions of equity and sustainability are vital to the development of food security.... A food system offering security should have sustainability such that the ecological syste Within the organizing framework of these models, local food systems/ community food security can provide a vehicle for coalition-building among those interested in anti-hunger advocacy, sustainable agriculture, nutrition, urban agriculture, local food pol We are approaching a time of integration, where growing numbers of food, agriculture and other professionals are recognizing the need for an integrated local/regional f ood systems approach to really address, analyze and solve the current challenges i part 4 of 4 A partial listing of References and Resources on foodsheds, food circles, community food security and local food systems issues and information. References: An Introduction to The Food Circle: A Stewardship 'Technology' for the New Paradigm, by Nancy Lee Bentley, EcoCity Journal, Winter 1994. available from The Food Circle. Community Food Security: A Food Systems Approach to the 1995 Farm Bill, by Andy Fisher and Robert Gottlieb, UCLA , for The Community Food Security Coalition. Food for the Future: Conditions and Contradictions of Sustainability, edited by Patricia Allen, 1993. New York, John Wiley. Defining Sustainable Communities, Report from the Conference, June 2-4, 1994, $5.00 from Neighborhood Funders Group, 1001 South Marshall Street, Suite 55, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27101; 910-724-9070. Food Policy Councils: The Experience of Five Cities and One County, by Kenneth Dahlberg, Paper presented to the Joint Meeting of the Agri- culture, Food and Human Values Society and the Society for the Study of Food and Society, Tucson, AZ, June 1994 Hendrix College Project. by Melissa Beck Yazman, available from Gary Valen, Hendrix College, Conway, AR 72032. Local Food Systems: Policies and Values Influencing their Potential, by Kenneth Dahlberg, 1993. National Science Foundation supported project, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI. Planting the Future: Developing an Agriculture that Sustains Land and Community, edited by Ann R. Bird, Gordan L. Bultena, and John C. Gardner. 1995. available from Iowa State University Press, 2121 S. State Avenue, Ames, IA 50014-8300. Regional Food Guidance: A Tool for a Sustainable Food System, by Jennifer Wilkens, Presented at the joint meeting of the Association for the Study of Food and Nutrition and the Agriculture, Food and Human Values Society, Tucson, AZ, May 1994. Sustainable Community Values Project Preliminary Report, Workshop presentation by Verna Kragnes and others, Eating Closer to Home CSA Conference, Dec. 1994. University of Wisconsin, River Falls. The Community Food Security Empowerment Act, January 1995, available from The Community Food Security Coalition c/o Hartford Food System. Urban Foodsheds, by Arthur Getz. 1991, Permaculture Activist: Vol VII, No.3. Resources: The Community Food Security Coalition; Mark Winne, c/o the Hartford Food System, 509 Wethersfield Ave. Hartford, CT 06114. 203-296-9325; 203-296-8326 fax Andy Fisher, Robert Gottlieb, UCLA Department of Urban Planning, 405 Hilgard Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90095 310-825-1067; 310-206-5566 fax Kate Fitzgerald, Nessa Richman, Sustainable Food Center, 1715 East Sixth St., Suite 200, Austin, TX 78702; (512) 472-2073; (512) 472-2075 fax; hn2953@handsnet.org Kenneth Dahlberg, Local Food Systems Project;, Department of Political Science, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI 49008, (616) 387- 5686; (616) 387-3999 fax Anne deMeurisse, Minnesota Food Project, 2395 University Avenue, Saint Paul, MN 55114. (612) 644-2038. Kate Clancy, Department of Nutrition and Food Managerment, 034 Slocum Hall, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York; 13244-1250; (315) 443- 4554. Robert L. Wilson, consultant to City of Knoxville Food Policy Council, (615)-588-7168. or Gail Harris, City of Knoxville, Food Policy Council, PO Box 51650, Knoxville, TN 37950-1650. (615)-546-3500. Sally Leong, Foodshed Working Group, 793A Russell Laboratories, UW-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin 53706 (608) 262-5309 Nancy Lee Bentley, The Food Circle, The Food Circle Network, PO Box 3083, Champaign, IL, 61826-3083, (217)-586-3846, xx200@prairienet.org for a packet of informational material including graphic linear and Food Circle models and a reprint of the Eco-City Journal "An Introduction to The Food Circle" article, send $7.95 to The Food Circle. Ben Kjelsus, The Food Circle Project, 7121 Park Road, Kansas City, MO 64129. (816) 924-3003. Verna Kragnes, Philadelphia Community Farm, Box 668, Osceola, WI 54020; (715) 294-3136. Rod MacRae, Toronto Food Policy Council, 277 Victoria Street, Toronto, Ontario Canada M5B 1W1 416-392-1107: 416-392-1357 fax From sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.eduWed Apr 5 11:34:26 1995 Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 07:02:58 -0700 (PDT) From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture Subject: Linguistics (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 10:40:24 -0300 From: Alasdair McKay To: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" Subject: Linguistics > Presumably those folks having trouble with 'foodshed' and even > 'watershed' have equal trouble comprehending 'software' (Duh, is that > a fabric treatment or something..?) and 'floppy.' No very great problem with "foodshed" as an alternative to "store" "barn" "larder" "pantry" or the like, but when you associate it with "watershed" - which means different things to different people, the intended meaning becomes very obscure. > The 3 1/2" floppies must cause apoplexy, because they're not very > bendable. Some people have no curiosity -- try dismembering one. "Watershed" to me (and many others in the English-speaking world) means "a line on either side of which surface water flows under gravity into different river systems". This is a precise concept and I have no difficulty in understanding it. The use of "shed" in this sense has also long been used to describe the parting of hair on the head in hair-styling circles ( left shed ; middle shed ; right shed ). I am also very well aware that there are many other people in the English speaking world who use the term "watershed" in quite a different way - usually to describe what I would call "catchment area", but in arid areas, where flow under hydraulic pressure may be more important than surface runoff and where no river system develops such that one cannot speak of its catchment area, other definitions must be used. I have often thought that this second usage of the term "watershed" must have come about through sloppy application of the first usage (arising out of a mis-understanding of the concept), but I am open to correction on that point by anyone who has good linguistic historical evidence on the matter. After a time, one can get used to this Babel, just as one contends with other foreign languages. > > C'mon, people. I speak several languages, and the ongoing beauty