By
FRANK CARINI/ecoRI News staff
The McDonald’s Corp. went public in 1965, and 15 years later it became one of the 30 companies that make up the Dow Jones Industrial Average. In the 50 years since fast food first rang the Wall Street bell, the economics of the U.S. food system have changed dramatically, largely for the betterment of multinational behemoths and to the detriment of public health, the environment and local economies.
Millions
of U.S. farms, many of them family run for generations, have folded, as
government policy encourages supersized agricultural practices. Nearly
two-thirds of the food produced in the United States now comes from Florida and
drought-stricken California. In North Carolina, there are nine times more
chickens on factory farms than there are people in the state.
The
largest pork producer and processor in the United States, Virginia-based
Smithfield Foods, is owned by a Chinese company. Nearly 17 percent of the hogs
slaughtered in the United States are confined in cages by Smithfield
Foods.
A
handful of global corporations — processors of meat and dairy, producers of
seeds, manufacturers of fertilizers and pesticides, distributors and grocery
retailers — dominate the world's food system, giving the likes of Cargill, Dow,
Monsanto, Nestle, Sysco and Walmart immense power to influence markets and
pricing.
“During World War II 50 percent of the U.S workforce worked doing something that involved the farm industry,” Julian Forgue said during a recent conversation over cups of coffee at his restaurant, Julians, on Providence's West Side. “Today that number is less than 2 percent. Our food was taken away from us after World War II, and we’ve broken down.”
 |
| A handful of global corporations dominate the worldwide food system. Click here for larger image. (James Provost/for IEEE.org) |
This
shift has dramatically reshaped southern New England’s food economy and the
region’s landscape. Highly processed food manufactured with subsidized
high-fructose corn syrup, gassed with 1-methylcyclopropene, filled with emulsifiers,
preserved with butylated hydroxyltoluene, prettied up with artificial colors
and made tasty by artificial flavoring replaced locally sourced food.
Fast-food
joints — SONIC Drive-In recently announced agreements for franchise
development in Rhode Island — chain restaurants and parking lots replaced
farms, farm stands and orchards. Buying fresh fish and shellfish on the docks
directly from those who actually caught it became a lost experience.
This
21st-century food system leaves much of the country, including southern New
England, considerably less food secure. Rhode Island, for example, has one to
three days’ worth of food should a disaster sever access to the centralized
supply chain, according to Leo Pollock, network coordinator for the Rhode Island Food
Policy Council.
“For
decades, food and food systems weren’t seen as a legitimate economic sector,”
Pollock said. “You’re starting to see a shift to a more regional and local
system."
Land
of the lost
Between 1982 and 2007, more than 23 million acres — an area the size of Indiana — of U.S. agricultural land was lost to development, according to the American Farmland Trust’s National Resources Inventory. Not a single state in the continental United States was left untouched.
In
fact, according to the American Farmland Trust, the most fertile land was
developed at a disproportionately high rate. Thirty-eight percent of the
agricultural land developed nationwide was prime — land that is best suited to
grow food.
During
those 25 years, Rhode Island developed 22 percent of its farmland and
development increased at a pace that was nine times faster than the state’s
population growth, according to Scott Millar, administrator of the Rhode Island
Department of Environmental Management’s Sustainable Watersheds Office.
It’s
no surprise then that Rhode Island leads the nation in farmland lost to
development, and both Connecticut and Massachusetts also have seen much of
their farmland replaced by subdivisions and strip malls.
Farmland
preservation is the key to building a sustainable local/regional food system,
according to Jesse Rye, co-executive director of Farm Fresh Rhode Island.
“If there are no local farms, there’s no local food,” he said. “Rhode Island
farmers have been good stewards of the land for a long time.”
Some
progress on the farmland preservation front in southern New England is being
made. Earlier this month, for example, Lial Acres in Warren, a family-run farm
for more than a century, became the 100th Rhode Island farm to be permanently
protected by the R.I. Agricultural Land Preservation Commission (ALPC)
for agricultural use.
