2010 Food System Summit

Can we trust our food?

There’s no doubt that America’s food system is complex and progressive. The process of getting food from farm to fork is extensive. Because of its vital importance, an annual summit is dedicated to learning from and bettering the methods by which we obtain our food.

The Food System Summit addresses food animal well-being, food safety, food industry technology and innovation and nutrition and health. The highlight of the event is the Center for Food Integrity (CFI) Consumer Trust Research Survey – a nationwide benchmark of current U.S. consumer opinion regarding trust in the contemporary U.S. food system.

According to its website, CFI was established in 2007 to increase consumer trust and confidence in the American food system, with the primary mission to promote dialogue, model best practices, address issues important to consumers and serve as a resource for accurate, balanced information.

This year, the summit was October 5 and 6 in Chicago.

Summit Feature Presentations Included:

• What Women Want: New Research about Beef Shopping and Implications for the Food Industry
• Religion’s Role in Framing the Discussion of Animal Well Being
• The Benefits of Modern Food Production in Today’s Economic Environment
• Technology and Today’s Food System – Cautions and Counsel

Listen to audio clips of news interviews with summit presenters.

The seminars are thought provoking and offer participants, comprising farmers, ranchers, processors, government and company associates, an opportunity for dialogue, though what most people are interested in is the annual survey that measures consumer opinion regarding food-production, transportation/handling and other issues.

Participants rated some questions using a 0-to-10 scale; “0” meant they had no concern about an issue and “10” meant they were very concerned about an issue.

The survey was conducted in August and polled 2002 people, 60 percent female and 40 percent male, using Survey Sampling International’s consumer Web panel (sampling error at 95 percent confidence level +/-2.2 percent).

Research Highlights:

• Early adopting consumers prefer online sources for information about the food system, followed by friends and family and their local television station.
• Traditional media sources, including newspapers and radio, were least preferred by early adopting consumers.
• Consumers view non-governmental organizations as the most credible sources about the humane treatment of farm animals.
• Following non-governmental organizations, consumers view farm-animal veterinarians and university experts as the most credible sources of information about the humane treatment of farm animals.
• An average rating of 6.94 was given to the question, “I trust food produced in the U.S. more than I trust food produced outside the U.S.”
• An average rating of 5.31 was given to the question, “I don’t care where my food was produced as long as it is affordable, safe and wholesome.”
• An average rating of 6.05 was given to the question, “The FDA strictly regulates the use of antibiotics given to animals raised for food.”
• An average rating of 7.22 was given to the question, “I would support a law in my state to ensure the humane treatment of farm animals.”
• An average rating of 6.25 was given to the question, “The use of herbicides and pesticides increases crop yields and crop quality, which means lower prices at the grocery store.”

There is less concern about food prices this year than the past two years, more confidence in the safety of food and more consumers feel that they have access to information about food origin, production and safety. 

The ultimate goal is to learn from the research findings and improve upon areas of concern.

“We are all stakeholders in our nation’s food supply – one of the safest, most abundant and most affordable in the world,” states CFI.

As the CFI continues its yearly survey and seminar, it will be interesting to witness how American consumers adjust or maintain their food-system perceptions.

*Photo obtained from www.michiganestateplanninglawblog.com

Agreement may alter Ohio food handling

There’s always something in the news about one food or another causing consumers grief – Spinach, peanuts and pork have been recent culprits.

Foods can be occasionally spoiled during their transport cycle – or how food gets from the farm to grocery stores and local markets.

Americans are becoming increasingly cognizant of this process. Because of the enhanced attention, Congress is considering several food safety policies.

The National Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement (NLGMA) is one such proposal. It would require Ohio produce growers to meet California-style food safety standards; forcing Ohio growers to adhere to growing policies and practices developed for and by California growers. Though this proposal is limited to leafy greens, the potential for similar proposals regarding fruits and vegetables seems imminent to some in Ohio’s produce industry.

To circumvent the potential of a complex food-safety regulation system being implemented in Ohio, The Ohio Produce Growers and Marketers Association (OPGMA) proactively established its own food safety plan for the Buckeye State.

The Ohio Fresh Produce Marketing Agreement program elements:

• A tiered approach that takes into consideration operation size
• Developed by and for Ohio growers
• Every produce-industry stakeholder has program input
• Provides access to additional markets now and in the future
• Provides customers with "peace of mind;" due diligence in growing safe food
• Blends good food safety practices with good environmental principles
• Encompasses all types of growers and is especially small-farm friendly

“We are trying to help the FDA because it is to our benefit to help them. If we don’t, we’ll get something that will put growers out of business,” said Bob Jones, Jr., OPGMA board member.

OPGMA believes that adhering to the NLGMA standards will adversely impact Ohio's small and medium-sized producers, who will be financially strapped to remain compliant.