and > strength of English is its very maleability and adaptability; > borrowing, adapting, adopting, shaping, modifying words to expand and > introduce meaning. Undoubtedly - but most languages can do this. If they could not, they would never have evolved in the first place. Probably the way in which English differs to some extent is in the facility to commute the function of a word without altering its structure to fit verbal or other inflection : E.g. Shakespeare's use of "spaniel" as a verb. - But words which have been hammered out of words whose meaning is different to different people do begin to cause problems. Technical terminology will arise spontaneously when even the rich English vocabulary of "words to use when you don't know what to call something" prove inadequate for the situation. In very narrow technical fields, only a few people need ever understand such terms. Children, over the generations, have also invented vocabularies for themselves. Usually these are left behind as things of childhood, but some pickings may survive to enrich the language. > English has become the language of preference for > international communication in large measure precisely _because_ its > speakers can (and do) coin words like 'foodshed' to explain a > concept. Come on! English is now an international language because the two dominant Imperial powers of the last three centuries - Britain and the United States - both used English. An over-rapid evolution of the English language at the present day would threaten its utility as the lingua franca of, say, the Orient rather than perpetuate it. > If you want to stand up and wave the flag for integrated, corporate, > centralised, and heavily subsidised agriculture, by all means do it, > and it can be discussed in those terms. I have no desire whatsoever to do this. > Please don't, however, set > up a term such as 'foodshed' as a straw-man and attack the term > rather than discussing the concept. The discussions about food supply are both interesting and important and should be conducted in a language which as many people as possible can understand readily. In this particular topic, the invention of a lot of new technical terms may be unwise unless they are genuinely necessary for precise and succinct discussion by some very specialised group of people. If nothing else, the proliferation of new terms makes me suspicious that someone is trying to "pull the wool" (if you get my drift). I know "straw-men" in various guises from the West and the Orient, but do not quite understand the relevance of the term here - although the meaning is fairly clear from the context. I presume that this particular straw man comes from some bit of literature with which I am unfamiliar. Why don't I knock you up tomorrow morning and we'll go out and have a look at this food shed of yours and then we'll find somewhere nice where you can eat on me? (Possibly offensive to some, but immediately recognisable by others as nothing but an indication of willingness to come by at an early hour for a pre-prandial stroll around the foodshed followed by an invitation to breakfast a good restaurant.) Alasdair McKay From jdaliparthy@pssci.umass.eduWed Apr 5 11:35:36 1995 Date: Tue, 04 Apr 1995 21:22:28 -0400 (EDT) From: JAYARAM DALIPARTHY To: sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu Subject: foodshed: market forces More thoughts on Foodshed: I am following the discussion on the concept of self sustainability and reliance (to the possible extent) on the locally grown food. It is a great idea and can have a positive impact on small farmers of many regions of this country, who are at present unable to compete with large farmers for a competetive price. I feel that the feasibility of foodshed may greatly depend on a) price of a commodity b) quality of a commodity If locally grown food becomes competitive in price and quality then there is a greater potential for foodshed concept. Sincerely Jay Daliparthy Dept. of Plant and Soil Sciences University of Massachusetts Amherst MA From nbentley@prairienet.orgWed Apr 5 23:28:07 1995 Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 19:42:37 -0500 (CDT) From: Nancy Lee Bentley To: sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu, sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.edu Subject: Foodsheds and Food Circles - corrected post The message is being resent with apologies to sanet-mg and others for technical difficulties and poor transmission of "Foodsheds and Food Circles" message encountered 4/3 and 4/4. Nancy Lee Bentley The Food Circle PO Box 3083 Champaign, IL 61826-3083 (217) 586-3846 nbentley@uiuc.edu xx200@prairienet.org (The Food Circle) _Local Food Security:_ _Foodsheds and Food Circles_ Contents: The Foodshed and The Food Circle More Local Food Security and Food Systems Development Info/Issues References and Resources _The Foodshed and The Food Circle_ The foodshed and the food circle are two concepts gaining recognition as model s or conceptual frameworks for describing local food systems. The foodshed concept, most often attributed to Arthur Getz's in his 1991 Urban Foodsheds article in Permaculture Activist, uses the analogy of a watershed to describe 'the area that is defined by a structure of supply'. Getz used the image of a foodshed to answer the question of "Where our food is coming from and how it is getting to us" and to picture how the local and regional food supply system works. Inherent in this concept, he empha- sized, was 'the suggestion of a need to protect a source, as well as the need to know and understand its specific geographic and ecological dimensions, condition and stability in order for it to be safeguarded and enhanced.' Today the Madison, Wisconsin area Foodshed Working Group along with an active coalition of food coops, csa associations, farmer's markets, producer coops, bakeries and other food processors, a natural food warehouse/ distributor, UWMadison and other active participants is the best example of a local food system identifying with the foodshed concept. The Food Circle is a dynamic, community-based and regionally-integrated food systems concept/model/vision. In effect, it is a systems ecology. In contrast to the current linear production-consumption system, The Food Circle is a production-consumption-recycle model. A celebration of cycles, this model mirrors all natural systems and is based on the fact that all stable, biological and other systems function as closed cycles or circles, carefully preserving energy, nutrients, resources and the integrity of the whole. The graphic model is a wheel of concentric circles, illustrating how an integrated food system flows from ag inputs and production through consumption and waste recycling. Starting with the individual at the center and moving outward through the family and community circles,this model shows the food system and its parts work, integrating political, economic, communication and other factors. For example, the CSA farmer in the production sector is directly across the circle from the CSA consumer members, showing the direct marketing relationship. The