Participation in Local Food Systems

Numerous references are made in the USDA-SCRI grant to networking and collaboration--the ability to communicate with anyone, anywhere, at anytime and work effectively together on activities of mutual interest.  These social behaviors are essential to the development of local food systems and their logical extension to local and regional economies.  Such behaviors are frequently labeled social networking.  This term is rapidly becoming part of our everyday usage as more people gain access to the Internet through mobile phones and computers and are associated with particular areas through GPS mapping and location-based data.

In effect, Information and Communication Technology (ICT) already provides the foundation upon which society, government, and commerce function.  As a result, exponential advances in the scope, depth, and degree of ICT's suite of systems, processes, and tools are transforming what we do, who we do it with, and how we get it done.  It enables us to participate as social networkers regardless of where we are, who we are, or what we are trying to achieve.  The intent of the grant is to provide the forums, tools, moderation, and training to help everyone who so chooses become more proficient in a social networking role.  Doing so opens the door to widespread participation and creates the opportunity space we need for local food systems to gain traction.

The diagram above proposes five "vectors"--personal motivation, purchasing preferences, value-chain contributions, community engagement, and political involvement--along which people can participate in local food systems.  Such localization emanates from a center that is rooted in a status quo supportive of the global food system, corporate farming, and "Big Ag".  Movement towards the periphery indicates increasing involvement and commitment to the topic of that vector.

Placing a "dot" on each vector gauges the relative degree and type of "investment" a person is making to that vector's subject.  The orange, blue, and green-colored rings radiating from the core indicate ranges of magnitude.  When all five vectors are plotted and lines are drawn to connect them, the resulting "spider" or "radar" chart, provides a snapshot of where a person currently participates or intends to participate in the near future.

While it would be unrealistic to expect uniform investment at the highest level in each vector, obvious red flags go up when one or two vectors are particularly strong and the others show far less attention.  However, when such an imbalance becomes evident, the same diagram can be used to plot an alternative set of dots that reflect greater attention being placed on the weaker vectors.  This can be done by expanding personal horizons to become more proficient at those behaviors in the lower-ranked vectors or by closely collaborating with others who register strong in those areas.  Either way, a more balanced approach ensues which significantly increases the potential for positive impact and change.

The above illustration builds on the previous diagram by including possible actions that indicate degree of involvement and commitment to each vector:
•    personal motivation:

•    health (nutritious, fresh, organic food)

•    lifestyle (family farm, dietary and culinary choices, religious tenets)

•    aspirations (environmental sensitivity, reduced carbon footprint, location value and place brand)

•    purchasing preferences:

•    farmers' markets

•    direct sale via grower-to-consumer subscription services like Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) groups

•    in-store retail outlets (locally-owned independent grocers and large chains featuring food stuffs) that integrate local and regional foods with global varieties

•    value-chain contributions:

•    volunteer (community gardens, food banks)

•   invest (offer land or provide equipment for gardens in either non-profit and for-profit endeavors

•    own and operate food-related operations (food production, processing, or preparation in restaurants and institutions such as schools, medical centers, and correctional facilities)

•    community engagement:

•    search for organizations with online or local affiliations--oftentimes non-governmental organizations, read email and publications and lurk

•    join the organization or online group and post content or make administrative contributions

•    convene people around topics of shared interest, charter an ongoing group, lead the group to fulfill its purpose or transfer the mantle of leadership to the next person

•    political involvement:

•    voting (casting ballots on issues that affect local food systems) and lobbying (influencing elected officials to introduce and support legislation that benefits local food systems)

•    public service employment within a government agency that has direct bearing on the interests of local food systems

•    hold office as an elected official.

As the list suggests, there are ample ways to participate.  However, it is useful to return to a point about imbalance raised earlier.  A rule of thumb is that a strong measure of "investment" is required in a minimum of three vectors to influence the development of local food systems.  However, a caveat is that changes in policies, regulations, licensure, and inspection procedures regarding food safety and quality in food production, processing, and preparation are required to sustain these food systems.

Too Little, Too Soon
Consider the very recent example in Lorain County, Ohio with concerns about appropriate licensure and inspection brought against Manna Storehouse, a family-owned and operated food co-op in Pittsfield Township, by the County Sheriff's Office, the County Health Department, and the Ohio Department of Agriculture.  There is significant personal motivation and extensive purchasing preferences made by customers in favor of Manna Storehouse.  Their operations were viable and demonstrated a high degree of involvement along the vector of value chain contributions.  Lastly, in reading the number of blog postings and related comments there seems to be no shortage of community engagement activities in support of Manna Storehouse.  So, what's wrong with this picture?

Concerted activity along the vector of political involvement is essential for success.  That means purchasing preferences and personal motivation--two vectors of independent action taken by individuals, not the collective action of a group--plus community engagement or value chain contributions will not bring enough to bear on policy-makers.  If the policies and regulations don't change, the formal system will prevail and behaviors exercised outside those of the formal system run the risk of having the same fate as Manna Storehouse.

By the same token, to make a frontal assault on food policies and regulations in an effort to change them prior to taking further action along other vectors is fraught with difficulties.  To do so assumes that people invested in the status quo are willing to divine what changes to make in the formal system rather than experiencing potential alternatives before making such decisions.  While nurturing the involvement of policy-makers along the community engagement and value chain contributions vectors may seem unnecessarily time-consuming and overly frustrating, it lays an important experiential foundation that garners the commitment of stakeholders and leads to substantive, positive changes soon afterward.

Participation in Change
This brings us back to social networking and the strategy outlined in the USDA-SCRI grant.  As the Ohio Local Food Systems Collaborative evolves, members will have sufficient Information and Communication Technology (ICT) infrastructure in place to define and engage in meaningful projects focused on the development and sustainability of local / regional food systems. The experience gained by participating in these relevant and well-positioned projects will provide the insight and confidence necessary to make orderly changes in the current governance structure assuring food safety, quality, and security.  Participation in local food systems is about making constructive, positive changes to the prevailing global food systems such that the two systems complement one another, both are sustainable, and all stakeholders own and support the process and the outcome.  This is the real purpose of the social networking associated with the USDA-SCRI grant project.  Looking forward to your participation!