Sign in or 
| Version | User | Scope of changes |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 19 2008, 4:00 PM EST (current) | Ben_H | 254 words added |
| Dec 19 2008, 1:22 PM EST | gibsonis | 365 words added |
Changes
Key: Additions Deletions
Overview and Purpose:
This page includes the "to do" list featured in Chapter 20 of this book, along with the orignial headings. Please continue to add to this list. Also feel free to modify the headings, add more, etc, if you see a better way to organize this. If something gets too long, create a new branch page for it. Thanks for your contributions! [p.s. you might use a different font as you add things, to make the new additions different. Feel free to take credit for your ideas.]
R. Janke
************************************************** The next 25 years—ideas generated by these interviews (see page 294 in book)
Training
–Universities and colleges should re-think the design of their sustainable agriculture curricula, and consider combination degree programs—liberal arts plus agriculture. This is already happening at the non-agriculture schools, for example, see the New Farm website listing of training programs in sustainable agriculture; two-thirds of them are not at agricultural colleges. Same thing with student farms, one-third are at agricultural universities, and two-thirds are at small colleges and also at larger non-ag universities like Stanford. Perhaps this needs to happen at land grant universities too. [Note: as someone trained in agriculture but having an interest in music, art, etc., I can see the value of the liberal arts too, but also think it would be nice for farmers and others to have some soils knowledge and fundamentals.]
–Create more farm-to-school training programs for all age groups, especially younger kids. This is also already happening, and some of these are connected to sustainable agriculture groups, but many are created by parents, gardeners, and teachers. As a group of farmers, we could be helpful in this effort, using farms like Kirk Cusick’s as models.
–Outreach to consumers—one farmer has suggested to me (Paul Johnson) that we ask our state Department of Agriculture or Department of Commerce to sponsor television or radio info-ads that feature a local farm, and a product that is in-season. Many people don’t even have a sense of the seasonality of their local fruits and vegetables, as they are available year-round in the grocery store. There are many other forms of consumer education that could be considered. The Organic Trade Association website has a plethora of background information and articles that could help. I’ve also seen calendars that feature local farms, local chefs, and delicious in-season recipes for each month.
Research
–Perhaps it is time to put together a serious chunk of change that isn’t tied to the university system or to the government that should be specifically allocated for sustainable agriculture research. Yes, there are some models out there, with Kellogg funding some food systems projects, and OFRF funding organic research. Perhaps SARE’s administrative structure could be used as a model for grass-roots involvement in decision-making about how funds are allocated, and there are more applications for SARE funds than there is funding to go around. Ask the Ted Turners and Willie Nelsons of the world to help create this pool of funding? As Dan Howell said, “I wish I had a million dollars to take to the university, or whatever amount of money it would take to get them to listen to me . . .”
-Taxpayers should insist that their state-supported universities start playing a leadership role in all issues related to sustainability, rather than playing catch-up, or just following the money. Otherwise they will continue to be seen as intellectual prostitutes, only following the dollar, and not the key issues that affect their citizens.
Support for/from Universities in General
–A good next step would be to continue to monitor at both the national and state levels the amount of funding going to sustainable and to “non-sustainable” agriculture research. This includes research that props up cropping or farming systems that have now been shown to use more calories of energy than they produce, or to be inefficient at nutrient absorption, allowing excess nitrogen and phosphorus to pollute U.S. streams, rivers, and now the Gulf of Mexico. This has been done several times in the past, especially in looking at whether organic farming was being served by the research establishment, but targeting “unsustainable research” might be a new twist. University administrators don’t like coming up with these figures, but if the public doesn’t ask, they will continue providing office space and faculty position to the highest bidder, not the best projects, or even projects that serve their constituents well.
–I’m at a loss as to how to lesson the influence of “big money” grants, especially in the era of diminished public support. One of Kansas’ Board of Regents members in a recent letter to the editor (Manhattan Mercury, February 19, 2008) stated that “20 years ago, Kansas State University and the University of Kansas received 52 percent of their budgets from the Kansas Legislature, but today that figure is only 26 percent.” It seems as though the universities are already in a downward spiral of diminishing public support and public service, and perhaps this trend is irreversible?