goal of The Food Circle is to consciously develop networks of sustainable, community- based and regionally-integrated food systems, capable of providing the basic food needs of their members, providing markets for local food and agricultural producers, providing cooperative communications and trading exchanges as clearinghouses for goods, services and information. Finally, the concept fosters an awareness of food stewardship. The bottom line is energy, values and the preservation of life. In contrast to the current linear food "chain" or food system resembling a gas and energy guzzling snake with two funnels at each end, The Food Circle depicts a fundamental closure, integration and healing of the food system we desperately need. The Food Circle embraces the whole web, including the food system connections, from a regional perspective. The beauty of The Food Circle lies in its addressing a host of associated issues, making it adaptable to a broad range of multidisciplinary interests as an organizing vehicle, a teaching model, a community economic develop- ment and planning model, even an entrepreneurial model. This Food Circle is actually a blueprint model I have been developing and nurturing for a number of years, first publicly used by myself and other organizers of New York's first organic conference, Closing the Food Circle, held at Ithaca in 1984. Since then the concept has grown slowly, organically, through writing, presentations, university research, local organizing projects, local and regional workshops, and now the budding of plans for the first multidisciplinary foodsystem conference, The Food Circle Network: Campaign for Sustainable Food Systems, targetted for 1996. The Food Circle WWW page is also now under construction. Several communities, including Kansas City/Columbia, Missouri and Champaign-Urbana, Illinois are developing local food circles. The Kansas City model incorporates a food policy council and membership in a statewide foodsystems task force, including a developing network of producers, consumers and neighborhood based local food circle projects have been organized. Two yearly conferences have been held. The Champaign-Urbana Food Circle, sprouting shoots in this Silicon Prairie testbed community, is still an informal consortium of csa's, food coop, vegetarian restaurant, farmer's market, farmer's market nutrition coupon project, UIUC, organic/sustainable producers in a Sustainable Agriculture Network and other activists, but also includes the local electronic Prairienet/freenet as a component of its nervous system. Local currency options, especially incorporating electronic information/creditsystems, are being researched. A precedent-setting national "Information Agriculture" conference, including Simulated Electronic Community utilizing The Food Circle model, is scheduled in Champaign -Urbana for June 1995. One key component of the local food circle operating model is communication. As Food Systems Development Coordinator with U of I , this past year I have been working with the Sustainable Agriculture Network and other groups to develop specialty/organic/ LOVA (locally- owned, value-added) approaches for Illinois and Midwest producers. An electronic marketing information service, including electronic marketing directory and marketing network development, has been proposed. Meanwhile, we are working with the local CCNet (business net) Ag committee to get at least 50 farmers up on Email before the summer, conceivably a lost cause now that "the fields are dry enough to work". The work takes time, growing organically, for the people must develop conviction in the ecological basis for the model and then reorient their working or consuming relationships. Barriers abound, from the centralized, technocratic structure of agriculture to consumer obsession with speed and convenience. Likewise, as emphasized in the June 1994 Defining Sustainable Communities Conference, sponsored by the Tides Foundation, "Sustainable communities require a different value system than the one which predominates in America today". Yet, the change will come, the conversion will happen. Inevitably, whether by choice or through economic collapse, we will end up returning to a locally-based food system. _More Local Food Security and Food Systems Development Issues_ Other approaches to local food security and food systems development have been focused on formation of local/municipal food policy councils. Ken Dahlberg, at the Dept. of Political Science, Western Michigan University, has done extensive research, written several papers on this top-down approach to local food systems development. He is currently coordinating the Local Food Systems Project, funded by W.K. Kellogg Foundation, which has been active in financial support and leadership in this area. Charleston, SC; Kansas City, Mo; Knoxville, TN; Philadelphia, PA; and St. Paul, MN, plus Onondaga County, (Syracuse) NY have or have had food policy councils to coordinate local food systems in their municipalities, with varying degrees of success. Some other cities with strong local food systems are Hartford, CT, Ithaca, NY, and Toronto, Ontario. Food systems developments in Los Angeles and East St. Louis, IL have been spearheaded by Urban and Regional Planners, rather than by food advocates per se. In their paper "Community Food Security: A Food Systems Approach to the 1995 Farm Bill", Andy Fisher and Bob Gottlieb of UCLA's School of Architecture and Urban Planning, brought out key issues to those activists attending the first Community Food Security Coalition's organizational meeting, August 25th, 1994: "... the concept of food security is often associated with the phenomenon of hunger. However, food security differs from hunger in certain crucial ways. First, food security represents a community need rather than an individual's plight, as with hunger. In this context, we define food security as 'all persons obtaining a culturally acceptable, nutritionally adequate diet through non-emergency (conventional) sources at all times.' Second, whereas hunger measures an existing condition of depravation, food security is decid- edly prevention-oriented, evaluating the existence of resources -- both community and personal -- to provide an individual with adequate acceptable food... A food security analysis extends .. into an examination of the food system. Questions of equity and sustainability are vital to the development of food security.... A food system offering security should have sustainability such that the ecological system is protected and improved over time.. and equity, meaning as a minimum, dependable access for all social groups". Within the organizing framework of these models, local food systems/ community food security can provide a vehicle for coalition-building among those interested in anti-hunger advocacy, sustainable agriculture, nutrition, urban agriculture, local food policy and community development and other related issues. We are approaching a time of integration, where growing numbers of food, agriculture and other professionals are recognizing the need for an integrated