Food Matters: How what we eat affects our health and the planet
Black Farmers in America, 1865-2000 The Pursuit of Independent Farming and the Role of Cooperatives
GROWING LOCAL FERTILITY: A GUIDE TO COMMUNITY COMPOSTING
Almost half the materials Americans discard – food scraps,
yard trimmings, and soiled paper – are compostable. While
58% of the 34 million tons of yard trimmings are recovered
for composting, the recovery level for the 36 million tons of
food scraps remains low at only 4.8%.1
Municipal and county governments and private food scrap generators increasingly recognize the importance of diverting food scraps from disposal
to reach recycling goals and manage solid waste handling costs.
More than 180 communities have now instituted residential food scrap collection programs, up from only a handful a decade ago. Countless supermarkets, schools, restaurants, and other businesses and institutions are also source separating their foodscraps for composting. One benefit of composting is that it can be small scale, large scale, and everything in between: small backyard bins, on-site campus systems, farm-based operations, low-tech and high-tech regional facilities. While large-scale
centralized facilities will undoubtedly be needed in order to reach
high recycling levels, close-by locally-based sites are not only
viable, but also bring many local benefits.
AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY ON STRUCTURAL RACISM PRESENT IN THE U.S. FOOD SYSTEM
The following is an annotated bibliography on selected resources and publications focused on structural racism in the U.S. food system.
Structural racism in the United States has been defined as the “normalization and legitimization of an array of dynamics—historical, cultural, institutional, and interpersonal—that routinely advantage whites while producing cumulative and chronic outcomes for people of color.”
Our intention was to look at literature that broadly covered structural racism across the entire food supply chain as well as to examine specific sectors of
the chain. We also identified literature that links the social construction of whiteness2 and its intentional or consequential impact on structural racism
within the United States’ local food movement. We intentionally focused on recent peer-reviewed and gray literature3 materials that are national, regional, and local in scope; we also identified materials that included significant references. Blog posts, news or media articles, and college class syllabi are for the most part not included in this bibliography; however, these writings contribute significantly to the discussion on structural racism in the food system and should be part of a more comprehensive education program on this topic.
The purpose of this annotated bibliography is to provide current research and outreach on structural racism in the U.S. food system for the food system practitioner, researcher, and educator. Our intention is to update this resource
on a recurring basis and suggest it be used as a companion resource for training or education sessions on structural racism in the food system.
The importance of soil organic matter
Healthy soil is the foundation of the food system. It produces healthy crops that in turn nourish people. Maintaining a healthy soil demands care and effort from farmers because farming is not benign. By definition, farming disturbs the natural soil processes including that of nutrient cycling – the release and uptake of nutrients.
Plants obtain nutrients from two natural sources: organic matter and minerals.
Organic matter includes any plant or animal material that returns to the soil and goes through the decomposition process. In addition to providing nutrients and habitat to organisms living in the soil, organic matter also binds soil particles into aggregates and improves the water holding capacity of soil. Most soils contain 2–10 percent organic matter. However, even in small amounts, organic matter is very important.
Soil is a living, dynamic ecosystem. Healthy soil is teeming with microscopic and larger organisms that perform many vital functions including converting dead and decaying matter as well as minerals to plant nutrients. Different soil organisms feed on different organic substrates. Their biological activity depends on the organic matter supply.
Nutrient exchanges between organic matter, water and soil are essential to soil fertility and need to be maintained for sustainable production purposes. Where the soil is exploited for crop production without restoring the organic matter and nutrient contents and maintaining a good structure, the nutrient cycles are broken, soil fertility declines and the balance in the agro-ecosystem is destroyed.
The Investment Case for Indoor Agriculture
Whenever we talk with indoor growers about their businesses, discussion eventually turns to the
cost of establishing and running an indoor farm. For all of their many benefits, indoor farms are
hampered by higher initial capital costs than outdoor farms, and the need for funding is accelerating as the industry transitions from a niche activity to a commonplace companion to outdoor farming, another tool in the commercial farmers’ tool kit.
Indoor farming is at a tipping point, as improved indoor farm economics and increased
mainstream acceptance of the industry mean larger vertical farming projects are becoming
commonplace. In 2014, we estimate that $33mn was raised by the US indoor produce industry as a whole; a single company – a stealth-stage vertical farmer – recently raised not much short of that total alone.
We estimate that a total build cost of $42bn would be needed to move 40% of just two crops –
lettuce and strawberries – into vertical farming systems, a goal which is less daunting when we
consider that the tomato industry moved from 10% under glass to 40% within the space of seven
years . In turn, this means a heightened need for capital to fund the wave of new indoor farm
builds.
