The apple core is a myth

One third, or 1.3 billion tons of food produced for human consumption is wasted every year.
In Canada alone, $27 billion worth of edible food is thrown out annually.
Turns out that by throwing away your apple core, you've been an unwilling contributor to this troubling state of affairs.
Why?
Because, according to James Hamblin, the apple core doesn't exist!
That's right. It's a myth.

It's time we reevaluate... everything.

What companies opposed or supported Prop 37 (GMO labelling)

The Cornucopia Institute put together a great visual of the corporations and grocers that didn't support Proposition 37 (are against labelling GMOs), and those that did.
Which companies will you support?

Ottawa gets its own Food Action Plan. Have your say

Toronto's Health-Focused Food Strategy

Two years ago ‘Cultivating Food Connections: Toward a Healthy and Sustainable Food System for Toronto’ was published. The report was the next stage of the Toronto Food Strategy, developed in large part by the Toronto Food Policy Council, and proposed a new vision for the food system; a health-focused one that would become part of the city’s policies and programs.

This health-focused food system is one that:

•Fosters food-friendly neighbourhoods
•Promotes social justice
•Supports nutrition and disease prevention
•Builds strong communities
•Creates local, diverse and green economic development
•Protects and sustains the environment
•Empowers people with food skills and information
•Nourishes links between city and countryside


Here are the differences between the existing food system and the one proposed in the report:

Rather than compete with city priorities and resources, the new proposed food system uses
food activities to help meet Toronto’s ongoing goals.

The report proposed six priority areas for action:
1. Support Food Friendly Neighbourhoods
2. Make Food a Centerpiece of Toronto’s New Green Economy
3. Eliminate Hunger in Toronto
4. Connect City and Countryside through Food
5. Empower Residents with Food Skills and Information
6. Urge Federal and Provincial Governments to Establish
Health-Focused Food Policies

Ottawa’s Food Action Plan: Get involved!





Toronto is just one of the forward-thinking cities addressing food issues, joining New York, San Francisco, the United Kingdom, and now Ottawa.

Food for All is a 2-year project led by Just Food that aims to develop a community-driven food action plan that involves:

-Food insecurity and health
-Physical access to food (incl.: food retail environments, food deserts, transportation, etc.)
-Food access in schools
-Food production in urban areas
-Food production in rural areas

The Action Plan has 14 components, listed below, that you can read and comment on... but hurry! We only have until Sunday April 22nd to provide online feedback:

Toward a Breastfeeding Friendly Ottawa
Healthy School Food Environments in Ottawa
Income and the Cost of Eating
Community Programming for Food Security, Food Education & Awareness
Access to Food: Planning and Zoning
OC Transpo and Food Access
Edible Landscapes
Community Gardening and Urban Agriculture on NCC Lands
Healthy Corner Stores
Community Gardening on Private Land and City of Ottawa Land
Prevention, Identification and Remediation of Soil Contamination
Hens in Urban Areas
Bees in Urban Areas
A Food Policy Council for Ottawa

Slacktivism and social change

For the past few months my brain has been on a bit of a vacation... that’s what it feels like anyways. I’m drawn to chick-lits over books on current affairs, romantic comedies over documentaries, and knitting over blogging. When I do blog, they’re not always my own thoughts. I post video clips that interest me, links to online petitions for causes I believe in, or re-write other people’s point of views I agree with... without necessarily looking critically into the issues or organizations.

I’m really not proud of this but, on some level, I guess I feel like I’m raising awareness or adding my voice to an issue I think is relevant.

Slacktivism, defined by Wikipedia, describes "feel-good" measures, in support of an issue or social cause, that have little or no practical effect other than to make the person doing it feel satisfaction... The underlying assumption being promoted by the term is that these low cost efforts substitute for more

substantive actions rather than supplementing them.

This Wiki page includes criticism and defenses of slacktivism. One of the critics they cite is Malcolm Gladwell. In his New Yorker article, Gladwell argues that “activism that challenges the status quo—that attacks deeply rooted problems—is not for the faint of heart.” This “high-risk activism”, he says, is often built around strong personal ties.