Lial
Acres has been in production for 125 years and is currently used for
diversified vegetable production, along with some hay and grazing land. It’s
owned by Bertha Lial, widow of Manuel Lial, who ran the farm as a dairy
operation for decades, after his father and grandfather before him.
“By
recognizing Lial Acres, we are demonstrating the importance of supporting
families who have dedicated their lives to farming and to preserving a culture
of farming for future generations to experience and enjoy,” Gov. Gina Raimondo
said during an April 16 ceremony to celebrate the preservation of the 40.5-acre
farm, 60 percent of which consists of prime agricultural soils.
 |
| Rhode Island has about 1,200 farms, mostly family run, that occupy some 70,000 acres. The state has about 50 seasonal farmers markets in urban, suburban and rural areas. (Frank Carini/ecoRI News) |
Rye
and others ecoRI News spoke with for this series, such as Stephanie Reusch of
the Southeastern
Massachusetts Food Security Network, however, don’t believe
southern New England as a whole is doing enough to help local farms be viable.
Rhode
Island, for instance, has the highest cost of land in the nation, at $13,600
per acre — three times the average cost in the Northeast and six times higher
than the national average. This high cost of land is making it nearly
impossible to have financially viable farm businesses in the state.
The
high cost of dwindling land in southern New England also makes it difficult to
protect farmland from development. The southeastern Massachusetts counties of
Bristol, Norfolk and Plymouth, for example, have a number of “hot spots,” where
there are high percentages of prime agricultural soils unprotected, according
to a 2014 study prepared for the Southeastern Massachusetts Food Security
Network.
The
protection of these lands is critical to supporting the local food system and
increasing food production and food security in the region, according to the
126-page report.
The
University of Rhode Island — once known as the State Agricultural School —
didn't think so, when, in 2012, it decided to rip up some 15 acres of prime farmland in Kingston to make room for
more parking.
“It’s
a hard job, and the global food economy makes it even more challenging,” Rye
said. “If we don’t promote and support local food, it puts green space at risk
and farms go away.”
Increasing
the amount of land/space used in the region to farm, however, is just one part
of growing the local food economy.
Go local
“A vibrant agricultural community in Massachusetts is essential to building healthy communities and a stronger economy,” Gov. Charlie Baker said at a recent Statehouse event celebrating the importance of local food.
The
governor proclaimed March 31 as Massachusetts Agricultural Day, and presented
the Massachusetts Farm Bureau Federation with a citation recognizing its
century of service.
But
growing the region’s local food economy will require much more than marginally
funded Buy Local campaigns and their companion websites (Connecticut, Massachusetts and Rhode Island),
holding annual Agricultural Days, handing out citations, and making Boston
cream Massachusetts’ official pie and doughnut.
It
requires more than naming North Providence-based Yacht Club Soda Rhode Island’s
official state soda in 2004 and then spending the next decade contracting with corporate giants to supply
the Statehouse with pop and bottled water.
Increasing
southern New England's food production to build healthier communities and
stronger economies will take more than pats on the back and a few
"attaboys." It will require us to radically change the way we think
about food.
About
90 percent of the food consumed in Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut
comes from outside New England, and most food-related jobs in the region are
tied to the lower-paying service industry.
“Food
has an immense impact on the state,” he said. “No one will argue against the
subjective benefits of local food, but few are investing in the system.
Traditional lenders typically don’t make those kind of loans.”
In
an October 2014 letter to the supervising planner of the Rhode Island Statewide
Planning Program, the R.I. Food Policy Council's Pollock made the case for the
state to better invest in farming and local food production. He noted that
agriculture provides numerous economic benefits: farms not only produce food,
but they also ensure access to open space and protect natural resources.
“With
more than 1,200 farms comprising 70,000 acres in total, and with a 42 percent
increase in the number of farms since 2002, Rhode Island’s agricultural sector
has consistently been undervalued as an economically significant sector,”
Pollock wrote.
In
fact, since the financial crisis of 2007-08, southern New England’s food
industry has actually prospered — one of the very few sectors in the region
that can claim growth. Lawmakers, bureaucrats and foodies frequently point to
this success.