This transition takes place against the backdrop of a period of rapid change in the financial services industry. The stable sources of funding on which startups have been able to rely for the past 20 years – traditional banks and wealth management firms – are ceding ground to newer forms of funding, such as, crowdfunding, microfinance and marketplace lending. In turn, this
opens funding opportunities for indoor farmers and entrepreneurs that go well beyond the venture capital, private equity and bank loans that are best known as capital sources.
The goal of this white paper is twofold; to outline the rationale for, and risks of investing in indoor
agriculture, and to examine potential funding sources. As such, it is intended for use by
entrepreneurs and investors alike. In preparing it, we have drawn on discussions with more than
fifty industry stakeholders, have conducted our own survey of industry financing needs and have
collated and analyzed data from crowdfunding platforms and from numerous industry, academic
and media sources.
The reason for our interest in this topic is simple: access to sufficient appropriate capital remains one of the greatest keys to success for indoor agriculture entrepreneurs. In our recent survey, more than half of respondents said that finding sufficient funding to operate or expand their firm was their greatest business challenge . Over three quarters of those who are planning to begin indoor farming say they will need to raise external funds before they do so .
Indoor Crop Production Feeding the Future
The purpose of this paper is to consolidate knowledge on the current state of the indoor agriculture industry, demonstrate its growing importance to our food system, and present the case for its long-term economic viability. Our target audience is those that do not know the industry well; the paper is intended as an introduction to indoor agriculture. As its authors, we do not consider ourselves expert in the industry, nor are we bound by any legal or contractual relationship to one another. We came together to create this paper out of a shared belief that, by better understanding the current state and trajectory of the indoor agriculture industry, we can collectively work to expedite its growth and create new opportunities for economic gain as well as wide-scale improvement in the US food supply system.
The Business Case for Racial Equity
“The Business Case for Racial Equity” quantifies the cost of racism in the U.S.
“The Business Case for Racial Equity” lays out the potential benefits to business, government and the economy of addressing racial inequities, pointing out specific areas of opportunity in housing, education, health and crime and justice. The document outlines the history of discriminatory policies across these areas and the disparities they created, going on to estimate the potential benefits of seizing opportunities to promote equality, including an increase of almost $2 trillion in minority purchasing power and millions of job opportunities for college graduates.
Black is Beautiful: The Doll Study and Racial Preferences and Perceptions
Psychologists Kenneth Bancroft Clark and his wife, Mamie Phipps
Clark, designed the “Doll Study” as a test to measure the psychological
effects of segregation on black children. The Clarks’ “Doll Study” became the first psychological research to be cited by the Supreme Court and was significant in the Court’s decision to end school segregation.
Using four plastic, diaper-clad dolls, identical except for color,
African American children between the ages of three and seven
were asked questions to determine racial perception and preference.
Discouragingly, the majority of the children preferred the white doll and attributed positive characteristics to it, while attributing negative characteristics to the black doll. The Clarks concluded that “prejudice, discrimination and segregation” caused black children to develop a sense of inferiority and self-hatred. Clark concluded, “If society says it is better to be White not only White people but Negroes come to believe it. And a child may
try to escape the trap of inferiority by denying the fact of his own race.”¹
The Case for Healthy Places
Place matters for health. It is well documented that one’s zip code can be a more reliable determinant of health than their genetic code. As a mission-driven health plan and integrated delivery system “at risk” for the health of our members and the communities we serve, the 200,000 employees of Kaiser Permanente work hard every day to provide the highest quality care at the lowest possible cost. But we also know that only 10-20% of what creates health has to do with access to care services. The rest of what creates health is directly shaped by where we live, work, learn, play and worship.
So if we are committed to improving population health and well being; reinforcing healthy lifestyle and behavior patterns; reducing health disparities by race and ethnicity; and seeking to reduce the drivers of chronic disease and preventable demand for services (and associated costs) that can make healthcare more affordable—we need to be involved in creating
healthy places.
This report codifies and presents the current evidence based on how placemaking strategies and projects—on a community’s streets, in parks and open spaces, in housing projects, and in diverse public settings—can contribute to improving people’s mental, physical and social health. It explores how built and natural environments that facilitate human connectivity and reduce isolation, while fostering equitable access to the social and economic determinants of health, directly supports human flourishing. It further addresses how placemaking undergirds economic prosperity, but also how leaders can create inclusionary strategies that reduce displacement of lower income and vulnerable families as property values increase.
The CDC Guide to Strategies to Increase the Consumption of Fruits and Vegetables
This document provides guidance for program managers, policy makers, and others on how to select strategies to increase the consumption of fruits and vegetables. It offers the most relevant information on each type of strategy.
The Economic Impact of Placemaking
High quality places are critical to attracting talent. Enhancing walkability,
promoting entrepreneurship, and expanding transit help create a vibrant
place and are effective ways to improve a community’s local economy.