Ohio’s Country Journal reported the recent development in its July edition. The story’s author, Matt Reese, reports:

“Unfortunately, whether it is really their fault or not, the blame often falls upon the farm. And as more scrutiny falls on farms, many of the larger Ohio produce operations have been required by their buyers to meet specific food safety standard operating procedures. For many operations this has resulted in the need to employ a full-time food safety quality assurance person to manage the complexities of the requirements that often have no backing in science or any potential for increased revenue for the farmer.”

Many state producers worry about the specifications of the NLGMA’s proposal spilling over into future produce-handling requirements in Ohio.

“Given the California agreement as an example, Ohio growers have major concerns with a number of specific on-farm requirements such as water use and usage, animal intrusion, field sanitation, harvest requirements, soil amendments and more. These specifics were designed around some California cultural practices and are not conducive to Ohio and many other states’ accepted practices,” said Lisa Schacht, an Ohio produce grower and member of Ohio Farm Bureau Federation (OFBF.

The Ohio Ecological Food and Farm Association, Innovative Farmers of Ohio, OFBF, Farmers' Market Management Network, Inc., Growing! Ohio Farmers' Markets and The Ohio State University support the Ohio Fresh Produce Marketing Agreement.

Reese reported that after the draft is completed, it must be reviewed by the Ohio Department of Agriculture and will move through the process (which includes an industry vote) for the development of a market agreement sometime in 2011.

People may contact OPGMA board member or the Ohio Fresh Produce Marketing Agreement project manager Karl Kolb at foodsafety@opgma.org with questions/comments.

*Photo obtained from: www. southbound.ph

USDA Campaigns for Local, Regional Food Systems

Food and agriculture are at the center of national dialogue as of late, re-introduced to the masses because of the “Food, Inc.” movie release, TIME magazine commentary “America's Food Crisis and How to Fix It” and most recently, a new USDA campaign launch.

The government branch is allocating millions of dollars in its budget to spur a nationwide conversation about how food travels from farms to plates.

“Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food” is Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan’s initiative that aims to educate Americans about the importance of promoting local and regional food economies in our country’s food system to:

• Create new income opportunities for farmers
• Promote sustainable agriculture
• Generate wealth that remains in rural communities
• Supply healthier food
• Decrease energy expenditure

"An American people that is more engaged with their food supply will create new income opportunities for American agriculture," said Vilsack. "Reconnecting consumers and institutions with local producers will stimulate economies in rural communities, improve access to healthy, nutritious food for our families and decrease the amount of resources to transport our food."

The USDA will “use existing USDA programs to break down structural barriers that have inhibited local food systems from thriving” and has allocated the following toward the campaign:

• Risk Management Agency – $3.4 million for collaborative outreach and assistance programs to socially disadvantaged and underserved farmers. These programs will support “Know Your Farmer” goals by helping producers adopt new and direct-marketing practices. For example, nearly $10,000 in funding for the University of Minnesota will bring together experts on food safety and regulations for a discussion of marketing to institutions like K-12 schools, colleges, universities, hospitals and other health-care facilities.
• USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service proposed regulations to implement a new voluntary cooperative program under which select state-inspected establishments will be eligible to ship meat and poultry products in interstate commerce. The new program was created in the 2008 Farm Bill and will provide new economic opportunities for small meat and poultry establishments, whose markets are currently limited.
• Rural Development – $4.4 million in grants to help 23 local business cooperatives in 19 states. The member-driven and member-owned cooperative business model has been successful for rural enterprises and brings rural communities closer to the process of moving from production-to-consumption as they work to improve products and expand appeal in the marketplace.
• USDA's Rural Development will also announce a Rural Business Opportunity Grant in the amount of $150,000 to the Northwest Food Processors Association. The grant will strengthen the relationship between local food processors and customers in parts of Idaho, Oregon and Washington and will also help the group reduce energy consumption, a major cost for food processors.

Advocates of buying locally produced foods cite safety and transportation-energy costs as primary factors in the dialogue.

Michael Abelman, founder and executive director emeritus of the Center for Urban Agriculture at Fairview Gardens, as well as a recognized practitioner of sustainable agriculture and proponent of regional food systems, commented about the government movement:

“We (society) are part of a broad movement reclaiming food from faceless, long-distance industrial providers. We're demanding not only that it be safe, but that it taste good – and that it be grown in a way that honors the land and those doing the work. And while it's true that we could slip up and make someone sick, the results of any carelessness would be smaller, more local.

“Food safety doesn't hinge on monitoring tiny bacteria. It depends on the most fundamental aspect of a healthy food system – relationships – biological, personal, ecological and local. Those relationships are on a scale small and, so, familiar.”

Vilsack solicits the campaign in a YouTube video and encourages consumer feedback to help shape the $65 million promotion at the campaign Web site via e-mails or comments via Twitter.

“Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food” poses the question, “Every family needs a farmer. Do you know yours?”

Will the campaign be successful in its goals to create awareness and change? What reforms/modifications to the food system should the USDA consider? Should any agribusinesses be concerned?