Marketing – Organic and Sustainable
–In addition to the cooperative marketing examples from Minnesota and Kansas, the “Ag of the Middle” program initiated out of the Leopold Center in Iowa seems to hold promise. It encourages one to look a the whole food chain in marketing, and promotes transparency and living wages at all levels, and cooperation rather than competition.As an example of this, Nancy Vogelsberg-Busch points out the importance of including her local butcher as an integral part of her marketing and farming plan, and also the need to plan for his profitability and survival as a business. Her appreciation was expressed in an interesting way; “He transforms that life into an entirely different life with a knife.”
–Several people mentioned the need to sell more local foods to schools, and one even suggested that a quota system could be created, where 50 percent of the food needed to come from within the state and perhaps 10 percent from the local county. –Some pointed out the futility of trying to survive in today’s markets (especially conventional) without government regulation and enforcement of the anti-trust laws on the books. This would require political action, and perhaps lawsuits similar to those that have been needed to force the government to enforce existing water quality laws in many states.
–As an example of “eating in the dark,” consumers in the United States usually don’t know exactly what they are eating or where it came from, because of the pathetic labeling requirements we have now. Even the “country of origin” labeling for meat seems to be controversial, and isn’t enforced, GMO products are not labeled, and now there appears to be an orchestrated effort by Monsanto in multiple states to pass legislation making it illegal for milk processors to label milk that comes from cows not treated with the BST hormone. Perhaps something the sustainable agriculture community could do is to orchestrate their own campaign for more truth in labeling, beyond having just “organic” and “everything else.” -Some local marketing and value-added programs are discouraged or prevented because of state or local health-code and/or liability insurance requirements. These are always presented as there to “protect the public” but they should also be re-examined for their potential to be a barrier to small businesses (farms, bakeries, restaurants) competing with larger businesses, who aren’t necessarily serving safer or more nutritious food than the small, local alternatives.
Organic Certification
–Due to the small number of organic farmers, it almost goes without saying that there will need to be consumer involvement (in massive numbers at times) and constant vigilance to keep the standards from being watered down at the national level. There probably is also a need for farmer involvement at the grass-roots level to keep the system workable and not too burdensome.
–Consumer awareness of organic seems to be largely limited to the effect the food has on them (safer, fewer pesticides, possibly more nutritious) while the farmers interviewed suggested that we have a long way to go in consumer education about the environmental and other benefits of organic.
–Those who weren’t certified organic but using sustainable practices would like to see some effort put into “certified sustainable” or some other recognition of their product, or product differentiation. However, this also opens the door to even more consumer confusion, and the possibility of being co-opted by imitators, or green-washing. –Some felt that getting the government involved is misguided, and perhaps other methods should be used for creating and protecting labels in the future?
Standardization of organic guidelines is important for consumer confidence, however, certification guidelines should be ever evolving as the pool of knowledge of sustainable and organic agriculture grows. I would like to see the guidelines encompass more and more of the criteria that different “eco-labels” are inventing. Organic certification does not address issues like social justice and workers’ rights. Organic growers do not have to preserve natural habitat or maintain native species or biodiversity, though they may do these things anyway since these are often practices that encourage beneficial insects, etc., but these issues should be addressed in the certification guidelines. Why only go halfway? Building the soil is important, but so is preserving healthy ecological systems. Perhaps we need a label for organic growers that addresses their land stewardship as it applies to all areas of the land and wildlife, not just the soil. I’d also like to see different certification guidelines for different sizes of production. It seems absurd to think that the same guidelines would apply to a grower with ten acres as an “industrial organic” grower with 500 acres. Maybe there should even be a limit on the size of a farm that can be certified organic. I’d like to see restrictions on the neighbors of organic growers to minimize pesticide drift, fertilizer runoff, GMO pollen drift, etc. Laws should be in place to protect and preserve the integrity of agricultural systems that strive for sustainability. Perhaps that would even encourage neighboring farmers to convert from their conventional operations to organic ones (or cause horrible feuds). With transition certification labels available, conversion seems more economically viable for farmers than it used to. Also, neighbors helping neighbors could lead to greater farmer solidarity and less price competition. Let’s see a whole county of farmers transition to organic and create a new tier of certification to encourage purity control. Here’s another thought – organic certifying agencies all have their own unique applications, some of which are more thorough and comprehensive than others. Can we really assume with confidence that all USDA certified organic products are created equal when they are the jurisdiction of different certifying agencies? Are they all equally “organic”? - Ruth Gibson
Is it right to limit large farms from producing organically if they follow the guidelines? After all we live in a free country, which also happens to be a capitalist country. For now these large farms are not monopolies although they may out compete smaller farms. Lets face it, organic farming will become just like every other market in America and be taken over by the bigger fish, unless the guidelines are changed to not allow that. In my opinion it is already too late for certification to be changed to keep the big companies out. The large companies like grocery store chains have made organic the economic presence that it is and they wont want to see a regulation change that increases prices. Americans are used to cheap food and they want to keep it that way. Sorry I'm so pessimistic in this discussion of the future of organic. -Ben Hauptli
Farm Profitability
–One specific suggestion (Cherniss) was to create a website or other ways for vegetable growers to share information about costs and returns for portions of their operations, not just the whole thing, so one could track how their farm compares to others, and also get ideas for improvement.