local/regional f ood systems approach to really address, analyze and solve the current challenges in food and agriculture today. In this visually-oriented world, such models are critical tools in this emerging discipline. They can help increase understanding of our current food system, identify barriers and constraints to sustainability and give us a vision and roadmap for realizing -- making real -- an optimum food system. _Resources and References_ A partial listing of References and Resources on foodsheds, food circles, community food security and local food systems issues and information. References: An Introduction to The Food Circle: A Stewardship 'Technology' for the New Paradigm, by Nancy Lee Bentley, EcoCity Journal, Winter 1994, available from The Food Circle. Community Food Security: A Food Systems Approach to the 1995 Farm Bill, by Andy Fisher and Robert Gottlieb, UCLA , for The Community Food Security Coalition. Food for the Future: Conditions and Contradictions of Sustainability, edited by Patricia Allen, 1993. New York, John Wiley. Defining Sustainable Communities, Report from the Conference, June 2-4, 1994, $5.00 from Neighborhood Funders Group, 1001 South Marshall Street, Suite 55, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27101; 910-724-9070. Food Policy Councils: The Experience of Five Cities and One County, by Kenneth Dahlberg, Paper presented to the Joint Meeting of the Agri- culture, Food and Human Values Society and the Society for the Study of Food and Society, Tucson, AZ, June 1994 Hendrix College Project. by Melissa Beck Yazman, available from Gary Valen, Hendrix College, Conway, AR 72032. Local Food Systems: Policies and Values Influencing their Potential, by Kenneth Dahlberg, 1993. National Science Foundation supported project, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI. Planting the Future: Developing an Agriculture that Sustains Land and Community, edited by Ann R. Bird, Gordan L. Bultena, and John C. Gardner. 1995. available from Iowa State University Press, 2121 S. State Avenue, Ames, IA 50014-8300. Regional Food Guidance: A Tool for a Sustainable Food System, by Jennifer Wilkens, Presented at the joint meeting of the Association for the Study of Food and Nutrition and the Agriculture, Food and Human Values Society, Tucson, AZ, May 1994. Sustainable Community Values Project Preliminary Report, Workshop presentation by Verna Kragnes and others, Eating Closer to Home CSA Conference, Dec. 1994. University of Wisconsin, River Falls. The Community Food Security Empowerment Act, January 1995, available from The Community Food Security Coalition c/o Hartford Food System. Urban Foodsheds, by Arthur Getz. 1991, Permaculture Activist: Vol VII, No.3. Resources: The Community Food Security Coalition; Mark Winne, c/o the Hartford Food System, 509 Wethersfield Ave. Hartford, CT 06114. 203-296-9325; 203-296-8326 fax Andy Fisher, Robert Gottlieb, UCLA Department of Urban Planning, 405 Hilgard Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90095 310-825-1067; 310-206-5566 fax Kate Fitzgerald, Nessa Richman, Sustainable Food Center, 1715 East Sixth St., Suite 200, Austin, TX 78702; (512) 472-2073; (512) 472-2075 fax; hn2953@handsnet.org Kenneth Dahlberg, Local Food Systems Project;, Department of Political Science, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI 49008, (616) 387- 5686; (616) 387-3999 fax Anne deMeurisse, Minnesota Food Project, 2395 University Avenue, Saint Paul, MN 55114. (612) 644-2038. Kate Clancy, Department of Nutrition and Food Managerment, 034 Slocum Hall, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York; 13244-1250; (315) 443- 4554. Robert L. Wilson, consultant to City of Knoxville Food Policy Council, (615)-588-7168. or Gail Harris, City of Knoxville, Food Policy Council, PO Box 51650, Knoxville, TN 37950-1650. (615)-546-3500. Sally Leong, Foodshed Working Group, 793A Russell Laboratories, UW-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin 53706 (608) 262-5309 Nancy Lee Bentley, The Food Circle, The Food Circle Network, PO Box 3083, Champaign, IL, 61826-3083, (217)-586-3846, xx200@prairienet.org for a packet of informational material including graphic linear and Food Circle models and a reprint of the Eco-City Journal "An Introduction to The Food Circle" article, send $6.95 to The Food Circle. Ben Kjelsus, The Food Circle Project, 7121 Park Road, Kansas City, MO 64129. (816) 924-3003. Verna Kragnes, Philadelphia Community Farm, Box 668, Osceola, WI 54020; (715) 294-3136. Rod MacRae, Toronto Food Policy Council, 277 Victoria Street, Toronto, Ontario Canada M5B 1W1 416-392-1107: 416-392-1357 fax Nancy Lee Bentley The Food Circle The Food Circle Network PO Box 3083 Champaign, IL, 61826-3083 (217)-586-3846 xx200@prairienet.org For a packet of informational material including graphic linear and Food Circle models and a reprint of the Eco-City Journal "An Introduction to The Food Circle" article, send $7.95 payable to The Food Circle, address above. From sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.eduWed Apr 5 23:29:32 1995 Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 18:41:46 -0700 (PDT) From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture Subject: Re: Foodsheds (again) (fwd) From: WLockeretz@Infonet.Tufts.Edu Date: Wed, 5 Apr 95 10:36:15 EDT Subject: Foodsheds (again) The characteristic of a watershed (American usage) that makes it precisely definable and useful is that not only does a particular body of water always receive its water from a particular area, but also the reverse: that the water running off from a particular place always follows the same course (i.e., the line of steepest descent) and always ends up in the same body of water. Is that supposed to apply to a "foodshed" too? That is, must a given farmer always sell everything through a single channel, to be consumed in a single place? If a farmer produces both wheat and vegetables, and sells the vegetables in a local farmers' market, must the wheat be sold there too? A stream of water doesn't split and go to two places. Unless we want to impose the same restriction on where farmers sell, maybe we need a "wheatshed," a "vegetableshed," and so on (maybe even a "Not-otherwise-Classified-shed." And if the farmer also raises cows, would they be sold in the cowshed? William Lockeretz From sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.eduWed Apr 5 23:30:18 1995 Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 18:43:02 -0700 (PDT) From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture Subject: Re: Linguistics (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 09:55:50 CST From: Greg McIsaac To: sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.edu Subject: Re: Linguistics (fwd) On Wednesday April 5 Alasdare McKay described some confusions around the term "watershed" in the English speaking world and argued that using the term "foodshed" may create similar confusions. Being an engineer who works with water movement and watersheds, I am in agreement with Mr. McKay. However, it seems to me that much of the confusion over watershed terminology