- Author: Clare Gupta
On a crisp fall morning at University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources' Elkus Ranch, a group of scholars and practitioners gathered for a daylong public symposium on “Advancing Climate Change Policy and Environmental Justice in California.” Against the sunlit backdrop of rolling golden hills and leaves just turning color, Dr. Leah Stokes of UC Santa Barbara delivered a keynote address on the current crowded landscape of federal-level climate change policy proposals.
As Stokes explained, the much-discussed Green New Deal is currently a broad, vaguely defined resolution, and so it "lives in the democratic primaries." For details on what something like it might entail, one must look to the Democratic candidates' climate action plans, Stokes said. Most of the proposals reflect a shift in the conversation about what kinds of emissions reductions need to be met and on what timeline — out of recognition that current targets are insufficient — as well as a new focus on strategies that go beyond carbon taxes.
Particularly relevant to UC ANR, Stokes noted a growing interest amongst policymakers in climate smart agriculture. For the first time, she said, policy wonks and mainstream media are picking up on terms like “regenerative agriculture” and “soil carbon sequestration” as important components of a climate policy. Yet Stokes' own polling data shows that “natural carbon storage” is still not a concept that resonates with the public as an important issue — most likely because many don't know what it means.
Here, then, lies an opportunity for UC ANR — to educate and share these ideas so the public might become more familiar with these kinds of climate mitigation strategies. Particularly amongst rural communities, Stokes reminded us that we can play a role in demonstrating how climate smart agriculture can provide benefits, such as income generation and job creation through managing land for carbon sequestration.
After a robust Q&A session with Stokes, we moved into our panel, “Advancing Equitable Climate Change Policy: Practitioner Experiences From the Field,” which featured four practitioners working at the interface of environmental justice and climate change policy — Federico Castillo of UC Berkeley, Sylvia Chi of the Asian Pacific Environmental Network, Janaki Jagannath (formerly) of the Community Alliance for Agro-ecology, and our own Ruth Dahlquist-Willard, a UCCE small farms advisor in Fresno County.
The crux of their conversation rested on a tricky question that underlies the concept of a “just transition”— or how to create policies and programs that balance the long-term need to reduce resource extraction with the immediate needs of disadvantaged populations. As a clear example, the recently passed Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) has a laudable goal of aiming to reduce groundwater overdraft and curtail groundwater pumping, but questions remain.
For example, when groundwater limits are imposed, it's unclear what will this mean for smaller farmers who can't compete with larger farmers that often have additional resources to compensate for their groundwater loss. Or as Castillo pointed out, what happens when solar farms reduce jobs for farmworkers? Dahlquist-Willard's work has been addressing these kinds of questions directly, as she helps small-scale farmers access Climate Smart Agriculture state funds (SWEEP in particular) to develop water infrastructure on their farms, many of which suffered from wells that ran dry in the recent drought.
As Jagannath noted, it is helpful to take an expansive view on why soil carbon sequestration — the goal of “climate smart agriculture” — is important. She noted that it involves agricultural practices that contribute to carbon mitigation, but that also improve how agriculture is currently done. That can, in turn, mean less pesticide use, improved soil quality, and reduced pollutants leaching into groundwater — all of which matter greatly to the health and well being of disadvantaged communities, particularly those living near agricultural areas.
The afternoon featured a virtual keynote delivered by Tamara Toles O'Laughlin, the North American director for 350.org. As an environmental advocate focused on equity, access and community, she gave a compelling vision of the kind of political action we need to protect all people and the planet. Notably, she introduced our group to a number of climate justice organizations that may be relevant for own work within UCCE.
We concluded the day with a truly inspiring panel made up of four female scholars on the rise in the world of climate action: Mackenzie Feldman of Data for Progress (and UC Berkeley alum), Jessica Rudnick of UC Davis, Clarke Knight of UC Berkeley, and Kripa Jagannathan of Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory.
Each of these young scholars is taking a unique approach to their engaged scholarship, from democratizing the collection of climate data by involving farmers (Jagannathan and Rudnick), to jumping into the fray of writing policy briefs about agriculture for the Green New Deal (Feldman), to showcasing the viability of green jobs in the popular press (Knight). Their panel made clear that there is much for even seasoned UC ANR colleagues to learn about linking research to policy from emerging scholars within our institutions.
As the day concluded, members of the UC ANR had the opportunity to enjoy seasonal snacks together, reflect on the day and wander up the road to visit the resident Elkus animals — chickens, sheep, goats, horses and a particularly ornery llama.