–Some have suggested looking at totally new marketing models as a path to profitability (discussed above under marketing).
–Niche markets were occasionally mentioned (golden flax for Fernholz, for example), but not seen as the silver bullet for their farm, or for others to necessarily emulate. Some farm profitability enterprises, such as the pumpkin patch and entertainment on the Holsapple farm can also lead to burn-out.
–Simply being smart about knowing one’s costs of production, not taking on un-necessary expenses (fertilizers and pesticides) and not getting bogged down in interest payments due to expansion was the advise of the farmers who also provided counseling to farmers during the farm crisis. One individual commented that he hadn’t calculated his cost of production for some farm products because he hadn’t been in a position to adjust his asking price—he just had to take what the market price offered. Perhaps a goal of sustainable agriculture should be to encourage everyone to calculate and share with others their cost of production figures. Consumers too need to know what it takes to bring a product to them, as many don’t realize how much effort, water, etc, goes into each pound of grain, meat or produce.
Another option for farm profitability and marketability is value added products. By creating a value added product farmers are not limited to the market price offered to them. By naming your own price for a product, production costs can be figured in. There are many options for value added products. Health food stores or organic grocers already sell many different local and organic value added products. Any value added product already on the market could be made from organic sources. Value added products are only limited by the imagination and creating one with consumer demand should not be a problem. -Ben Hauptli
U.S. Farm Policy
–The sustainable agriculture movement continues to lobby on behalf of portions of the farm bill they think will support sustainable agriculture on farms, but it is under-funded and under-staffed compared to the larger commodity groups. Unless the commodity support payments are either not allowed by World Trade Organization (WTO) rules and enforcement, or the commodity groups become weaker and/or are not allowed check-off funds, the only recourse in terms of balance of strength within sustainable agriculture is for farmers to ask consumers, citizens to get involved on their behalf. Some within sustainable agriculture have suggested trying to get Senators and Representatives from urban districts more involved in the agriculture committees, as they are currently heavily weighted with farm state delegates that serve the interests of their commodity groups (but not necessarily their farmers).
International Agriculture Policy
–This is an area just crying out for more consumer education. If “buy local” is to ever be more than just a slogan or buzz-word, not just people as consumers, but as citizens as tax-payers need to consider the long-term consequences of importing food, and loosing the expertise and infrastructure needed to grow it in their own communities.
Widespread Adoption of Sustainable Agriculture
–To document whether sustainable agriculture practices are being adopted, not just organic, surveys could be conducted and included in the U.S. Census of Agriculture asking how many are using nitrogen-fixing legumes in their rotation, following diverse crop rotations, or doing rotational grazing.
–As for wide-spread adoption by larger farms, there needs to be financial incentive, and perhaps one-on-one coaching provided, since many practices are site-specific, farm specific. University extension systems are not prepared to play this coaching role, as their staff time is limited (and being cut further), and they are encouraged to work with farmers as groups, not to serve as consultants to individuals.
–Current incentives towards “un-sustainable agriculture” need to be removed for there to be any serious adoption of sustainable agriculture.
