By
FRANK CARINI/ecoRI News staff
The Mount Hope Farm Farmers
Market in Bristol is one of about a dozen markets being held in Rhode Island
this winter. (Joanna Detz/ecoRI News)
Food Solutions New England, a network that serves as a “convener,
cultivator and champion” for the region’s food system, has an ambitious goal:
have 50 percent of the food New England consumes come from the six-state region
by 2060. This lofty goal is frequently cited by bureaucrats, foodies and
farmers, but how do we get there? Can we get there?
Currently, about 90 percent of the food consumed in New England
comes from outside the region, according to a 48-page report released
last year by the regional collaborative network coordinated by the University
of New Hampshire.
This imported food is supplied by a global system that
produces abundant, and often cheap, sustenance that comes with plenty of hidden
costs: displaced populations; low-paid farmers, fishermen and factory workers;
a host of negative environmental impacts; and public-health concerns.
“I like the big goal. It’s important that we strive to get there,”
she said. “How we get there is a whole other discussion. Our food future is not
a longer version of the present.”
Until the mid-19th century, New England was covered with farms, as
most people in the region fed themselves by growing and producing their own food.
Today, the service industry, tourism, technology, medicine and
higher education have replaced farming and fishing as the region’s driving
economic forces. Development, much of it catered to these sectors — i.e., the
Dallas-based developer seeking to build privatized student housing on a former
Route 195 parcel in Providence — dominates a growing part of the region’s
landscape.
New England lacks a hearty supply of local food largely because
the amount of land producing it has dwindled, significantly. The region has
some 14.5 million people, but only about 5 percent of its land, less than 2
million acres, is farmed. Commercial fishing, once a major industry here, is
struggling to survive.
Since the 1940s, Rhode Island alone has lost more than 80 percent
of its farmland to development and forest regrowth. Today, less than 7 percent,
about 40,000 acres, is agriculturally active. In Massachusetts, from 1999 to
2005, land was developed at a rate of 22 acres a day, converting some 40,000
acres of farmland and forest to residential use.
Sustainable
communities
Among the many concerns associated with a changing climate and
feeding a growing population, the issue of food security must rank near the
top. But developing a resilient food system isn’t adequately addressed in New
England sustainability policy or by legislative action.
In Rhode Island, where less than 5 percent of the food consumed is
grown or raised locally, the state’s recently drafted sustainability plan mentions the word “farmland” once —
“Farmland and forest will surround centers that are infused with greenways and
open space.”
Preserving farmland is well and good, but the plan makes no
mention of who will be farming this land and how they will make a living if
they did. Farms, especially those of the medium- and small-scale variety,
operate without the safety net of Big Ag subsidies. They survive on razor-thin
margins, and farmers contend with numerous variables outside their control,
such as a changing climate and flooding.
In that same sustainability plan, the word “agricultural” appears
twice, with little context: “maintaining or expanding the state’s agricultural
sector” and “the character of other parts of the community can be preserved,
including historic areas, agricultural lands and open space.”
Neither the word “food” nor “farming” appears in the 24-page
document entitled “A Sustainable Rhode Island: Three-Year Work Plan 2012-2015.”
By contrast, the word “development” appears 96 times, “growth” 34 times and
“transportation” 37 times.
The plan’s utopian introduction proclaims: “Rhode Island will
balance the needs of its people with the protection of its natural resources.
It will be a place where all generations may enjoy natural beauty, clean air
and water, a productive economy, an affordable place to live, access to
efficient transportation systems, a connection to the past and a sustainable,
prosperous future.”
The document then proceeds to ignore how the state’s prosperous
future will sustainably feed its population. In fact, this guiding document
seems more concerned with growing everything but food, from residential,
commercial and industrial development to growth centers that “will be dynamic
and efficient centers for development that have a core of commercial and
community services, mixed-use development, and natural and built landmarks and
boundaries that provide a sense of place.”
Similar sustainability plans and principles in Massachusetts and
Connecticut focus on development and gloss over the mere mention of food. A
169-page plan to implement sustainable development
in the New York-Connecticut metropolitan area mentions the word “food” twice.
In a top-10 list of
sustainable development principles for Massachusetts, there is no mention of
food.
In fact, most state-sponsored sustainability plans for southern
New England focus almost entirely on development and attracting developers.
It’s difficult to foster local food production and consumption
when guiding policy fails to acknowledge the important role food plays in
creating sustainability. After all, doesn’t sustainable development need to eat
sustainable food?
Is there enough land in New
England to feed 50 percent of the population? Rich Pederson grows about 2 tons
of food annually on three-quarters of an acre in Providence. (Frank
Carini/ecoRI News)
Food insecurity
New England is dependent on other states, most notably California,
and countries for food, and this fossil fuel-dependent system will likely
become less sustainable over time. Urban farming, farmers markets and
community-supported agriculture (CSA) alone won’t make New England more food
secure or make prices more affordable.
To reach that often-cited 50 percent mark by 2060 will require
much more than marginally funded Buy Local campaigns, holding Agricultural Days
at statehouses once a year and making calamari Rhode Island’s official state
appetizer.