For example, the volunteers for the 1964 Mississippi Freedom Summer Project – three of which were killed and many others beaten or arrested - who stayed with the project despite the risks also had friends that stayed. The Greensboro Four who staged the sit-in at the “whites only” lunch counter of Woolworth’s in 1960 were all close friends. In contrast, he states that social media is based on weak ties and rarely leads to high-risk activism. He writes that these tools are great to get people involved when there’s very little for them to do (like “liking” a page or signing a petition). “Facebook activism succeeds not by motivating people to make a real sacrifice but by motivating them to do the things that people do when they are not motivated enough to make a real sacrifice”.

Gladwell also contends that to successfully take on a powerful, organized establishment, activist efforts need to be organized around a hierarchical organization with rules and procedures, and controlled by a single central authority. Social media is not hierarchical but rather builds networks bound by loose ties, where decisions are made through consensus. “The instruments of social media are well suited to making the existing social order more efficient. They are not a natural enemy of the status quo”.

Because there is no clear authority, Gladwell states that networks have difficulty reaching consensus and setting goals. “They can’t think strategically; they are chronically prone to conflict and error. How do you make difficult choices about tactics or strategy or philosophical direction when everyone has an equal say?”

In contrast, social activist Grace Lee Boggs advises that as we look forward to the social changes that she sees are upon us, we need to rethink the concept of leaders. She stated that leader implies power, and we must embrace the idea that we are the leaders we've been looking for.

Was she foreshadowing the Occupy movement? This movement defines itself as “a people-powered movement” that uses “a non-binding consensus based collective decision making tool known as a ‘people's assembly’”. The movement has been lambasted by many for not having a clear agenda (although, according to Naomi Wolf, this might have been part of a coordinated smear campaign against the movement organized at a very high national level. She reported that they in fact have a clear agenda).

Wayne Roberts - Canadian food policy analyst and writer- defended the Occupy movement which, in his opinion, is based on the same principles as the city-based food movement:

In the interconnected and webbed world created by the Internet, platform-providing, rather than content-promoting, organizations have come to the fore...As social movements catch up, community-based power will gravitate toward organizations featuring platforms, portals and places, rather than specific content—which is why the people who lament the lack of content in various occupations are out of it. Platforms are about opening discussions, not closing them and about providing options not mutually exclusive options.

He goes on to point out that the majority of grassroots food organizations have been platform-based, rather than content-specific. Organizations don’t focus on specific pre-defined issues, but “serve as forums for discussion, and hosts of initiatives and experiments.”

A few days ago, the organization Invisible Children released their latest campaign video calling for the arrest of Joseph Kony – head of the Ugandan Lord’s Resistance Army and most wanted man on the list of the International Criminal Court for his atrocious war crimes- by the end of 2012. The much-watched video is a lesson on how to use social media to motivate young people to ‘action’, using a great narrative, cool music and, maybe most importantly, targeting celebrities (and policy makers). The video ends with their call to ‘action’:

1. Sign the pledge to show your support
2. Get the bracelet and the action kit (posters, stickers)
3. Sign up to donate a few dollars a month and join their army for peace
4. Above all, share their movie.

No high-risk activism here.

While nobody is really questioning Invisible Children’s motives or that Kony should answer for his crimes, the organization has been highly criticized (click here, here or here) for a number of reasons including, but not limited to: its misuse of money (the majority of which seems to have been used for its own marketing), its support for the corrupt Ugandan army- despite the fact that Kony is currently in the Democratic Republic of Congo, its oversimplification of the situation in Uganda, its neo-colonialist ‘solution’ of calling for the ‘White Americans’ to save the Africans.