occurs on the international level and it is not surprising that the objections to the term are coming from outside the US. In the US, the term "watershed" is most often used to describe an area that sheds water to a particular outlet, which is what everyone else in the English speaking world refers to as a "catchment." The ridges that divide catchments are referred to "watershed divides" in the US. However, people in the US will still use the phrase "watershed" to refer to events or periods of time in which some great change occurred (e.g. "It was a watershed in American History"). In that usage they are using the term "watershed" to refer to the divide. Nancy Lee Bently prefers the term food circle to describe what seems to be a similar set of concepts, and this term may eliminate some of the confusion about foodshed terminology on the international level. However, I don't particularly care for the term food circle, for two reasons. A circle is a rather precise, rigid, two dimensional geometric form, that does not capture the dynamic, flexible, multidimensional character of food systems. The ecologists have had the term "food web" for quite some time and that seems to capture what much of what foodsheds and food circles seem to be about. Why not use that terminology, since it seems to be fairly well established, is ecologically oriented and may circumvent some confusion on the international scene? Gregory McIsaac Agricultural Engineer University of Illinois > Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 07:02:58 -0700 (PDT) > Reply-to: sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.edu > From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" > To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture > Subject: Linguistics (fwd) > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 10:40:24 -0300 > From: Alasdair McKay > To: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" > Subject: Linguistics > > > > Presumably those folks having trouble with 'foodshed' and even > > 'watershed' have equal trouble comprehending 'software' (Duh, is that > > a fabric treatment or something..?) and 'floppy.' > > No very great problem with "foodshed" as an alternative to "store" "barn" > "larder" "pantry" or the like, but when you associate it with > "watershed" - which means different things to different people, the > intended meaning becomes very obscure. > > > The 3 1/2" floppies must cause apoplexy, because they're not very > > bendable. > > Some people have no curiosity -- try dismembering one. > > "Watershed" to me (and many others in the English-speaking world) means "a > line on either side of which surface water flows under gravity into > different river systems". This is a precise concept and I have no > difficulty in understanding it. The use of "shed" in this sense has also > long been used to describe the parting of hair on the head in > hair-styling circles ( left shed ; middle shed ; right shed ). > > > I am also very well aware that there are many other people in the English > speaking world who use the term "watershed" in quite a different way - > usually to describe what I would call "catchment area", but in arid > areas, where flow under hydraulic pressure may be more important than > surface runoff and where no river system develops such that one cannot > speak of its catchment area, other definitions must be used. I have > often thought that this second usage of the term "watershed" must have come > about through sloppy application of the first usage (arising out of a > mis-understanding of the concept), but I am open to correction on that > point by anyone who has good linguistic historical evidence on the matter. > > After a time, one can get used to this Babel, just as one contends with > other foreign languages. > > > > > C'mon, people. I speak several languages, and the ongoing beauty and > > strength of English is its very maleability and adaptability; > > borrowing, adapting, adopting, shaping, modifying words to expand and > > introduce meaning. > > Undoubtedly - but most languages can do this. If they could not, they > would never have evolved in the first place. Probably the way in which > English differs to some extent is in the facility to commute the function > of a word without altering its structure to fit verbal or other inflection : > > E.g. Shakespeare's use of "spaniel" as a verb. > > - But words which have been hammered out of words whose meaning is > different to different people do begin to cause problems. > Technical terminology will arise spontaneously when even the rich English > vocabulary of "words to use when you don't know what to call something" > prove inadequate for the situation. In very narrow technical fields, only > a few people need ever understand such terms. > Children, over the generations, have also invented vocabularies for > themselves. Usually these are left behind as things of childhood, but > some pickings may survive to enrich the language. > > > English has become the language of preference for > > international communication in large measure precisely _because_ its > > speakers can (and do) coin words like 'foodshed' to explain a > > concept. > > Come on! English is now an international language because the two > dominant Imperial powers of the last three centuries - Britain and the > United States - both used English. An over-rapid evolution of the English > language at the present day would threaten its utility as the lingua > franca of, say, the Orient rather than perpetuate it. > > > If you want to stand up and wave the flag for integrated, corporate, > > centralised, and heavily subsidised agriculture, by all means do it, > > and it can be discussed in those terms. > > I have no desire whatsoever to do this. > > > Please don't, however, set > > up a term such as 'foodshed' as a straw-man and attack the term > > rather than discussing the concept. > > The discussions about food supply are both interesting and important and > should be conducted in a language which as many people as possible can > understand readily. In this particular topic, the invention of a lot of > new technical terms may be unwise unless they are genuinely necessary for > precise and succinct discussion by some very specialised group of people. If > nothing else, the proliferation of new terms makes me suspicious that > someone is trying to "pull the wool" (if you get my drift). I know > "straw-men" in various guises from the West and the Orient, but do not > quite understand the relevance of the term here - although the meaning is > fairly clear from the context. I presume that this particular straw man > comes from some bit of literature with which I am unfamiliar. > > > Why don't I knock you up tomorrow morning and we'll go out and have a > look at this food shed of yours and then we'll find somewhere nice where > you can eat on me? > > (Possibly offensive to some, but immediately recognisable by others as > nothing but an indication of willingness to come by at an early > hour for a pre-prandial stroll around the foodshed followed by an > invitation to breakfast a good restaurant.) > > Alasdair McKay > > > > > From tjakin@pssci.umass.eduFri Apr 7 22:04:52 1995 Date: Fri, 07 Apr 1995 16:54:41 -0400 From: tjakin@pssci.umass.edu To: sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu Subject: food security postings from SUSTAG-L Greetings SANET-ters: Below are some of the local food security/foodshed messages sent to SUSTAG-L which were not copied to SANET, and one or two that were sent directly to me. Thanks to everyone who responded; I hope that the sharing of knowledge among the grassroots food systems projects from around the country will continue. It seems like the re- connection of the consumer and the local producer is a win-win situation. Best regards, Tom Akin ------------------------------------------------------- begin forwarded messages Fri, 31 Mar 1995 16:36:05 -0600 (CST) >From: William T Vorley Subject: Foodsheds To: tjakin@pssci.umass.edu Message-id: <9503312236.AA15826@isum2.iastate.edu> X-Mailer: EasyVincent 3.