Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources
Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources
Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources
University of California
Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources

Beyond manifesto: How to change the food system

Mark Bittman, cookbook author and New York Times food writer, used the occasion of New Year’s Day to throw down the gauntlet for real and permanent change to the U.S. agricultural system. “We must figure out a way to un-invent this food system,” he says in a Times opinion column. He likens the scale of the task to tectonic cultural strides like abolition, civil rights, and the women’s vote.

As to how we go about achieving this goal, Bittman speaks in broad terms. He appeals for patience, invoking the pioneers of those transformative movements, who had the perspective that their progress is not just for now but for future generations. He names the culprits of sugary drinks and poor livestock conditions as key points of attack. He calls for goals. Well reasoned approaches, to be sure, but they aren’t a blueprint for specific action.

UC Berkeley researchers have been working on some specifics for several years now, researching the agricultural, policy, and social practices that would make possible the type of systemic change Bittman is advocating. In a special multi-article feature devoted to "diversified farming systems," or DFS, for the December issue of the journal Ecology & Society, scientists from Berkeley, Santa Clara University, and other institutions lay out a comprehensive scientific case that biologically diversified agricultural practices can contribute substantially to food production while creating far fewer environmental harms than industrialized, conventional monoculture agriculture—that is, large swaths of land devoted to growing single crops using chemical inputs.

DFS are different from the narrow definition of organics, and the research shows that, unlike industrial agriculture, biologically diversified agriculture tends to generate and regenerate ecosystem services such as soil fertility, pest and disease control, water-use efficiency, and pollination, which provide critical inputs to agriculture. The research also found that DFS support globally important ecosystem services, including substantially greater biodiversity, carbon sequestration, energy-use efficiency, and resilience to climate change. 

But changing America’s agriculture system is more complex than just changing farming techniques, according to Alastair Iles, assistant professor of environmental science, policy, and management, and co-director of the Berkeley Center for Diversified Farming Systems.

“If diversified farming systems are to thrive in the United States, policies and preferences must evolve to reward the environmental and social benefits of sustainable farming and landscape management,” Iles says. “Policies supporting ecological diversification are underdeveloped and fragmented compared with conventional agricultural policies.” 

In one Ecology & Society article, Iles and co-author Robin Marsh, also of UC Berkeley, consider several obstacles that prevent or slow the spread of diversified farming practices, such as the broader political and economic context of industrialized agriculture, the erosion of farmer knowledge and capacity, and supply chain and marketing conditions that limit the ability of farmers to adopt sustainable practices.

“To transform agriculture, we need to understand these obstacles and develop and test solutions, such as peer-to-peer learning, recruitment and retention of new farmers through access to credit and land, and compensation for ecological services provided by ranchers, for example,” Iles says.

Other key facets of a sustainable agricultural system include attention to its social dimensions, such as human health, labor, democratic participation, resiliency, diversity, equality, and ethics, according to special issue co-editor Chris Bacon of Santa Clara University. In an article with colleagues, Bacon proposes creating partnerships with institutions that could address issues like immigration, food access, and worker health. 

But first and foremost, the farms themselves have to produce enough to remain profitable and to feed a growing population. Conservation biologist Claire Kremen, also a UC Berkeley professor and co-director of the Berkeley DFS Center with Iles, says that more work is needed to build on what is already known about biologically diversified agriculture, to make them these methods even more productive.

“To date, the amount of research and development investment in this type of agriculture is miniscule compared to what’s been invested in conventional agriculture,” Kremen said. “There may be substantial potential to increase food production from biologically diversified, sustainable agriculture that we have not yet tapped into. With research support to study and improve on sustainable farming systems, we can tap that potential. Growers want to utilize sustainable practices if they can, but they need to know it won’t hurt their bottom line.” 

So, DFS scientists might argue, Bittman’s New Year’s manifesto, which ends with a call for “energy, action — and patience,” could be amended to include “a comprehensive scientific, political, and sociological approach, and putting dollars behind the right kinds of research.”

Read more about diversified farming systems research at UC Berkeley.

Posted on Tuesday, January 8, 2013 at 8:24 AM
  • Author: Ann Brody Guy

Comments:

1.
This is all well and good. In fact, I think it's great as far as it goes. What's missing is anything resembling even a modest understanding of the history of US farm policy, and the history of the fight against agribusiness exploitation of farmers and the food system over the past 60 years. What has happened, in short, is that no significant food movement showed up over the first 40-50 years, and now, when we have tons of newcomers trying to help out, they end up in a false policy paradigm, like Bittman's, and don't know what to do. Yes, there should be some better policies for achieving these goals, and yes, the food movement wonders what they might be. But in fact, enormously powerful tools have been around for decades, based upon a different paradigm of the farm bill, a different body of knowledge, leading to a different understanding of justice, and categorically different kinds of farm bill strategy. Here's a Bittman, for example, pleading for a bold way forward, but in the real world, he has shown no respect for the main ones who have gone before, (or knowledge of them,) who have walked the walk for decades (albeit pre-internet and offline), and who are fighting a losing battle of trying to get the Food Movement to even understand how farm bills have worked throughout their history. See "The Hidden Farm Bill: Secret Trillions for Agribusiness," "Farm Bill Economics: Think Ecology," "Primer: Farm Justice Proposals for the 2012 Farm Bill," "The Hidden Conservation Title: Price Floors for Small Grains" (forthcoming). The Food Movement isn't yet on board, and is too defensive toward constructive criticism. Sadly, #FoodLeaders, starting with Bittman, Pollan, the Lappe´s, EWG, etc. offer little help. The research, the education, that's all great, (except when it misinforms people about the Farm Bill). Bottom line: it's about paradigms. All too often well meaning leaders have gotten lost, reactively, in the frying pan (your brain on agribusiness). Who will break out, proactively. Frogs in the soup, you're in peril! Leap out of your box! You heard it here first?

Posted by Brad Wilson on January 10, 2013 at 2:23 PM

2.
There will be no real change in food systems while folks like Bacon talk about social food non-issues like diversity and equality instead of real food social issues like consumer preferences. The only real changes in food have been driven by consumer demand, and future changes will only happen when consumers change their preferences.

Posted by Craig on January 11, 2013 at 2:02 PM

3.
No question that the economics need to work to enable food system change, but I don't see it as an either or choice. Consumers and citizens can demand great tasting food, farmed in more sustainable ways that also address issues of ethics and environmental justice.

Posted by Christopher Bacon on January 23, 2013 at 10:35 AM

Leave a Reply

You are currently not signed in. If you have an account, then sign in now! Anonymously contributed messages may be delayed.




Security Code:
QWPTEF
:

Read more

 
E-mail
 
Webmaster Email: jewarnert@ucanr.edu