- Author: Clare Gupta
- Author: Julia Van Soelen Kim
In a growing number of communities, food policy councils (also called “food system alliances”) have emerged to address gaps in local policies that focus on food. Most communities have transportation, housing or land use policies, but food policies are frequently missing. Food policy councils (FPCs) are an important way to bring community members together with local government to promote the social, economic and environmental health of local and regional food systems.
Food policy councils are made up of representatives from many sectors in the food system, including farmers, distributors, retailers, food service operations, government agencies (like public health, county social services and county agriculture departments), and community organizations that work in the food system. Some FPCs also develop close partnerships with county-based UC Cooperative Extension to help facilitate their work.
FPCs support a variety of food and agriculture-related policies and programs, including healthy food access, land use planning, regional food procurement, food waste, food and economic development, local food processing, and regulations related to urban farming or community gardening, to name a few examples.
A brief history of food policy councils
FPCs emerged in the late 1980s as the sustainable agriculture and food/nutrition movements began to pay more attention to community food systems. Early FPCs were created through resolutions of local government bodies (Clancy et al 2008). At that time, they tended to be embedded within government, much like a planning commission or a social service commission. As the local food movement began to rapidly expand in the 2000s, many local activists and organizations began to create FPCs as a way to bring together a more diverse group of food system stakeholders. These newer generation FPCs were typically organized outside of government as a non-profit organization or community coalition. Studies of FPCs, including our own, find that they take very diverse organizational forms and tackle widely varying issues, which means that generalizations about their goals and outcomes are difficult to make. This may be quite appropriate however, given the enduring FPC goal of tailoring food policies to the specific characteristics of particular places.
A UC ANR research project is looking at how FPCs work
While FPCs are increasingly on the radar of those trying to promote food system change, we still don't have much recent documented evidence about the actual work of FPCs (though see Harper et al. 2009, Fox 2010 and Borron 2003). In response, a team of UC Cooperative Extension researchers (Clare Gupta, Julia Van Soelen Kim, Dave Campbell, Jennifer Sowerwine, Gail Feenstra, Shosha Capps and Kate Munden-Dixon) began a comparative study of 10 California food policy councils in 2016. We wanted to know this: what are the networks and relationships that FPCs are a part of? And how do these networks and relationships influence what a FPC is able to achieve? As UCCE researchers ourselves, we were especially interested in understanding the nature of relationships between FPCs and university researchers, including UC Cooperative Extension.
To answer these questions, we interviewed more than 60 FPC members from food policy councils across California. We asked them about the work they were doing within their councils, their relationships with other players in the local food system, and the way they find information relevant for their council's priorities. We also led focus groups with members exploring the same questions. In addition, we analyzed documents produced by and about FPCs. We also engaged in “participant observation” — researcher lingo for the process of engaging with groups and individuals as a way to learn first-hand about what they do. Lastly, we combined the stories we heard from our interviewees with numerical data from a survey of nearly all of California's known FPCs. We hoped by doing this to develop a better picture of FPCs' strategies for gathering relevant information, networking and creating impact.
Our Research Findings
A full report of our findings can be found on the UC SAREP website, but here we share some key takeaways and strategies for FPC success:
- Respondents see information sharing as the most valuable FPC activity. It encourages collaboration and shifts participant thinking towards a more holistic view of food policy work.
- Members who are “knowledge brokers,,” including Cooperative Extension advisors, are connected to many different knowledge sources and are able to draw on these different sources to provide data and information that match their council's needs.
- Real-life experiences are often as compelling with policy-makers as statistics. FPCs cite the value of integrating information from numbers (i.e. quantitative data) and stories (i.e. qualitative data).
- There is no one-size-fits-all approach to FPC membership. Some FPCs view food system change as a process that involves a broad and inclusive consortium of stakeholders. They try to bring stakeholders with diverse values together (i.e., a “big tent” approach). Other FPCs emphasize attracting allies who share core values and a commitment to advocacy on behalf of food systems change (i.e., a “small tent” approach).
- Small sub-groups within FPCs can achieve significant policy change. A targeted sub-group of the FPC (i.e. working group; task force, campaign) can work with key allies to push forward a particular policy priority—the entire council does not necessarily have to be entirely involved.
- Effective FPCs have strong leaders. These leaders have deep experience and connections in the community and a good feel for the nuances involved in effective political organizing.
