Post No. 2

Posted By: Mike Score, 8/10/2007

Recent reports reveal that 96% of U.S. consumers have high interest levels in consuming local food. Consumers increasingly care about where their food comes from and how it was produced following scares about lower-cost foodstuffs imported from China like melamine-tainted products, and botulism-contaminated chili.

Consumers are also becoming more aware of their carbon footprints. In conversations I've had with regional food distributors I've learned that one-half of current grocery store prices for fresh produce is accounted for by transportation costs associated with shipping fruit and vegetables from out of state. Consumers don't see the sense in tying up 50 percent of their food dollars in senseless transportation costs. Just think about the capital that could be freed up for new investment if we redeployed 25 to 50 percent of dollars spent on feeding Michigan residents.

If we were consuming all of our locally grown products in Michigan and still experiencing a shortfall it would make sense to continue importing goods from other states or countries. But Michigan Agricultural Statistics reports suggest that only 1% of farm products in southeast Michigan are sold directly to consumers. We are shipping most of our farm products out of state for processing, then importing them back in, blended with product from the global commodity system, under major brand labels.

Regional food retailers have been working hard with modest results to increase their offerings of local agricultural goods. Only 34 percent of farmers in southeast Michigan report satisfaction with marketing channels for moving their fruits and vegetables into the marketplace.

Consumers are demanding local products. Retailers are looking for local goods to put on their shelves. Farmers are struggling to find marketing channels that place their goods in regional stores. What is wrong with our food system? Why can't local leaders make local food systems work?

Comments:

Friday, August 10, 2007 9:32 AM by Phil Tocco

Maybe we're asking the wrong question. Maybe "local leaders" aren't the fulcrum point to shifting the food system to a more local focus.

Friday, August 10, 2007 2:36 PM by Sharon P. Sheldon

WE need to create incentives to work across county and organization lines and boundaries in order to affect change in the regional food system. Often times, funding streams and related budgets create barriers to creating solutions; for real food system change, a true interdisciplinary partnership with a budget and the decision-making power to try new approaches must be given the opportunity to test new approaches!

Friday, August 10, 2007 3:44 PM by John Heiss

As an active member/supporter of the Community Supported Agriculture Network in Southeast Michigan, I believe part of the solution will require by-passing local leaders and developing solutions that begin with a smaller scale. I also believe that Community Food Centers that have been developed in other major metro areas could help improve the food desert that is Detroit, Highland Park, Ecorse...
Subsidized CSA shares could help with the flow of local, organic food to the city's residents. I would happily pay a premium for our share if it could help put a share in the hands of a needy family. Large-scale investments in nutrition might help bring thousands of new acres under cultivation using the CSA model.

Friday, August 10, 2007 4:13 PM by Jennifer Fike

As consumers become more aware of the agriculture economy and how disconnected the food system has become, they will demand changes to the current system. We can already see positive changes with the increase in farmers' markets across the region. The food system will change when all parties become involved - from legislators, to consumers, to businesses. To change areas where vast food deserts exist will take involvement from everyone.

Friday, August 10, 2007 4:15 PM by Mike Score

You'll see in upcoming postings that the idea of regionalism that Sharon suggests is key in the proposal I put forward for development of a more sustainable food system.

Phil and John both observe that it may be necessary to bypass community leaders. There have been times where I've been tempted to agree with them but before we move too far in that direction we should ask if that is really necessary. As much as leaders are criticized for not being able to keep up with progressive thinking in the broader community, I've found that there are often good reasons for moving slower than advocates would like to see. I also know that leaders, in most cases, are dynamic, creative resource managers. I think it is wise to figure out how to work with them. They have authority to apply valuable resources to the initiatives we are working toward.

Friday, August 10, 2007 5:38 PM by Susan Rosenhauer

It seems like we as consumers are almost forced into purchasing our food from the "box" markets. They make it so easy to buy our produce while we shop for hamburger, boxed pasta, toilet paper, and shoes. The one stop shop. These markets don't care what chemicals were sprayed on the produce. They could care less what we feed our families. They only care about how the produce looks on the shelf, not the quality nor the level of safety.

I am a firm believer that, given an option, this is a thing of the past. Not for everyone, but for a good percentage of families, a large enough percentage to make a change in our food system. I hear it almost everyday, the dissatisfaction of people in the quality of the mass produced, mass shipped products that are available in the grocery stores. But what other options do people have? I believe our families are tired of this and with the development of the CSA's in South Eastern Michigan, we are going to see a turn around in our food system.

Saturday, August 11, 2007 1:36 PM by Roxanne Christensen

Up until now it has been consumers who have been carrying the cross for the re-establishment of local food systems. But now they are being joined by a growing corps of first generation farmers who are setting up shop in the cities and towns where they live. What is enabling them is a commercial sub-acre farming system called SPIN-Farming.
SPIN requires minimal infrastructure and provides a specific process for generating significant income from land bases under an acre in size. It integrates agriculture into the built environment in a commercially viable manner, and removes the two big barriers to entry for aspiring farmers – they do not need much land or financial resources to do SPIN.
Many are now recognizing that the segregation of food production outside of cities and towns no longer makes sense in an increasingly urbanized world. By re-casting farming as a small business in a city or town, SPIN eliminates many of the factors outside of the farmer’s control, and therefore eliminates the need for traditiional government supports. And it is making farming accessible and relevant again to a new generation by positioning agriculture as integral part of urban and suburban economies, rather than something a part from them.
SPIN is providing a tool for re-defining farming for the 21st century – sub-acre, low capital intensive, environmentally friendly, close to markets, entrepreneurially-driven. It is redirecting aspiring farmers away from traditional agricultural products that lose money and towards products that meet the needs of urban and suburban customers. And it just might spark a farming revival that cuts across geography, generations, incomes and ideologies to provide common ground, quite literally, beneath everyone’s feet.