The
State Economic Development Plan for Rhode Island even notes that “plant-based
and agriculture businesses in Rhode Island have a total impact of $1.78 billion
per year and 12,372 jobs,” and that “Rhode Island ranks among the states with
the highest percentage of food sales direct to the public, amounting to more than
$6 million in sales in 2007 and the highest sales at farmer’s markets.”
Yet,
there seems to be no real coordinated effort regionally, or even within the
individual states, to seize upon the popularity of locally sourced food,
according to, well, just about everyone ecoRI News spoke with, from government
officials to farmers to local food advocates.
Consumers,
thanks to the local food movement, are increasingly reflecting on the origin,
environmental impacts and health consequences of what they eat and drink — the
popularity of locally crafted beer and handcrafted wines are growing alongside
locally sourced food.
There also are growing concerns about pollution,
deforestation, greenhouse-gas emissions, and energy and water demands
associated with industrial food and beverage manufacturing.
“Sustainable,
local farming is good for the earth,” Farm Fresh's Rye said. “But, if we follow
the links along the local food system chain, are we making the most out of its
resources?”
Forgue,
the owner of Julians, said southern New England needs to put people to work
growing food, to strengthen the local economy and improve public health. Forgue
said he gets much of his restaurant’s food from local vendors, and he defined
local as being within 300 miles.
Rhode
Island lawmakers created the Inter-Agency Food & Nutrition Policy Advisory Council three
years ago to examine the barriers that are keeping the state from developing a
strong, sustainable food economy. Lots of meetings have since been held and
notes taken.
Efforts
to beef up southern New England's food system would preserve farmland,
encourage sustainable agricultural practices and benefit public health. But,
more importantly, at least when it comes to grabbing the attention of
lawmakers, providing the local food economy with more support would help
strengthen a still-sagging economy.
Feeding
people makes money; if it didn’t, Monsanto wouldn’t be doing business with some
70 food and beverage companies. But investment in food production and
processing takes a backseat to high tech and real estate — not surprising,
considering high-tech investors typically see a 12 percent to 15 percent
return.
Investing
instead in, say, a farm, an investor would be lucky to see a 3 percent return.
That percentage discrepancy is a real obstacle. Investors, legislators and
policymakers need to be shown why investing in the local food system makes
sense and cents.
 |
| Rhode Island resident and aquaculturist Chris Clarendon schleps an oyster cage from his boat to his pickup parked along Fogland Beach in Tiverton. He runs Seapowet Shellfish LLC. (Frank Carini/ecoRI News) |
The
region's burgeoning food economy needs to be pushed forward by financial
support and business assistance. Farmers need greenhouses to help them extend
the growing season. Farm equipment is expensive.
“There
are few targeted loans for this industry, and there’s little start-up support,”
Pollock said. “That’s not unique to food, but if we want to make this sector a
priority, we need to support the local food system with money and assistance.
We need investors who are willing to accept lower returns to support society and
the environment. We’re seeing a tiny shift in that direction.”
Healthy investment
Demand for local fare encourages local food producers, increases the production and distribution of local food, and supports cooperative food-buying programs. Meeting the needs of this increasing demand means more money earned and spent here.
Southern
New England’s three states are starting to better understand the connection
between food and the economy, according to Pollock. “States are beginning to
organize ways to strengthen their local food systems,” he said. “The
coordination and funding of this movement is in its infancy."
Local
food advocates maintain that if Connecticut, Massachusetts and Rhode Island
were to better support policies and programs that encourage residents to grow,
sell, buy and eat more locally sourced food, it would strengthen neighborhoods
and communities. They say increased support would create local jobs and build
local careers. It is, after all, difficult to outsource local food production.
Pollock
noted that growing more food locally also means additional jobs are needed for
processing and distribution. He said workers would be needed to flash freeze
and can fruits and vegetables for sale year-round. Facilities and infrastructure
would require construction, plumbing and heating, and maintenance. Local
delivery trucks would need drivers and repair.
“The
economic impact would be significant. These aren’t insignificant businesses,”
he said. “But at what scale does this make sense? A significant amount of
infrastructure would be needed. The price point will ultimately make that
decision.”