Ugandan Journalist Rosebell Kagumire wrote:

The film is void of any means like peace efforts that have gone on and it simplifies the war to Joseph Kony — a mad evil man. This war was bigger than Joseph Kony and those who will end it won’t be Americans. It’s a complex war that requires African governments of Uganda, South Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo and Central

African Republic to work together to pacify the region... All in all it’s a very imperialistic film trying to touch sentiments of those who can ‘save’ Africa i.e. Hollywood and the West.

I am glad for social media that we are able to watch this kind of work and we react. This kind of condescending attitude towards Africa and its problems shouldn’t be given space in the 21st century.

For her full video commentary, click here.

For Invisible Children's response to critiques, click here.

In an interview, Grant Oysten, 19-year old political science student and one of the first to post his criticism of KONY 2012, stated that he’s alarmed that people took up the cause so readily without looking at the issue more critically. He worries that people will feel like they know everything about the issue after having seen the video. The purpose of his post, he says, was to present arguments against the message propagated by Invisible Children, in order to start a more balanced dialogue.

He writes:

Is awareness good? Yes. But these problems are highly complex, not one-dimensional and, frankly, aren’t of the nature that can be solved by postering, film-making and changing your Facebook profile picture, as hard as that is to swallow. Giving your money and public support to Invisible Children so they can spend it on supporting ill-advised violent intervention and movie #12 isn’t helping. Do I have a better answer? No, I don’t, but that doesn’t mean that you should support KONY 2012 just because it’s something. Something isn’t always better than nothing. Sometimes it’s worse.

Is that true? Is something not always better than nothing?

Canadian journalist at the CBC, Evan Solomon, questions the KONY 2012 backlash, asking if this is a case of the perfect getting in the way of the good. He states that KONY 2012 is not policy, but a polemic (a form of dispute, wherein the main efforts of the disputing parties are aimed at establishing the superiority of their own points of view regarding an issue) and that the mainstream media should have the courage to admit that none of us would be talking about Kony without this video. “Whats wrong with Justin Bieber telling kids to stop a killer?,” he asks.

He contends that critics are missing the bigger political implication: “can foreign policy be driven by social media and youth activism? Is it smart politics or dumbed-down do-goodism?”

***

My take home message comes from social activist Grace Lee Boggs on what it takes for change to happen:

“It takes a whole lot of things. It takes people doing things. It takes people talking about things. It takes dialogue. It takes a change in the way we think”.

Michael Pollan's Food Rules, animated

Source

Occupy the Food System

In December, Willie Nelson, President of Farm Aid, wrote an amazing piece for the Huffington Post. In it, he points out how concentrated the agricultural market is- a very small number of firms control the majority of the market, threatening competition and resulting in market abuses:

93% of soybeans and 80% of corn grown in the United States are under the control of Monsanto; four companies control up to 90% of the global trade in grain; 3 companies process more than 70% of beef in the U.S.; 4 companies dominate close to 60 % of the pork and chicken markets.

Nelson gives example of the power these large corporations have, overturning GIPSA in the US - proposed fair market contract rules under Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration that would have made it illegal for packers and slaughter houses to unfairly discriminate against independent farmers - and using $5.6 million in lobbying costs to overturn US Department of Agriculture rules that would have changed the standards for school lunches to reduce the amounts of starch and sodium and increase the amounts of fresh fruits and vegetables.

He ends:
Despite all they're up against, family farmers persevere. Each and every day they work to sustain a better alternative -- an agricultural system that guarantees farmers a fair living, strengthens our communities, protects our natural resources and delivers good food for all. Nothing is more important than the food we eat and the family farmers who grow it. Corporate control of our food system has led to the loss of millions of family farmers, destruction of our soil, pollution of our water and health epidemics of obesity and diabetes.

We simply can't afford it. Our food system belongs in the hands of many family farmers, not under the control of a handful of corporations.

"We are farmers, we grow food for the people"

In March 2011, the Public Patent Foundation filed the landmark lawsuit, Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association (OSGATA) et al v. Monsanto on behalf of family farmers, seed businesses and farming organizations to challenge Monsanto’s patents on genetically modified (GMO) seeds and protect farmers from the biotech seed and chemical giant’s abusive patent infringement lawsuits.