The Future of Agriculture
–It seems that at some point, someone somewhere is going to have to address the health insurance issue. This may happen at the national level with a health care plan. If it doesn’t, perhaps a role for non-profits could be to help start some sort of group health insurance plan for sustainable agriculture farmers? As individuals, farmers are fairly powerless to deal with this, with the exception of choosing to have health insurance, or choosing not to, and literally risking the farm in that gamble.
–The profitability question is equally as difficult. Just because grain farmers receive subsidies does not necessarily mean that fruit and vegetable growers should too, but clearly the “market” is not encouraging young people to go into the profession of farming. And as skilled managers of assets in the thousands or millions of dollars, they are not being compensated for their skill or risk. As Nancy Vogelsberg-Busch said, “Curse me like your doctor or lawyer, but pay me the same or at least a living wage so I can get out of this factory job.” Kirk Cusick suggested that so many doctors and lawyers are getting interested in local and healthy food, that perhaps a bartering system could be established? Maybe food has a value to some beyond monetary value? Some communities have started local currency systems to facilitate this bartering among a network of participants. In Ithaca NY, this currency is called “Ithaca Hours.” What if my hour of time as a farmer was worth the same as an hour of time at the dentist or doctor?
In summary
This “to do” list for the next 25 years is not comprehensive, and doesn’t even begin to capture the wealth of information generated by the 18 interviews contained in this book. I encourage the reader to dig further, both into these interviews, and to ask some of these same questions of your colleagues, neighbors and food providers. We also have several things that I think “we” (as a community of people involved in sustainable agriculture) don’t agree on. I call these the dilemmas still to resolve:
–The tension between sustainable and organic agriculture (broad vs. narrow definition) –How the universities, agencies, non-profits and farmers can work together most productively.
–Do we need to be a more “organized movement,” or are we doing pretty well as a loose-knit group of like-minded people? Are we a movement or an ideology? Should we be a movement? Do we need to create a think-tank, or get together on this some-how?
–The cost of organic food? People need to pay the full cost of food production, including paying farmers a living wage, but people would also like to see it serve more than just the high-end market. For example, “Whole Foods Market” in some cities is jokingly referred to as “Whole Paycheck Market.” How do we make it affordable as a society to everyone who needs it, without asking farmers to make all the sacrifice?
–Will sustainable agriculture be limited by our unsustainable culture, land values and marketing system? Or,will sustainable agriculture lead the way to a more sustainable culture?
**************************************************
This page includes the "to do" list featured in Chapter 20 of this book, along with the orignial headings. Please continue to add to this list. Also feel free to modify the headings, add more, etc, if you see a better way to organize this. If something gets too long, create a new branch page for it. Thanks for your contributions! [p.s. you might use a different font as you add things, to make the new additions different. Feel free to take credit for your ideas.]
R. Janke
************************************************** The next 25 years—ideas generated by these interviews (see page 294 in book)
Training
–Universities and colleges should re-think the design of their sustainable agriculture curricula, and consider combination degree programs—liberal arts plus agriculture. This is already happening at the non-agriculture schools, for example, see the New Farm website listing of training programs in sustainable agriculture; two-thirds of them are not at agricultural colleges. Same thing with student farms, one-third are at agricultural universities, and two-thirds are at small colleges and also at larger non-ag universities like Stanford. Perhaps this needs to happen at land grant universities too. [Note: as someone trained in agriculture but having an interest in music, art, etc., I can see the value of the liberal arts too, but also think it would be nice for farmers and others to have some soils knowledge and fundamentals.]
–Create more farm-to-school training programs for all age groups, especially younger kids. This is also already happening, and some of these are connected to sustainable agriculture groups, but many are created by parents, gardeners, and teachers. As a group of farmers, we could be helpful in this effort, using farms like Kirk Cusick’s as models.
–Outreach to consumers—one farmer has suggested to me (Paul Johnson) that we ask our state Department of Agriculture or Department of Commerce to sponsor television or radio info-ads that feature a local farm, and a product that is in-season. Many people don’t even have a sense of the seasonality of their local fruits and vegetables, as they are available year-round in the grocery store. There are many other forms of consumer education that could be considered. The Organic Trade Association website has a plethora of background information and articles that could help. I’ve also seen calendars that feature local farms, local chefs, and delicious in-season recipes for each month.