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT May I draw your attention to 2 articles Joel Salatin in New Farm: Sept/Oct 91 8-12 and Jul/Aug 94 47-48. His "FARM" organization in Willis VA looks very interesting. -- Bill Vorley wtvorley@iastate.edu Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture, 3216 Agronomy Hall, Iowa State University, Ames IA Tel. (515) 294 7853, Fax. (515) 294 9696 >From: WLockeretz@Infonet.Tufts.Edu Date: Wed, 5 Apr 95 10:36:15 EDT Subject: Foodsheds (again) The characteristic of a watershed (American usage) that makes it precisely definable and useful is that not only does a particular body of water always receive its water from a particular area, but also the reverse: that the water running off from a particular place always follows the same course (i.e., the line of steepest descent) and always ends up in the same body of water. Is that supposed to apply to a "foodshed" too? That is, must a given farmer always sell everything through a single channel, to be consumed in a single place? If a farmer produces both wheat and vegetables, and sells the vegetables in a local farmers' market, must the wheat be sold there too? A stream of water doesn't split and go to two places. Unless we want to impose the same restriction on where farmers sell, maybe we need a "wheatshed," a "vegetableshed," and so on (maybe even a "Not-otherwise-Classified-shed." And if the farmer also raises cows, would they be sold in the cowshed? William Lockeretz ---------- Forwarded message --------- Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 09:55:50 CST >From: Greg McIsaac To: sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.edu Subject: Re: Linguistics (fwd) On Wednesday April 5 Alasdare McKay described some confusions around the term "watershed" in the English speaking world and argued that using the term "foodshed" may create similar confusions. Being an engineer who works with water movement and watersheds, I am in agreement with Mr. McKay. However, it seems to me that much of the confusion over watershed terminology occurs on the international level and it is not surprising that the objections to the term are coming from outside the US. In the US, the term "watershed" is most often used to describe an area that sheds water to a particular outlet, which is what everyone else in the English speaking world refers to as a "catchment." The ridges that divide catchments are referred to "watershed divides" in the US. However, people in the US will still use the phrase "watershed" to refer to events or periods of time in which some great change occurred (e.g. "It was a watershed in American History"). In that usage they are using the term "watershed" to refer to the divide. Nancy Lee Bently prefers the term food circle to describe what seems to be a similar set of concepts, and this term may eliminate some of the confusion about foodshed terminology on the international level. However, I don't particularly care for the term food circle, for two reasons. A circle is a rather precise, rigid, two dimensional geometric form, that does not capture the dynamic, flexible, multidimensional character of food systems. The ecologists have had the term "food web" for quite some time and that seems to capture what much of what foodsheds and food circles seem to be about. Why not use that terminology, since it seems to be fairly well established, is ecologically oriented and may circumvent some confusion on the international scene? Gregory McIsaac Agricultural Engineer University of Illinois > Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 07:02:58 -0700 (PDT) > Reply-to: sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.edu > From: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" > To: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture > Subject: Linguistics (fwd) > > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 10:40:24 -0300 > From: Alasdair McKay > To: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" > Subject: Linguistics > > > > Presumably those folks having trouble with 'foodshed' and even > >'watershed' have equal trouble comprehending 'software' (Duh, is > > that a fabric treatment or something..?) and 'floppy.' > > No very great problem with "foodshed" as an alternative to > "store" "barn" "larder" "pantry" or the like, but when you associate it with "watershed" - which means different things to different people, the intended meaning becomes very obscure. > > > The 3 1/2" floppies must cause apoplexy, because they're not > > very bendable. > > Some people have no curiosity -- try dismembering one. > > "Watershed" to me (and many others in the English-speaking world) > means "a line on either side of which surface water flows under > gravity into different river systems". This is a precise concept > and I have no difficulty in understanding it. The use of "shed" > in this sense has also long been used to describe the parting of > hair on the head in hair-styling circles ( left shed; middle shed >; right shed ). > > I am also very well aware that there are many other people in the > English speaking world who use the term "watershed" in quite a > different way - usually to describe what I would call "catchment > area", but in arid areas, where flow under hydraulic pressure > may be more important than surface runoff and where no river > system develops such that one cannot speak of its catchment > area, other definitions must be used. I have often thought that > this second usage of the term "watershed" must have come about > through sloppy application of the first usage (arising out of a > mis-understanding of the concept), but I am open to correction on > that point by anyone who has good linguistic historical evidence > on the matter. After a time, one can get used to this Babel, > just as one contends with other foreign languages. > > > C'mon, people. I speak several languages, and the ongoing > > beauty and strength of English is its very maleability and > > adaptability; borrowing, adapting, adopting, shaping, modifying > > words to expand and introduce meaning. > > Undoubtedly - but most languages can do this. If they could