At the heart of the lawsuit is the threat that farmers face due to genetic trespass as a result of Monsanto’s GMO seed and the aggressive enforcement of their alleged patent rights.




I stand with Farmers vs. Monsanto



After hearing the arguments, Judge Naomi Buckwald stated that on March 31st she will hand down her decision on whether the lawsuit will move forward to trial.

For more information and how to get involved, visit Food Democracy Now!

"Back to the Start"

Willie Nelson teamed up with Chipotle to release this ad against factory farming and for sustainable agriculture. Download the song from itunes- proceeds go to the Chipotle Cultivate Foundation.

Where does our food come from?

Eat Real Eat Local



Thanks Nikki!

Food and Love

Link

Top culinary destinations

According to Keith Bellows, Editor in Chief of National Geographic Traveler magazine,
“A meal is more than an intake of calories; it’s an exercise in cultural immersion. What people eat, when they eat, where and how they source the food, what gastronomic rituals they observe – all offer telling insights to a place and its people.”

It's that time of year to start dreaming about the next vacation destination.
Here are Bellows' top 5 culinary destinations.
What's yours?
(I'm a little partial to #5 myself...)

Seafood for Thought: Part 2 (End of the Line)

The End of the Line is the first major feature documentary film on the impact of overfishing on our oceans... and it looks really good!

Scientists predict that if we continue fishing as we are now, we will see the end of most seafood by 2048!

Filmed over two years, The End of the Line follows investigative reporter Charles Clover as he reveals "the dark underbelly and hidden costs of putting seafood on the table at home or in restaurants". It's filmed across the world – from the Straits of Gibraltar to the coasts of Senegal and Alaska to the Tokyo fish market, and features top scientists, indigenous fishermen, politicians, celebrity restaurateurs, and former tuna farmer turned whistleblower, Roberto Mielgo.

"The End of the Line is a wake-up call to the world".

For more information about the movie and other ways you can take action, click here.

The End of the Line is also a book (by Charles Clover) which I've started... will let you know what I think!





For Part 1 of Seafood for Thought, click here!

Seafood for Thought: Part 1 (How to find sustainable seafood)

Overfishing is the greatest threat to our oceans today. About 130 million tons of seafood is harvested every year- that's double of what it was in the 1970s! 90% of all large, predatory fish (like tuna and cod) are already gone from the world's oceans, and
nearly 75% of the world's fisheries are fished to capacity, or overfished... a situation that’s only getting worse, putting at risk the over 120 million people worldwide who depend on fish for their incomes....

The fishing gear used to catch seafood is also destroying ocean ecosystems and catches non-target, often endangered, species like sea turtles, seabirds and marine mammals.

There’s also the issue of illegal fishing that puts further pressure on stocks, and on the food security of coastal communities.

According to Greenpeace, we’re taking 2.5 times more out of the sea than what is sustainable, and we need to ease up on the volume we consume. That said, lots of people like seafood and it’s recommended as a great source of that beneficial omega 3 fatty acid –DHA...

So what’s an environmentally-conscious fish lover to do?

Our seafood choices have the power to make this situation worse, or improve it. And to improve it, we need to start consuming seafood in a sustainable manner.

Sustainable seafood can be defined as species that are caught or farmed in a way that ensures the long-term health and stability of that species, as well as the greater marine ecosystem.

There are a few great programs out there that can help us get sustainable seafood on our plates.

Greenpeace’s Redlist
The Redlist is a list of seafood that are the most damaging and in need of immediate attention – a list of "what not to eat" and "what not to sell".
For example, in Canada, Atlantic Salmon (farmed), Atlantic Cod, Atlantic Haddock, and Atlantic sea scallops are on the Redlist.
Seafood markets and consumer preferences for seafood differ from country to country, so there are different Greenpeace Seafood Red Lists for different countries- make sure to look at your national Greenpeace website- click here.