In fact, serious problems plague New England’s food system.
Consumers here buy excessive amounts of refined grains, fats and sugars, and
less fruits, vegetables and whole grains, according to the Food Solutions New Englandreport entitled “A
New England Food Vision.” Besides the obvious health implications of these
choices, refined foods aren’t a regional or local specialty.
Other food-production problems include the high cost of land,
especially in Rhode Island, and a lack of it, most notably in the three
southern New England states, where 75 percent of the region’s population lives.
The region’s high land values, the decline of coastal fish
populations and worldwide competition from large-scale agriculture have
conspired to cripple New England’s food system.
New England, like much of the United States, now dines on
microwaveable fare, rice that cooks in minutes, various meat helpers and a
plethora of other fast foods. Changing entrenched consumer eating habits to
include more local food will be difficult, according to Bevan Linsley.
The coordinator for Island Commons, a consortium of stakeholders that
supports Aquidneck Island sustainability and which is “trying to be the boots
on the ground” in Newport, Middletown and Portsmouth, R.I., for the 50-by-60
vision, sees cost and convenience as two major obstacles that will need to be
overcome.
“We put our heads in the sand when it comes to the issue of food
because of the convenience factor,” said Linsley, who also manages various
Rhode Island farmers markets. “We buy food now looking mostly through the
window of price without considering the health consequences of all this sugary,
salty, highly processed food.”
The growing popularity of
farmers markets has helped energize the local food movement. (Joanna Detz/ecoRI
News)
Local growth
It’s hard to argue that the popularity of local food during the
past decade hasn’t increased. In Massachusetts, the total number of farmers
markets rose 36 percent between 2005 and 2012. Rhode Island had 15 farmers
markets in 2004; by 2013, there were 55. Connecticut now has some 100 farmers
markets held throughout the year, including nearly two dozen this winter.
To strengthen, support and better manage the growing demand for
local food, Connecticut, Massachusetts and Rhode
Island have all
created food policy councils, whose mission is to craft plans that address the
need to build sustainable food systems.
But despite this growing taste for local food, can this movement
really be expected to feed half of the New England population in the next 45
years?
To reach that desired level of local production will first and
foremost require a strong political will. It will require simplifying
food-safety regulations and cutting back on the red tape, but without neutering
regulation.
It will mean making land-use policy serve the food system rather
than development. It will require better coordinating the work of the many
agencies, organizations and universities with fingers in the New England food
pie.
There will need to be a strong commitment to addressing the
practical needs of small and mid-sized growers and producers. Financial
barriers for people who come from food and farming backgrounds but don’t have
access to the necessary capital to break ground will need to be removed. It
will require private and public money to better connect producers with
consumers.
It will mean helping small- and medium-scale meat producers with
transportation and storage logistics. The region will need more USDA-certified
slaughterhouses, and the region’s food hubs will need to continue to broaden their
reach.
It will mean helping farmers develop accessory uses for their land to supplement their
income. It will require teaching students the importance of food and nutrition.
It will mean funding and supporting low-income food-assistance programs, as
about 11 percent of the New England population lives in poverty. It will mean
making farmers markets more approachable to at-risk populations.
It will mean making sure the region’s food-production strengths,
such as cranberry bogs, acres of wild blueberries, apple orchards, pastureland
and the sea, are taken advantage of but not abused. It will mean making sure
such topics as energy, composting and aquaculture are part of the discussion.
It will mean the University of Rhode Island, once known as the
State Agricultural School and originally established as a land-grant institution,
will need to stop tearing up valuable farmland to create more parking.
“We’re going to need to grow a lot more food and to do that we’re
going to need every piece of land available,” said Greg Gerritt, a longtime
Providence-based environmental/social justice activist. “And we can’t start
clearing forests to do that. Everyone’s going to have to have a garden, and
Rhode Island’s turf farms are eventually going to have to grow food.”
To feed 50 percent of the population by 2060 — Census figures
project New England will have 15 million to 16 million people by then — “A New
England Food Vision” estimates the region will need about 6 million acres of
agricultural land — a threefold increase that would approach 1945 levels.
The report makes it clear that it is not a plan, but rather a
vision that explores what could happen if New England was to commit to
supporting sustainable food production. If the region did, the report projects
that by 2060 New England would be able to grow/produce most of its vegetables,
half of its fruit, some of its grain and dry beans, and all of its dairy, beef
and other animal products.
Currently, New England produces about half of the dairy products
consumed in the region, less than half the vegetables (mostly sweet corn and
potatoes), a quarter of the fruit, and 2.5 percent of cereals, beans, vegetable
oils, sugar and beverages, according to “A New England Food Vision.”
About 5 percent of beef and small amounts of poultry and pork are
now produced in New England. The region’s fishermen catch almost as much
seafood as New Englanders consume, but large exports and large imports
complicate the picture, according to the report.
Cost concerns
Thanks to Big Ag, high-fructose corn syrup, chemical
preservatives, factory farms and chain restaurants, the foods most New
Englanders now eat differ little from those consumed across the rest of the
country.