According
to a study by Michigan State University, food hubs, on average, work
with 80 producers, most of which are small or mid-sized. These businesses, on
average, employ 19 paid staff and have annual sales exceeding $3.5 million.
In
addition to the support food hubs provide to local and regional farmers, they
also have the power to spur job creation and stimulate local economic activity,
according to the Michigan State study.
The
report suggests that even a small percentage shift in local food production has
the potential to create thousands of new jobs.
When food hubs buy services and
goods from local and regional farmers, money re-circulates through the local
economy, creating a multiplier effect, where every $1 of demand for food hub
products generates an additional $0.63 in related industrial sectors, according
to the study.
Big
Ag doesn’t strengthen the local, regional or even the national economy. For
example, U.S. factory farms — four companies own 84 percent of the beef market
and four companies control 66 percent of the hog industry — hire as few workers
as possible, and typically buy equipment, supplies and feed from the same
agricultural conglomerates that buy their products. There’s no trickle-down
effect, just unprotected lagoons of seeping animal waste.
Besides
the obvious benefit to public health and the environment, a comprehensive
sustainability plan for a local/regional food system would significantly boost
southern New England’s economy, according to a smorgasbord of studies and reports.
Even
when the hidden costs of factory farming are ignored, industrial agriculture is
often less efficient at producing food than smaller, sustainable farms,
according to GRACE
Communications Foundation, a New York-based organization focused
on increasing awareness of the environmental and public-health issues created
by the country’s current food, water and energy systems.
Sustainable
farms support local economies by providing jobs for members of the community
and buying supplies from local businesses, and diversified farms produce more
food per acre than large-scale, monoculture farms, according to GRACE.
A
strong local food system supports small farms and independent grocery stores,
creating jobs and driving economic growth, as money and capital stay in the
community, according to the National League of Cities. The Washington, D.C.-based
advocacy organization, which represents 19,000 municipalities in 49 states,
also notes that small, decentralized food systems are less vulnerable to
disruptions in the supply chain or lapses in quality control, and communities
that are more self-sufficient have more food security.
New
strategy
To better position the regional food economy won’t cost southern New England a dime — at least to start. The first steps require policy and regulation changes that support a local food system. While all three states have taken baby steps to create programs and adopt policies that encourage local food production, Pollock noted these two areas are the missing links in southern New England’s food chain.
“To
what degree we support a local food economy comes down to policies and
programs,” he said. “We haven’t gotten there yet.”
Among
the most effective policy changes the three states could make would be to
rework purchasing guidelines to better include local vendors. Government
spending — money already being spent on food — has the potential to enhance
southern New England’s economy, because of the impact state and federal
contracts have on the food system.
The
state of Rhode Island alone spends about $10 million annually on food,
according to the Department of Administration (DOA). Another $340 million or
so in federal money annually passes through Rhode Island to be spent on food.
These
state and federal tax dollars are largely spent on commercially processed
products manufactured by conglomerates. Relying on local food to meet the needs
of hospitals, universities and state agencies would help strengthen the
region’s economy.
The
Inter-Agency Food & Nutrition Policy Advisory Council and the R.I. Food
Policy Council are working with agencies, such as the Department of
Corrections, to better incorporate local food into state purchasing. Both
councils also are working with school districts to build stronger
farm-to-school programs.
“Spending
more public dollars on locally-grown food to serve in state agencies such as
prisons, hospitals, and child care centers would deliver a boon to the state
economy and would encourage more Rhode Island farmers to start or expand their
farming operations in the state,” according to a November 2014 report
commissioned by the R.I. Food Policy Council.
The
council identified institutional food procurement as a priority area and asked
the Harvard Food Law and Policy Clinic in 2013 to develop recommendations. Its
27-page report noted three key points:
Increasing
the amount of locally grown food served in state agencies would likely
improve the nutritional quality of the meals, since many local products are
fresher and less processed than food that has been shipped long distances.
Local
food procurement by public institutions would expand economic
opportunities for farmers, food businesses and other workers in Rhode Island.