SeaChoice (Canada)
SeaChoice is a Canadian sustainable seafood program, formed by five Canadian environmental groups including the David Suzuki Foundation. Their goal is to help Canadians take an active role in supporting sustainable fisheries and aquaculture.
They provide great seafood (and sushi) guides for your wallet with traffic-light scorecards- "Best Choices", "Some Concerns", and seafood you should "Avoid".
Click here to print out your own copy of the guides!

Seafood Watch (Monterey Bay Aquarium)
The Seafood Watch program helps American consumers and businesses make choices for healthy oceans. They offer handy pocket guides with a list of recommendation using the traffic-light system- seafood items that are "Best Choices," "Good Alternatives," and that should be "Avoided."
Their pocket guides are available for six regions of the U.S.: West Coast, Southwest, Central U.S., Southeast, Northeast and Hawaii and they also also have national and sushi versions of the pocket guides. All of their guides are updated every six months. Click here to print your own guide.

Ocean Wise (Vancouver Aquarium, Canada)
The Vancouver Aquarium is a non-profit association dedicated to effecting the conservation of aquatic life. Its Ocean Wise program works directly with restaurants, markets, food services and suppliers ensuring that they have the most current scientific information regarding seafood, and helping them make ocean-friendly buying decisions.
The Ocean Wise logo can be found in participating restaurants, markets and food-service outlets throughout Canada- currently there are over 300 participating members- all committed to providing ocean friendly alternatives to their customers. Click here to find out what restaurants are Ocean Wise in your area.

Not from Canada or the US?
Seafood Watch includes a list of organizations by country offering their own localized recommendations- click here.

Starved for Attention

A friend of mine, Dr. Umang Sharma, brought this great campaign to my attention... thanks Umang!

This year, an astonishing 195 million children worldwide will suffer from the effects of malnutrition; 90% of them live in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.
Malnutrition contributes to at least 1/3 of the 8 million annual deaths of children under 5 years of age.

According to the international medical humanitarian organization Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), without essential nutrients 9 children will continue to die every minute of causes related to malnutrition.

MSF, along with the VII Photo agency, launched “Starved for Attention” in June, a global multimedia campaign presenting a unique and new perspective of childhood malnutrition.
Through a seven-part mini-documentary series that seamlessly blends photography and video, the campaign aims to rewrite the story of malnutrition.

Photojournalists traveled to malnutrition “hotspots” around the world - including India, Bangladesh, Mexico, Burkina Faso, Djibouti, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the United States - to shed light on the underlying causes of the malnutrition crisis and innovative approaches to combat this condition.

Currently, international donors - in particularly those making the largest humanitarian contributions to food assistance projects - are currently providing substandard foods like cereal-based fortified flours. While these foods can relieve hunger, they don't meet basic nutritional standards for infants and young children, a reality highlighted by the fact that none of these cereals are used in nutrition programs in the donors' own countries.

To end this double standard, you can sign the petition “Overcoming Childhood Malnutrition: The Time to Act is Now” on starvedforattention.org.

The time to act is now.

The Garden

I saw 'The Garden', a documentary, last year in class- which was somewhat awkward because it made me cry quite a bit.

It is such a sad, but important story. A definite must see.

The film explores and exposes the fault lines in American society and raises crucial and challenging questions about liberty, equality, and justice for the poorest and most vulnerable among us.

Click Here for more information.

Beyond Food Miles

The New York Times recently ran an Op-Ed piece that almost seems to disparage the local food movement. Contributor Stephen Budiansky states:

"...the local food movement now threatens to devolve into another one of those self-indulgent — and self-defeating — do-gooder dogmas. Arbitrary rules, without any real scientific basis, are repeated as gospel by “locavores,” celebrity chefs and mainstream environmental organizations. Words like “sustainability” and “food-miles” are thrown around without any clear understanding of the larger picture of energy and land use".