not, > they would never have evolved in the first place. Probably the way in which > English differs to some extent is in the facility to commute the function > of a word without altering its structure to fit verbal or other inflection : > > E.g. Shakespeare's use of "spaniel" as a verb. > > - But words which have been hammered out of words whose meaning > is different to different people do begin to cause problems. > Technical terminology will arise spontaneously when even the rich > English vocabulary of "words to use when you don't know what to > call something" prove inadequate for the situation. In very > narrow technical fields, only a few people need ever understand > such terms. > Children, over the generations, have also invented vocabularies > for themselves. Usually these are left behind as things of > childhood, but some pickings may survive to enrich the language. > > > English has become the language of preference for > > international communication in large measure precisely > >_because_ its speakers can (and do) coin words like 'foodshed' > > to explain a concept. > > Come on! English is now an international language because the > two dominant Imperial powers of the last three centuries - > Britain and the United States - both used English. An over-rapid > evolution of the English language at the present day would > threaten its utility as the lingua franca of, say, the Orient > rather than perpetuate it. > > > If you want to stand up and wave the flag for integrated, > >corporate, centralised, and heavily subsidised agriculture, by > >all means do it, and it can be discussed in those terms. > > I have no desire whatsoever to do this. > > > Please don't, however, set > > up a term such as 'foodshed' as a straw-man and attack the term > > rather than discussing the concept. > > The discussions about food supply are both interesting and > important and should be conducted in a language which as many >people as possible can understand readily. In this particular > topic, the invention of a lot of new technical terms may be > unwise unless they are genuinely necessary for precise and > succinct discussion by some very specialised group of people. If > nothing else, the proliferation of new terms makes me suspicious > that someone is trying to "pull the wool" (if you get my drift). > I know "straw-men" in various guises from the West and the > Orient, but do not quite understand the relevance of the > term here - although the meaning is fairly clear from the > context. I presume that this particular straw man comes from > some bit of literature with which I am unfamiliar. > > > Why don't I knock you up tomorrow morning and we'll go out and > have a look at this food shed of yours and then we'll find > somewhere nice where you can eat on me? > > (Possibly offensive to some, but immediately recognisable by > others as nothing but an indication of willingness to come by at > an early hour for a pre-prandial stroll around the foodshed > followed by an invitation to breakfast a good restaurant.) > > Alasdair McKay > ---------- Forwarded message --------- Date: Thu, 6 Apr 1995 21:49:02 -0700 >From: Bruce Gregory To: sustag@beta.tricity.wsu.edu Subject: Re: Linguistics (fwd) On Wednesday April 5 Greg McIsaac described some alternative word useage to "foodshed" presenting the ideas: >the term "watershed" in the English speaking world and argued that using the >term "foodshed" may create similar confusions. Being an >engineer who works with water movement and watersheds, I am in >agreement with Mr. McKay. However, it seems to me that much of >the confusion over watershed terminology occurs on the >international level and it is not surprising that the objections > to the term are coming from outside the US. In the US, the term > "watershed" is most often used to describe an area that sheds > water to a particular outlet, which is what everyone else in >the English speaking world refers to as a "catchment." The > ridges that divide catchments are referred to "watershed >divides" in the US. However, people in the US will still use the phrase "watershed" to >refer to events or periods of time in which some great change occurred >(e.g. "It was a watershed in American History"). In that usage they are >using the term "watershed" to refer to the divide. > >Nancy Lee Bently prefers the term food circle to describe what seems >to be a similar set of concepts, and this term may eliminate >some of the confusion about foodshed terminology on the international >level. However, I don't particularly care for the term food circle, >for two reasons. A circle is a rather precise, rigid, two >dimensional geometric form, that does not capture the dynamic, >flexible, multidimensional character of food systems. The ecologists have had >the term "food web" for quite some time and that seems to capture what >much of what foodsheds and food circles seem to be about. Why not >use that terminology, since it seems to be fairly well established, >is ecologically oriented and may circumvent some confusion on the >international scene? A better alternative word has been buzzing through my mind of late, most often as another description on the "foodshed" idea. How about "foodnet"? The growing, transportation on the local, interstate or international scale all depend upon a system of networks, (such as the media we are using now. . .) Networks of natural systems, human made systems, you get the idea. Bruce Gregory Mitchell Bay Farm rbgreg@pacificrim.net (8U ---------- Forwarded message --------- Date: Thu, 6 Apr 1995 10:03:30 -0400 (EDT) >From: jhaskett@asrr.arsusda.gov To: "Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup)" Cc: Principles of Sustainable Agriculture Subject: Re: Foodsheds (again) (fwd) Maybe its not is shed but a web. Jonathan Haskett On Wed, 5 Apr 1995, Tom Hodges (moderated newsgroup) wrote: > From: WLockeretz@Infonet.Tufts.Edu > Date: Wed, 5 Apr 95 10:36:15 EDT > Subject: Foodsheds (again) > > The characteristic of a watershed (American usage) that makes it precisely > definable and useful is that not only does a particular body of water always > receive its water from a particular area, but also the reverse: that the > water running off from a particular place always follows the same course > (i.e., the line of steepest descent) and always ends up in the same body of > water. Is that supposed to apply to a "foodshed" too? That is, must a given > farmer always sell everything through a single channel, to be consumed in a > single place? If a farmer produces both wheat and vegetables, and sells the > vegetables in a local farmers' market, must the wheat be sold there too? A > stream of water doesn't split and go to two places. Unless we want to impose > the same restriction on where farmers sell, maybe we need a "wheatshed," a > "vegetableshed," and so on (maybe even a "Not-otherwise-Classified-shed." > And if the farmer also raises cows, would they be sold in the cowshed? > > William Lockeretz > > Thomas Akin Extension Educator Plant & Soil Science Dept. Bowditch Hal Box 30910 University of Massachusetts TEL: (413) 545-5236 Amherst, MA 01003-0910 FAX: (413) 545-0260 From littr001@maroon.tc.umn.edu Fri Apr 7 22:32:49 EDT 1995 Article: 6006 of alt.sustainable.agriculture Newsgroups: alt.sustainable.agriculture Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!news.duke.edu!agate!