Overall, we found that the work of FPCs at the local and state level is making a significant difference in our state, providing a meaningful way to pursue food systems policy and change. Our recent article in the Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems and Community Development specifically highlights how local government and FPCs collaborate to shape food policies and programs in different local contexts. Stay tuned for more results from our work.
Get involved
We would love to hear from you about whether our findings resonate in your own food policy council, or if you have ideas for next research steps.
Want to get involved in local food system policy-making? Join a food policy council! See reports by Food First or Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future's Food Policy Networks for additional information.
Citations
Clancy, K., Hammer, J., & Lippoldt, D. (2008). Food policy councils-past, present, and future. In Remaking the North American Food System: Strategies for Sustainability (pp. 121-143). University of Nebraska Press.
Borron, S.M. 2003. Food Policy Councils: Practice and Possibility. Congressional Hunger Center Hunger-Free Community Report.
Fox, C. 2010. Food Policy Councils: Innovations in Democratic Governance for a Sustainable and Equitable Food System. Los Angeles Food Policy Task Force unpublished report.
Harper, A., Shattuck, A., E. Holt-Gimenez, Alkon, A., and F. Lambrick. 2009. Food Policy Councils: Lessons Learned. Food First: Institute for Food and Development Policy.
- Author: Kat Kerlin
The National Science Foundation has awarded $1.6M to UC Davis to analyze the complex relationships between surface water and groundwater supply, agricultural land use and the economic well-being of rural, disadvantaged communities.
The project is led by principal investigator Helen Dahlke, an associate professor in the UC Davis Department of Land, Air and Water Resources. The team will develop models to help guide decision-making regarding water management and land use in the state.
While the newly funded project focuses on the Tulare Basin in California's Central Valley, it is expected to provide new insights for other regions of the United States facing similar issues involving economic and water security.
The broader impacts of the project focus on helping local disadvantaged communities participate in the governance of water resources. This includes forming “water schools” and engaging K-12 students from under-represented groups in science and policy issues.
The project will also provide interdisciplinary research education and training for graduate and undergraduate students, who will be involved in all aspects of the research and community engagement activities.
The project is supported by the NSF Dynamics of Coupled Natural and Human (CNH) Systems Program. The award is one of nine the program awarded across the nation this week, totaling $13 million.
“These awards demonstrate the importance of understanding the connectedness of nature and society in studying the effects of environmental change and socioeconomic stress,” said CNH program director Liz Blood of NSF.
Co-PIs on the research team include Jon Herman in the UC Davis Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering; Anne Visser and Clare Gupta in the UC Davis Department of Human Ecology; Rebecca Teasley from the University of Minnesota, Duluth; and Laurel Firestone from the nonprofit Community Water Center.
More information
Flooding Farms in the Rain to Restore Groundwater
Kat Kerlin writes about the environment for UC Davis Strategic Communications. Follow her at @UCDavis_Kerlin.
- Author: Pamela Kan-Rice
“We visited offices of 26 of California's 55-member congressional delegation in two days!” said Lucas Frerichs, government and community relations manager.
On March 6-9, a UC ANR delegation attended the 35th Annual Council on Agriculture Research, Extension and Teaching (CARET) meetings in Washington D.C. CARET is part of the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU). They also made congressional visits to explain the importance of science and research to California.
Vice President Glenda Humiston was joined by AVP Wendy Powers, UCB College of Natural Resources Dean Keith Gilless, UCR College of Natural and Agricultural Sciences Dean Kathryn Uhrich, Nutrition Policy Institute Director Lorrene Ritchie, UC Cooperative Extension Specialist Clare Gupta, Chief Innovation Officer Gabe Youtsey, and Frerichs. Industry partners Bill Frost, former UC ANR AVP; Cher Watte, executive director of the California Asparagus Commission; Mike Mellano, fresh cut flower grower; Dina Moore, Humboldt County rancher; and Jean-Mari Peltier, managing partner of Environmental Solutions Group, served as CARET delegates from California.
The group split up into teams to visit the offices of Senators Dianne Feinstein and Kamala Harris, agriculture committee members, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, Minority Leader of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi and other California representatives.
Although no U.S. secretary of agriculture had been confirmed at the time of their visit, members expressed their support for agriculture.
“One thing that members of Congress – Republicans and Democrats – can certainly agree on is that the support for agriculture and the University of California is strong,” Frerichs said.
Read more about the CARET visits in Powers' ANR Adventures blog.