Compared to locally sourced food, this processed food is cheaper,
both economically and nutritionally. Local food is typically more expensive,
largely because of the economies of scale. This cost discrepancy between local
food, which is healthier for both humans and regional economies, and
mass-produced feed impacts local growers/producers, middle-income families and
at-risk populations.
“Scale is the enemy,” said Raiola, whose Warren, R.I., nonprofit
provides low-cost access to shared-use commercial kitchens and other industry-related
resources to help entrepreneurs jump-start local food businesses.
“Small is
hard. How do you make it affordable? For a local salsa maker, cans of tomatoes
from Sysco cost less than the farmer’s down the street. How much are customers
willing to pay?”
In southeastern Massachusetts, that amount is little more than $5,
according to a 2014 Southeastern Massachusetts Food Security Network
assessment. Bristol, Norfolk and Plymouth counties have some 1,700 farms, with
nearly 110,000 acres of farmland, that produce about $157 million annually in
market value. The region’s residents spend $5.02 per person annually on
direct-market purchases of local food, according to the 126-page assessment.
The Southeastern
Massachusetts Food Security Network is coalition of food pantries, farms,
foundations and social service agencies working together to promote local food security:
“a situation in which all community residents obtain a safe, culturally
acceptable, nutritionally adequate diet through a sustainable food system that
maximizes community self-reliance and social justice.”
“Food security is the main issue,” said Stephanie Reusch, the
part-time coordinator for the Network. “Everyone needs food, but food is not a
spending priority in this country. We’d rather spend money on material things
like cars. Our culture doesn’t value food in the same way Europe does.”
U.S. families spend an average of $151 a week on food, according
to the Network’s assessment. In fact, Americans, on average, spend the lowest
percentage of income worldwide on food.
Increasing the amount of food New England produces, sells and
consumes will most certainly require a concerted effort to educate consumers
about the health, environmental and economic benefits of eating locally sourced
food. It will mean increasing the region’s collective understanding of food and
how it’s produced.
“The corporate messaging efforts that food should be cheap are
powerful,” Reusch said. “It’s going to take quite an effort to build up the
local food economy.”
Vertical leap
David Dadekian, founder of Eat
Drink RI, and a 2014 Rhode Island Foundation Innovation Fellowship
recipient, wants to create a year-round marketplace in Providence that would be
similar to Quincy Market in Boston, Pike Place Market in Seattle or Reading
Terminal Market in Philadelphia.
He believes a centralized culinary hub would boost Rhode Island’s
economy, increase the overall health of the population and reduce the state’s
carbon footprint.
The Rhode Island Foundation awarded Dadekian $300,000 to start
putting his idea into action. The fellowship was granted with the goal of
improving Rhode Island’s economy. Although his project is still in its
beginning stages, Dadekain has begun scouting possible locations and has hired
a planner.
“If you look at what’s been going on over the last ten years, one
of the only sectors in the economy of Rhode Island that has really grown is
farming, restaurant food, and things all across the food spectrum,” Dadekian
told ecoRI News in September. “Put all the food
aspects together its been a dramatic growth, especially in the local food part
of it.”
This proposed
vertical-farming tower to be built in Singapore would be 26 stories high, more
than half its surface area would be covered by native vegetation, and solar
panels would generate about 40 percent of the building’s energy needs. Could a
similar vertical-farming structure be built on some of the I-195 land in
Providence? (T.R.Hamzah & Yeang Sdn.Bhd.)
Raiola, a fellow advocate of growing the local food economy,
supports Dadekian’s vision, which blends nicely with her work at Hope &
Main, but she believes Rhode Island and the rest of New England needs to “think
bigger” when it comes to food.
“A little farmhouse with a fence and chickens is not the practical
way to provide food for half the New England population,” Raiola said.
"There’s no warm and fuzzy way to get there. I don’t know if it can be
done through traditional farming. All the incentives are with Big Ag.”
One of Raiola’s “radical” food ideas is using some of Providence’s
reclaimed I-195 land to build a vertical farm. “It would be model for all of
New England,” she said. “It would be an urban living space with agriculture. It
would attract funding and tourism. Everyone would see it from the highway — a
living-learning experiment that could be the future of local food.”
In fact, Raiola believes technology holds many of the answers to
producing more food locally.
“We’re becoming more urban,” she said. “We need closed systems,
and vertical farming, for one, is integrated in the ways we live. We need a
combination of agriculture and tech that won’t scare people and will make sense
to people.”
Linsley also believes we need to think differently about how we increase
local food consumption and how we better communicate the vital role food plays
in creating sustainable communities. She believes we should start by creating a
constituency — a well-organized, coordinated network that isn’t duplicating
efforts — that cares passionately about local agriculture and understands the
challenges associated with creating a regional food system.
“Incredibly subsidized crops have led to cheap, nasty foods that
we are now addicted to,” Linsely said. “We need to build a network of community
gardens that show kids how to grow food. They’ll eat the fruits and vegetables
they grow. But we have to teach food education.”
Rebuilding our regional food economy from fast and cheap to
sustainable and healthy is going to require, as Raiola said, “thinking outside
the farm.”