Not long ago I wrote a blog post entitled 'Do Locavores Have it Wrong?' in which I reviewed James McWilliams' main points from his book 'Just Food: Where locavores get it wrong and how we can truly eat responsibly'. These points are pretty much the same as Budiansky's- mainly that we have to look beyond food miles to move towards a sustainable food system.

I agree.

I just don't agree with statements like that of the Center for Consumer Freedom: "Someone should tell the “locavores,” who encourage people to buy food from the closest sources possible - like farmers markets and community supported agriculture (CSA) programs (that buying something grown halfway around the world can be more eco-friendly than buying something grown just a county or two away)".

Local Food Systems (LFS) have been found to be effective means to achieve food sovereignty- the right of people to local, healthy and ecological food production, realized in equitable conditions that respect the rights to decent working conditions and incomes- CSAs and Farmer's Markets are examples of such LFSs. That said, it is now understood that to achieve this vision, LFSs must go beyond food miles (See Figure 1.0).








A Few Facts:

A globalized food system

-Under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, 37 industrialized countries, including Canada, agreed to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 5.2% from 1990 levels. As of 2007, Canada's emissions were 26% above 1990 levels, and continue to rise, making this country one of the top 10 global polluters.

-Transportation accounts for 25% of Canada’s GHG emissions, more than any other sector of the economy. About 30-40% of road cargo moves food (a UK stat- data lacking for Canada)

-Between 1968 and 1998, world food trade increased by 184%, with the majority of food trade occurring between countries of similar environments, resulting in the same food items merely being swapped. For example, in 2005, Ontario exported $69 Million, and imported $17 Million, in fresh tomatoes.

-Rather than selling to local retailers, farmers sell into a complex system wherein food is usually shipped hundreds of kilometres to centralized processing plants, only to potentially be sold in a supermarket close to the product’s point of origin.

-In the US and Canada, food typically travels between 2,500 and 4,000 km from farm to plate, up 25% since 1980.

- Using imported versus local ingredients generates four times the GHG emissions; one study found that replacing imports of 58 common food items with local counterparts would be the equivalent to taking 16,191 cars off the road.

Local Food Systems (LFS)

In response to this globalized food sourcing system, concerns about the environments, and a decreased confidence in the agri-food industry (due to outbreaks, GMOs, etc.), there has been a surge of LFS initiatives- Canada is home to over 2300, the top four of which are:

31.3%- Restaurant and chef initiatives serving local food
24.9%- Farmers’ markets generating $1.03 billion in sales
15.3%- Retail grocery stores sourcing local foods
12.8%- Community Supported Agriculture (CSA)


More Facts (some of these points are mentioned in Budiansky's article).

-It is true that foods traveling a shorter distance will not necessarily have less of an environmental impact; mode of transportation, size of vehicle and economies of scale (how much can be moved at once) must be considered.

For example, air transportation produces the most GHG emissions, followed by road (small-sized vehicle), road (truck), rail, and water.

That means that food transported by water could travel seven times farther than food transported by road (truck) and release less GHG
OR
a unit of food delivered by tractor trailer from California to Ontario may require less fuel than if delivered within a 100-mile radius in a small pick-up truck.

Studies show that food systems that integrate bulk deliveries of sustainable produce are more environmentally friendly than options such as farmers’ markets, requiring a greater number of small-sized vehicles (See figure 1.0 above).

-It is also true that a focus on food miles ignores energy use at other stages in the food system.

Transportation accounts for 11% of energy use, but agricultural production and processing account for 83%- this includes things like water use, harvesting techniques, type of fuel used etc. That's why it was found that it's more energy efficient to ship grass-fed lamb raised in New Zealand’s by boat to Britain than transporting local grain-fed amb within Britain, or to import tomatoes from Spain to the UK than to produce them in heated greenhouses in the UK off-season.

What Does this all Mean?

-We need to continue to support our local farmers by buying from farmer's markets and CSAs.

Despite the growth of LFS initiatives, farm incomes have continued to fall, dropping 24% between 1988 and 2002. The average Ontario farmer earns just over $8,000 a year, while production costs continue to rise.