- Author: Tracy Schohr
“We focused on fostering a good dialogue and facilitating co-learning among attendees,” said event co-chair Leslie Roche, assistant UC Cooperative Extension specialist in rangeland management. “We hosted university faculty, statewide CE specialists and academics, and county-based CE advisors—as well as local policymakers and leaders from non-governmental organizations and statewide programs.”
UC researchers who have successfully engaged in the public policy arena provided numerous models of linking research and policy. There were five key take-aways for scientists:
- Honest broker role – Present policymakers with various policy options, based on sound research. Have a clear understanding of the science behind your messaging. Use qualitative data to tell the story of the hard quantitative data.
- Active engagement – Be part of informational and oversight hearings. Empower communities to take action and foster community engagement.
- Build coalitions – Collaboration is imperative. Develop unexpected allies and foster long-term relationships, realizing it may take some time to bear fruit.
- Disseminate information – Share your data in user-friendly formats. Target local community, Legislature and state agencies to inform policies. Get your science into trainings and continuing education programs. Leverage your coalition to expand the circulation of your research results.
- Target messages – Develop a strong, concise message to deliver your research. Use an emotional connection – “Old-growth oak woodlands” versus “oak woodland.”
Throughout the conference, speakers highlighted the multiple levels of engagement for researchers in the policy arena, with different roles matching different needs – some take a center stage, while others play imperative behind-the-scenes roles.
Keynote speaker Jason Delborne, associate professor of science, policy and society at North Carolina State University, encouraged engaging the public. “Science is a social process,” he said, noting that community and public engagement is often key to successfully applying research to policy. Delborne also touched on the tension between expertise and democracy, commenting that we can't always resolve it and often we have to learn to live with this tension.
A diverse set of researchers shared their perspectives from experiences in engaging in policy. The panel included Thomas Harter, Robert M. Hagan Endowed Chair in Water Management and Policy and UCCE specialist in the Department of Land, Air, and Water Resources at UC Davis; Lorrene Ritchie, director of the UC ANR Nutrition Policy Institute; Mindy Romero, founder and director of California Civic Engagement Project at UC Davis Center for Regional Change; and Yana Valachovic, UCCE forest advisor and county director in Humboldt and Del Norte counties. They discussed the importance of building strong science-based programs, actively engaging local communities and building coalitions of support.
Guests from both government and non-government organizations who use research to shape policy shared their perspectives on translating science to decision-making.
“Science is the foundation for developing programs,” said Amrith Gunasekara, science advisor for the California Department of Food and Agriculture.
Tina Cannon Leahy, attorney with the State Water Resources Control Board, noted that policymakers and decision-makers are often looking for a clear, “black-and-white” answer, while for scientists, there is “no answer,” but rather information.
Anne Megaro, consultant to the California Senate Committee on Agriculture, and Rebecca Newhouse, consultant to the California Senate Environmental Quality Committee, both emphasized the importance of making sure science is accessible and digestible.
Juliet Sims of the Prevention Institute explained how her organization uses both published scholarly literature and community stories to effectively inform its advocacy platform.
Keynote speaker Rachel Morello-Frosch, associate professor in the Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management at UC Berkeley, introduced the concept of moving from “translational research” to “transformational research,” a shift that requires deep community engagement in meaningful ways to effect policy change.
In the afternoon, four breakout sessions were offered: “Policy structures and opportunities for engagement” with Robert Waste, “Relational approaches to science communication and engagement” with Faith Kearns, “Putting it into practice–UC ANR case studies” with Dave Campbell, Clare Gupta and Lucas Frerichs, and “Navigating policy engagement: Education vs advocacy,” with Adrian Lopez and Kit Batten. These training modules helped participants build technical skills and analytical frameworks for successful policy engagement.
The Research to Policy Conference was a forum to exchange ideas and share perspectives, continuing to bridge the gap between science and policy communities. It challenged attendees to be open to new ways of thinking, shared innovative outreach methods and showcased how research can have an impact in the policy arena.
“The event brought cross-fertilization and co-learning between disciplines – nutrition, forest management, water quality – and there were common themes that resonated for all participants,” said event co-chair Gupta, assistant UCCE specialist in public policy and translational research.
VP Glenda Humiston wrapped up the policy conference by saying, "Good science is vital for good policy. It's great to see UC folks enhancing these skills to bring science together with policy."
For more information on applying research to policy, contact Frerichs, UC ANR government and community relations manager, at (530) 750-1218 or lfrerichs@ucanr.edu, or Research to Policy Program Team contacts Gupta at cgupta@ucdavis.edu and Roche at lmroche@ucdavis.edu.