The
transportation of food across long distances is a energy intensive, and
Rhode Island can reduce its carbon footprint from transportation by switching
to foods not transported over hundreds or thousands of miles.
Strengthening
the regional and local food economies, however, will require more than just
rewriting procurement policy and streamlining regulations. It also will require
some significant financial investment, both public and private. Better
marketing and branding of local food, for example, could attract more
tourists/foodies to the region and help small-scale farmers better access
federal money and foundation grants.
The
region also lacks the infrastructure needed to support greater local food
production. More processing facilities — Rhode Island, for instance, only has
one U.S. Department of Agriculture-regulated slaughterhouse for poultry — would
encourage farmers and producers to expand operations. Infrastructure upgrades
would likely make more local food more affordable to more people.
The
recently created Southeastern
Massachusetts Livestock Association has secured two
parcels of land in Westport, Mass., in hopes of building a slaughterhouse to
keep South Coast farmers from having to travel to the western part of the state
for the service. The proposed plant would serve as a meat shop, smokehouse and
dry-aging facility. The estimated cost is nearly $4 million.
“We
don’t need more jobs for highly qualified people. We have plenty of those
jobs,” Ausura said. “We need to create jobs for skilled labor. Local food does
that. You can easily train a person who worked at a button factory to flash
freeze vegetables.”
Supporters
of building a diverse local food economy believe a bolstered regional food
industry would support plenty of jobs, some of which, according to projections,
could pay up to $50,000 a year.
There
are more than 200,000 fast-food restaurants in the United States,
and revenue has grown from $6 billion in 1970 to $160 billion last year.
Back
to the future
While growing the local food economy will take infrastructure investment, farm and farmland conservation, and policy support, it also will require changing five decades of eating habits and addressing the issue of accessibility. Neither one is an easy task.
The
global food system that feeds us manufactures cheap sustenance, and we’ve
developed a taste for it. America’s collective culinary contributions are
served in buckets and bags by a colonel, a clown, a king and a jack in the box.
“There’s
a lot of behaviors associated with food that are entrenched,” Rye said. “The
buying habits of individuals and institutions are entrenched.”
While
locally sourced food has become easier to find and more affordable in the past
two decades, accessibility is still a substantial obstacle, especially during
the southern New England winter.
“We’ve
made good progress, but we have to make is easier,” Rye said. “We need to make
local food better accessible and not just to farmers market shoppers. Buying
locally is like voting with your knife and fork. Eating with the seasons is not
always convenient but you will better understand the ramifications of the
global food system.”
Recruiting
voters, however, will take patience, education and assigning more value to the
things we eat. It also will mean telling stories.
“We
have no connection to our food. We don’t know the producers, the farmers,” said
Reusch, the part-time coordinator for the Southeastern Massachusetts Food
Security Network. “We haven’t valued food in general for a while. We don’t know
the full story behind our food.”
To
hear those stories, talk to a local farmer or chef, or visit a local farm or
community garden. People like to talk about food, especially those growing it,
preparing it and cooking it.
“There’s
a story that goes with the carrots you bought at a farmers market,” Rye said.
“There’s no connection if those carrots were sent to a huge distributor and
handled by a bunch of people.”
So what
might a strengthened local/regional food system look like? A patchwork of small
farms on derelict city lots in Providence, Woonsocket, New Bedford, Fall River,
Hartford and Bridgeport, to name just a few places. The rebirth of farm stands.
The continued growth of community-supported agriculture and farmers markets,
and better-supported seafood and dairy collaboratives.
The
average age of southern New England’s farmers would be closer to middle-aged
than retirement — the average age of New England farmers is 57.6, up from 56.5
in 2007, according to the most recent Census
of Agriculture.
Many
of the region’s old mills would be reborn as packaging, processing and
distribution centers. Food scrap, both residential and commercial, would be
composted, to help keep people employed and to keep the region’s soil fertile.
New
technologies and innovative minds would continue to advance aquaponic systems
and rooftop gardening techniques. A growing collection of greenhouses, high
tunnels and hoop houses would keep farmers growing year-round.