Research
–Perhaps it is time to put together a serious chunk of change that isn’t tied to the university system or to the government that should be specifically allocated for sustainable agriculture research. Yes, there are some models out there, with Kellogg funding some food systems projects, and OFRF funding organic research. Perhaps SARE’s administrative structure could be used as a model for grass-roots involvement in decision-making about how funds are allocated, and there are more applications for SARE funds than there is funding to go around. Ask the Ted Turners and Willie Nelsons of the world to help create this pool of funding? As Dan Howell said, “I wish I had a million dollars to take to the university, or whatever amount of money it would take to get them to listen to me . . .”
-Taxpayers should insist that their state-supported universities start playing a leadership role in all issues related to sustainability, rather than playing catch-up, or just following the money. Otherwise they will continue to be seen as intellectual prostitutes, only following the dollar, and not the key issues that affect their citizens.
Support for/from Universities in General
–A good next step would be to continue to monitor at both the national and state levels the amount of funding going to sustainable and to “non-sustainable” agriculture research. This includes research that props up cropping or farming systems that have now been shown to use more calories of energy than they produce, or to be inefficient at nutrient absorption, allowing excess nitrogen and phosphorus to pollute U.S. streams, rivers, and now the Gulf of Mexico. This has been done several times in the past, especially in looking at whether organic farming was being served by the research establishment, but targeting “unsustainable research” might be a new twist. University administrators don’t like coming up with these figures, but if the public doesn’t ask, they will continue providing office space and faculty position to the highest bidder, not the best projects, or even projects that serve their constituents well.
–I’m at a loss as to how to lesson the influence of “big money” grants, especially in the era of diminished public support. One of Kansas’ Board of Regents members in a recent letter to the editor (Manhattan Mercury, February 19, 2008) stated that “20 years ago, Kansas State University and the University of Kansas received 52 percent of their budgets from the Kansas Legislature, but today that figure is only 26 percent.” It seems as though the universities are already in a downward spiral of diminishing public support and public service, and perhaps this trend is irreversible?
Marketing – Organic and Sustainable
–In addition to the cooperative marketing examples from Minnesota and Kansas, the “Ag of the Middle” program initiated out of the Leopold Center in Iowa seems to hold promise. It encourages one to look a the whole food chain in marketing, and promotes transparency and living wages at all levels, and cooperation rather than competition.As an example of this, Nancy Vogelsberg-Busch points out the importance of including her local butcher as an integral part of her marketing and farming plan, and also the need to plan for his profitability and survival as a business. Her appreciation was expressed in an interesting way; “He transforms that life into an entirely different life with a knife.”
–Several people mentioned the need to sell more local foods to schools, and one even suggested that a quota system could be created, where 50 percent of the food needed to come from within the state and perhaps 10 percent from the local county. –Some pointed out the futility of trying to survive in today’s markets (especially conventional) without government regulation and enforcement of the anti-trust laws on the books. This would require political action, and perhaps lawsuits similar to those that have been needed to force the government to enforce existing water quality laws in many states.
–As an example of “eating in the dark,” consumers in the United States usually don’t know exactly what they are eating or where it came from, because of the pathetic labeling requirements we have now. Even the “country of origin” labeling for meat seems to be controversial, and isn’t enforced, GMO products are not labeled, and now there appears to be an orchestrated effort by Monsanto in multiple states to pass legislation making it illegal for milk processors to label milk that comes from cows not treated with the BST hormone. Perhaps something the sustainable agriculture community could do is to orchestrate their own campaign for more truth in labeling, beyond having just “organic” and “everything else.” -Some local marketing and value-added programs are discouraged or prevented because of state or local health-code and/or liability insurance requirements. These are always presented as there to “protect the public” but they should also be re-examined for their potential to be a barrier to small businesses (farms, bakeries, restaurants) competing with larger businesses, who aren’t necessarily serving safer or more nutritious food than the small, local alternatives.
Organic Certification
–Due to the small number of organic farmers, it almost goes without saying that there will need to be consumer involvement (in massive numbers at times) and constant vigilance to keep the standards from being watered down at the national level. There probably is also a need for farmer involvement at the grass-roots level to keep the system workable and not too burdensome.
–Consumer awareness of organic seems to be largely limited to the effect the food has on them (safer, fewer pesticides, possibly more nutritious) while the farmers interviewed suggested that we have a long way to go in consumer education about the environmental and other benefits of organic.