Farmers can realize a 40-80% increase in return by marketing through LFSs by capturing more of the value added normally captured by agri-business.

Money spent locally has also been shown to boost local economy- one study found that a 20% increase in local food purchasing would generate $500M worth of economic activity, enough to stimulate 10,000 new jobs.

-Driving more than 10km (6 miles) to a farmer's market is probably not the most environmentally-friendly activity. We need to ask our local grocers to source locally-grown products.

What's Happening?

Because of this kind of discussion, researchers from the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture have proposed the use of food “eco-labels” on foods that will give consumers more information than just point of production, but include information on both food miles and CO2 emissions.

These labels are appearing on supermarket and menu items in the UK (labels also include compliance to animal welfare standards), Australia, Japan, Taiwan, and Sweden.

The Swedish National Food Administration is even developing dietary guidelines that give equal weight to climate and health! They expect a 20-50% reduction in the nation’s emissions from food production as a result.

While critics point out that eco-labelling alone will not fight climate change, it will encourage the food industry and farmers to adopt carbon-reducing strategies.

In Toronto, there's a Non-Governmental Organization called Local Food Plus (LFP) that is doing amazing work. They have developed certification criteria that go beyond local to include sustainable production methods, soil and water conservation, worker welfare, humane animal handling, protection of biodiversity, and on-farm energy use.

They work with farmers, encouraging sustainable farming practices, and organizations & grocery stores, encouraging them to source locally. Because of them, the University of Toronto- the largest Canadian University- became the first university on the continent to formally commit to purchasing local sustainable food for their cafeterias and residences.

Great things are happening...!

Seeds of Hope: We are the leaders we've been looking for

In the clip below, Grace Lee Boggs, author and activist, talks about change.

While she states that our planet is currently facing a serious time of uncertainty, she sees hope, and a movement emerging where, instead of people complaining about things, they're doing something about it.

She gives the example of Will Allen, former basketball player and current urban farmer, community organizer, writer and activist. Allen puchased a 2-acre piece of land to grow food for a community. According to Boggs, growing our own food provides a way for young people to relate to the earth, their elders, and time, in a different way.

In answer to the question often posed, "How do I make a difference?", Boggs says that it should be something local and something real- however small. Even starting a dialogue is doing something.

When asked if there are leaders we can look to, Boggs states that we have to rethink the concept of leaders; leader implies power.
Instead, we need to embrace the idea that we are the leaders we've been looking for.

Inspiring!

Time for Ronald to Retire!

If you're against the use of a clown character to encourage kids, and their parents, to eat fast food, sign the petition to Retire Ronald McDonald... it only takes a few seconds... and it's about time.

This initiative comes from Corporate Accountability International.

Click here to visit the website to sign the petition and learn more.

Click here to send a letter to McDonald's CEO, James Skinner, via the Center for Science in the Public Interest.

(I did both!)

Here's part of the Press Release:

After close to fifty years of hawking fatty food directly to kids, Ronald McDonald is being urged to retire.

The findings come amid growing recognition of the fast food industry’s primary role in driving the epidemic of childhood obesity and diet-related disease.

“This clown is no friend to our children or their health,” said Senior Organizer Deborah Lapidus of Corporate Accountability International. “No icon has ever been more effective in hooking kids on a harmful product. Kids have become more obese and less healthy on his watch. He’s a deep-fried Joe Camel for the 21st Century. He deserves a break, and so do our kids.”

For poll results, an analysis of Ronald McDonald’s pervasive presence on the American landscape, a background on the psychology behind children’s marketing and more visit www.RetireRonald.org.

Food Freedom Day

This past Friday (February 12th) was Food Freedom Day in Canada- the day that the average Canadian will have earned enough money to buy his/her groceries... for the whole year!

Can you imagine? It takes only 43 days!
Food Freedom Day fell on the same day last year.

Unfortunately, according to the Canadian Federation of Agriculture (CFA), the gap between the price of food and the amount of money farmers receive has been increasing. One CFA-funded study found that farmers get only 27% of money spent on groceries by an average family.