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!news From: "littr001@maroon.tc.umn.edu" Subject: Re: Foodsheds etc. To: gwfeenstra@ucdavis.edu Message-ID: <48827.littr001@maroon.tc.umn.edu> X-Minuet-Version: Minuet1.0_Beta_16 Sender: news@news.cis.umn.edu (Usenet News Administration) Nntp-Posting-Host: x17-36.agecon.openpn.umn.edu X-Popmail-Charset: English Organization: University of Minnesota, Twin Cities Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 15:48:42 GMT Lines: 12 Hi, this is Lydia I too am finding the Foodshed discussion very interesting. I too am wondering how to deal with areas that do not have a rich resource endowment. Talking about foodshed in CA seems like sitting at the edge of the cornicopia and saying, "ain't life grand?" Not everyplace is so greatly blessed. Of course, long run, not very many people should live in areas without good topsoil, lots of water, a viable climate. Still, I'd like to hear how the foodshed does deal with varying geographical food growing capabilities (of course, all of us would pay much more for food everywhere if external costs were internalized). From jg16@cornell.eduMon Apr 10 21:26:07 1995 Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 16:30:42 -0400 From: Judy Green To: sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu Subject: FOOD SHED/MARKETSCAPE? I've been following the food shed discussion with much interest. I'm part of a group working on a book tentatively entitled "Sustainaing Rural Landscapes: Applying Innovative Concepts to the Practical Work of Landscape Protection and Land Use Planning". My chapter, and those of a couple of other collaborators, will explore the relationship between food/agricultural marketing systems and the sustainability of Northeast U.S. communities and landscapes. In our discussions we have been using the term MARKETSCAPE rather than food shed,food system, food circle or whatever. Now I'm trying to figure out whether to continue using "marketscape" or buy into one of the other terms which are quickly gaining familiarity (at least with SANET users.) I'd welcome feedback. Does "marketscape" offer any improvements over the other terms in that it does not imply a particular directionality, scale or structure? Anyway, in addition to your comments on terminology, I also welcome comments on this early (READ: ROUGH-VERY ROUGH) outline of ideas for my chapter below. The "social capital and environmental capital" stuff refers to Cornelia Flora's outline of 4 types of capital - 1) physical (including money), 2) human (individuals' skills, education, labor, etc) 3) natural resource and 4) social (the way we are organized to interact, our institutions, cultural norms, level of mutual trust, etc etc...) A high degree of social capital makes more effective use of other forms of capital. My thesis is that locally/regionally integrated marketscapes (eg food sheds) foster the development of social capital and perhaps therefore, natural resource capital. Global marketscapes, on the other hand tend to degrade social capital in both importing and exporting communities. I have not yet delved into the literature which many of you have suggested so I'm sure I will find lots of good stuff in there too. In the meantime, thanks in advance for any comments you have. FIRST DRAFT -THINK PIECE - 10/7/94 J. Green "THE AGRICULTURAL MARKETSCAPE": Implications for Development of Social and Natural Resource Capital I. Definitions: Marketscape: A geographic conceptualization of agricultural marketing systems, mapping the sources and destinations of inputs and outputs to and from farms. (Should be superimposed on a mapping of natural resources and of human population) Locally integrated marketscape: A system of marketing relationships in which there is a high level of recirculation of resources - coupling of farm inputs and outputs (sources and destinations) - within a locality. Eg: generation of agricultural inputs (soil fertility, seed, breeding stock, machinery and equipment, knowledge, training, new farmers, farm labor, credit....) from local resources; and distribution of farm products (food and fiber, "waste" nutrients, recreational access...) to local recipients. "Local" and "integrated" both being relative terms - the tighter the linkages geographically, the more locally integrated; the more numerous and diverse the linkages, the more locally integrated. Locally non-integrated (or non-locally integrated?) marketscape: A system of marketing relationships in which the sources and destinations of farm inputs and outputs are geographically distant, and therefore disconnected from the people and landscape of a locality. Eg: the "global market" II. Social attributes of marketscapes Locally integrated. Marketing relationships are more likely to be personal relationships, maintained over time. High degree of control in creating and defining economic relationships remains with local people. Producers and consumers of inputs and outputs view each other in more than economic terms, have many shared interests including, importantly, an interest in the local landscape. Economic and social relations more horizontal, egalitarian, based more on reciprocity, trust. Negotiation of interdependent but distinct economic interests. Long-term view, shared commitment to locality. High degree of accountability to local community. Farm business decisions made with an eye to many goals - economic, environmental, community relations. Very strong networks involving farm and nonfarm interests .... So, many positive contributions to developing social capital. Non-locally integrated. Disconnection between economic and personal interests and relationships; economic relations primarily vertical (farmers at the bottom?); low level of local control of economic relationships, power remains outside local community and non-accountable. Farm business decisions made against primarily economic criteria. Few opportunities for trustbuilding between farmers and nonfarmers. Little understanding, connection to, "ownership" of local agriculture by non-farmers. Very weak networks - farmers alienated, isolated. Symbolic diversity - us against them. No relationship between the local food supply and the local landscape. III. Implications of marketscape for developing social capital of locality-based communities Development of more locally integrated marketscapes can be seen as a strategy for building social capital in rural communities, and for strengthening horizontal linkages between rural and urban communities......... Following would be case examples of local marketscape development, eg Ithaca, New York and Eastern Europe.... Judy Green Phone: 607-255-9832 Coordinator Fax: 255-9984 Farming Alternatives Program Email: jg16@cornell.edu Dept. of Rural Sociology Cornell University Never attribute to malice that which is Ithaca, NY 14853-7801 adequately explained by stupidity