–Those who weren’t certified organic but using sustainable practices would like to see some effort put into “certified sustainable” or some other recognition of their product, or product differentiation. However, this also opens the door to even more consumer confusion, and the possibility of being co-opted by imitators, or green-washing. –Some felt that getting the government involved is misguided, and perhaps other methods should be used for creating and protecting labels in the future?
Standardization of organic guidelines is important for consumer confidence, however, certification guidelines should be ever evolving as the pool of knowledge of sustainable and organic agriculture grows. I would like to see the guidelines encompass more and more of the criteria that different “eco-labels” are inventing. Organic certification does not address issues like social justice and workers’ rights. Organic growers do not have to preserve natural habitat or maintain native species or biodiversity, though they may do these things anyway since these are often practices that encourage beneficial insects, etc., but these issues should be addressed in the certification guidelines. Why only go halfway? Building the soil is important, but so is preserving healthy ecological systems. Perhaps we need a label for organic growers that addresses their land stewardship as it applies to all areas of the land and wildlife, not just the soil. I’d also like to see different certification guidelines for different sizes of production. It seems absurd to think that the same guidelines would apply to a grower with ten acres as an “industrial organic” grower with 500 acres. Maybe there should even be a limit on the size of a farm that can be certified organic. I’d like to see restrictions on the neighbors of organic growers to minimize pesticide drift, fertilizer runoff, GMO pollen drift, etc. Laws should be in place to protect and preserve the integrity of agricultural systems that strive for sustainability. Perhaps that would even encourage neighboring farmers to convert from their conventional operations to organic ones (or cause horrible feuds). With transition certification labels available, conversion seems more economically viable for farmers than it used to. Also, neighbors helping neighbors could lead to greater farmer solidarity and less price competition. Let’s see a whole county of farmers transition to organic and create a new tier of certification to encourage purity control. Here’s another thought – organic certifying agencies all have their own unique applications, some of which are more thorough and comprehensive than others. Can we really assume with confidence that all USDA certified organic products are created equal when they are the jurisdiction of different certifying agencies? Are they all equally “organic”? - Ruth Gibson
Is it right to limit large farms from producing organically if they follow the guidelines? After all we live in a free country, which also happens to be a capitalist country. For now these large farms are not monopolies although they may out compete smaller farms. Lets face it, organic farming will become just like every other market in America and be taken over by the bigger fish, unless the guidelines are changed to not allow that. In my opinion it is already too late for certification to be changed to keep the big companies out. The large companies like grocery store chains have made organic the economic presence that it is and they wont want to see a regulation change that increases prices. Americans are used to cheap food and they want to keep it that way. Sorry I'm so pessimistic in this discussion of the future of organic. -Ben Hauptli
Farm Profitability
–One specific suggestion (Cherniss) was to create a website or other ways for vegetable growers to share information about costs and returns for portions of their operations, not just the whole thing, so one could track how their farm compares to others, and also get ideas for improvement.
–Some have suggested looking at totally new marketing models as a path to profitability (discussed above under marketing).
–Niche markets were occasionally mentioned (golden flax for Fernholz, for example), but not seen as the silver bullet for their farm, or for others to necessarily emulate. Some farm profitability enterprises, such as the pumpkin patch and entertainment on the Holsapple farm can also lead to burn-out.
–Simply being smart about knowing one’s costs of production, not taking on un-necessary expenses (fertilizers and pesticides) and not getting bogged down in interest payments due to expansion was the advise of the farmers who also provided counseling to farmers during the farm crisis. One individual commented that he hadn’t calculated his cost of production for some farm products because he hadn’t been in a position to adjust his asking price—he just had to take what the market price offered. Perhaps a goal of sustainable agriculture should be to encourage everyone to calculate and share with others their cost of production figures. Consumers too need to know what it takes to bring a product to them, as many don’t realize how much effort, water, etc, goes into each pound of grain, meat or produce.