In the States, Americans spend less than any other nation on food- 9.5% of their annual income. Interestingly, they spend the most on health care- 16% of their annual income.

Sure, food is cheap... but at what cost to farmers, the environment, and our health?
If we can afford it, maybe we should be spending more money on good quality, fresh, organic, local foods...

Happy Valentine's Day!

Do Locavores Have it Wrong?

In 2007, locavore was the New Oxford American Dictionary's word of the Year. I remember first hearing the word in 2008.

The movement has since really taken off, helped by wonderful book written by two Canadians- Alisa Smith and James MacKinnon-The 100-Mile Diet. Click here for a previous blog about the book.

Food miles is the cornerstone of the locavore movement: the distance food travels from the farm to our plate.
It's estimated that the the average food we eat has travelled 1500-3000 miles... oftentimes more than that.

What are the Benefits of Eating Locally?

According to its many advocates, eating local foods (which hasn't really been defined yet, but within a 100-mile radius is what the 100-mile diet is all about) not only minimizes the fossil fuels used to bring the food to us, but results in food that tastes better, is better for our health, better for local economies. It also allows us to reconnect with the seasons and with the people producing our food.

Is Local Food Healthier?

Kind of.
In a recent publication of its Current Issues (Jan 2010), Dietitians of Canada's concluded that there is no evidence that supports that local foods are healthier...
but
Limited evidence does show that certain foods (like broccoli, kale, green beans, red peppers, tomatoes, apricots and peaches) lose nutrients when they travel long distances. Preliminary studies indicate that local grass-fed meat may also be more nutritious.

Eat Locally: Not the Answer?!

Lots of people also choose to eat local because it's a way to stand up to our current "messed-up" food system : "local is a way to counter the global". There's the well-known expression: "voting with your fork". While I'm not a locavore, I've become very conscious of where my food comes from... and haven't eaten a banana or citrus fruit in months!

According to James McWilliams, author of Just Food: Where locavores get it wrong and how we can truly eat responsibly, I'm not alone.
Since 1990, there has been a 4-fold increase in farmer's markets with more and more people wanting to know where their food's coming from.... which is great!

BUT

According to McWilliams, focusing on eating locally is a form of denial. Not only, is it not globally sustainable, it's flawed to think that food miles is what's bad for the environment, and simplifying the issue into "distance is bad, local is good" prevents us from finding real solutions.



Life-Cycle Assessment: Food's Carbon Footprint

McWilliams talks about the Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA)- a measurement that goes beyond food-miles and looks at the carbon-footprint of food- at all the stages. It factors in things like water usage, waste, harvesting techniques, pesticide use, climate, storage, etc.

LCA tells us that the the production and processing of food actually uses the most fossil fuels (45%)... transportation uses the least (11%)!

What Does This Mean?

According to the LCA, and McWilliams, if you live in th UK, it is 4 times more energy-efficient to buy grass-fed lamb imported from New Zealand than to buy local grain-fed lamb (this point was corroborated by Michael Pollan in an interview )!

An LCA of the Danish fishing industry found that changing fishing method could reduce fuel-use tremendously- using a net hanging vertically in the water (a seine) used 15 times less energy than using a trawl (a weighted net dragged across the ocean floor). So, it would make more sense to ask about fishing method rather than food miles....

A great paper written by Pierre Desrochers and Hiroko Shimuzu- We Have No Bananas- agrees with McWilliams. They point out that importing produce from areas where they grow naturally emits less greenhouse gases than growing them locally in greenhouses or cold-storing them to extend their shelf-life.

Their argument is summarized in the following statement:

"...food miles are, at best, a marketing fad that frequently and severely distorts the environmental impacts of agricultural production. At worst, food miles constitute a dangerous distraction from the very real and serious issues that affect energy consumption and the environmental impact of modern food production and the affordability of food".

Hmmm. Interesting...

Obesity is a Global Threat

Source