Another option for farm profitability and marketability is value added products. By creating a value added product farmers are not limited to the market price offered to them. By naming your own price for a product, production costs can be figured in. There are many options for value added products. Health food stores or organic grocers already sell many different local and organic value added products. Any value added product already on the market could be made from organic sources. Value added products are only limited by the imagination and creating one with consumer demand should not be a problem. -Ben Hauptli
U.S. Farm Policy
–The sustainable agriculture movement continues to lobby on behalf of portions of the farm bill they think will support sustainable agriculture on farms, but it is under-funded and under-staffed compared to the larger commodity groups. Unless the commodity support payments are either not allowed by World Trade Organization (WTO) rules and enforcement, or the commodity groups become weaker and/or are not allowed check-off funds, the only recourse in terms of balance of strength within sustainable agriculture is for farmers to ask consumers, citizens to get involved on their behalf. Some within sustainable agriculture have suggested trying to get Senators and Representatives from urban districts more involved in the agriculture committees, as they are currently heavily weighted with farm state delegates that serve the interests of their commodity groups (but not necessarily their farmers).
International Agriculture Policy
–This is an area just crying out for more consumer education. If “buy local” is to ever be more than just a slogan or buzz-word, not just people as consumers, but as citizens as tax-payers need to consider the long-term consequences of importing food, and loosing the expertise and infrastructure needed to grow it in their own communities.
Widespread Adoption of Sustainable Agriculture
–To document whether sustainable agriculture practices are being adopted, not just organic, surveys could be conducted and included in the U.S. Census of Agriculture asking how many are using nitrogen-fixing legumes in their rotation, following diverse crop rotations, or doing rotational grazing.
–As for wide-spread adoption by larger farms, there needs to be financial incentive, and perhaps one-on-one coaching provided, since many practices are site-specific, farm specific. University extension systems are not prepared to play this coaching role, as their staff time is limited (and being cut further), and they are encouraged to work with farmers as groups, not to serve as consultants to individuals.
–Current incentives towards “un-sustainable agriculture” need to be removed for there to be any serious adoption of sustainable agriculture.
The Future of Agriculture
–It seems that at some point, someone somewhere is going to have to address the health insurance issue. This may happen at the national level with a health care plan. If it doesn’t, perhaps a role for non-profits could be to help start some sort of group health insurance plan for sustainable agriculture farmers? As individuals, farmers are fairly powerless to deal with this, with the exception of choosing to have health insurance, or choosing not to, and literally risking the farm in that gamble.
–The profitability question is equally as difficult. Just because grain farmers receive subsidies does not necessarily mean that fruit and vegetable growers should too, but clearly the “market” is not encouraging young people to go into the profession of farming. And as skilled managers of assets in the thousands or millions of dollars, they are not being compensated for their skill or risk. As Nancy Vogelsberg-Busch said, “Curse me like your doctor or lawyer, but pay me the same or at least a living wage so I can get out of this factory job.” Kirk Cusick suggested that so many doctors and lawyers are getting interested in local and healthy food, that perhaps a bartering system could be established? Maybe food has a value to some beyond monetary value? Some communities have started local currency systems to facilitate this bartering among a network of participants. In Ithaca NY, this currency is called “Ithaca Hours.” What if my hour of time as a farmer was worth the same as an hour of time at the dentist or doctor?
In summary
This “to do” list for the next 25 years is not comprehensive, and doesn’t even begin to capture the wealth of information generated by the 18 interviews contained in this book. I encourage the reader to dig further, both into these interviews, and to ask some of these same questions of your colleagues, neighbors and food providers. We also have several things that I think “we” (as a community of people involved in sustainable agriculture) don’t agree on. I call these the dilemmas still to resolve:
–The tension between sustainable and organic agriculture (broad vs. narrow definition) –How the universities, agencies, non-profits and farmers can work together most productively.
–Do we need to be a more “organized movement,” or are we doing pretty well as a loose-knit group of like-minded people? Are we a movement or an ideology? Should we be a movement? Do we need to create a think-tank, or get together on this some-how?
–The cost of organic food? People need to pay the full cost of food production, including paying farmers a living wage, but people would also like to see it serve more than just the high-end market. For example, “Whole Foods Market” in some cities is jokingly referred to as “Whole Paycheck Market.” How do we make it affordable as a society to everyone who needs it, without asking farmers to make all the sacrifice?
–Will sustainable agriculture be limited by our unsustainable culture, land values and marketing system? Or,will sustainable agriculture lead the way to a more sustainable culture?
**************************************************
