Open Collections

UBC Undergraduate Research

Monitoring and evaluation of the Univesity of British Columbia Food System Project Alexander, Amy; Drabble, Jenna; Henry, Molly; Liang, Stephanie; Param, Arash Apr 5, 2013

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
18861-Alexander_A_et_al_SEEDS_2013.pdf [ 1.37MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 18861-1.0108510.json
JSON-LD: 18861-1.0108510-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 18861-1.0108510-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 18861-1.0108510-rdf.json
Turtle: 18861-1.0108510-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 18861-1.0108510-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 18861-1.0108510-source.json
Full Text
18861-1.0108510-fulltext.txt
Citation
18861-1.0108510.ris

Full Text

UBC Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Student Report       Monitoring and Evaluation of the University of British Columbia Food System Project Amy Alexander, Jenna Drabble, Molly Henry, Stephanie Liang, Arash Param  University of British Columbia LFS 450 April 5, 2013           Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report”.  UBC Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Student Report      Monitoring and Evaluation of the University of British Columbia Food System Project Amy Alexander Jenna Drabble Molly Henry Stephanie Liang Arash Param  Scenario Five Group Five  University of British Columbia LFS 450: Land, Food and Community III April 5, 2013   Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report” Monitoring and Evaluation of the University of British Columbia Food System Project  Abstract  Over the last decade, the UBC Food System Project (UBCFSP) has emerged as a community-based action research project which was initiated by the Faculty of Land at Food Systems and the UBC SEEDS program.  The UBCFSP has worked with core representatives in the UBC Food system to assess the sustainability of the system and transition toward a more sustainable system.             The UBCFSP partners called for an improved communication strategy, which would allow them to determine the direction of the project and the needs of the campus community.  In response, this project was developed to monitor and evaluate the UBCFSP, as well as direct future projects.  A focus group was held involving the UBCFSP partners in order to develop a series of priority actions for the project.  Through a survey involving members of the UBC Food System further information was gathered regarding the behaviours, practices, and priorities of the campus community regarding the UBC food system.           Utilizing this data, we have organized and prioritized the actions to compose a draft of the document which will help guide future UBCFSP scenarios.  In conducting this project, we have brought together different sections of the campus community and set the agenda for food sustainability action across UBC.  Introduction  Context statement As one of the largest educational institutions in British Columbia, and a leader in sustainability initiatives, the University of British Columbia (UBC) has the potential to have a significant impact on agricultural sustainability from the local to the global level.  UBC is unique as a university that has maintained a variety of food service providers, including a large in-house sourcing, production, and waste sector.  This has allowed UBC to set standards and targets for the sustainability of their food system.   Over the last decade, the UBC Food System Project (UBCFSP) has emerged as “a collaborative, community-based action research project initiated jointly by the UBC Faculty of Land and Food Systems and the UBC SEEDS Program”, which “works collectively with core representatives in the UBC food system to assess the sustainability of the system, and respond to barriers and opportunities while transitioning toward food system sustainability” (Baker-French 2013, 4).  The UBCFSP has evolved a great deal in recent years as it has seen significant growth in the number and scope of the projects it is associated with.  The project is considered a leader and an example of sustainable food focused projects on campus, and it is expanding its role every year.  To monitor the success of the UBCFSP project and direct future scenarios, our group was given the task of evaluating the UBCFSP and determining priority action areas for the project. Through our research we have determined the priority action areas for the UBC food system as identified by UBC community stakeholders, and have designed a “Food Action Priorities” document that will be used to track and monitor priority initiatives in the campus’ food system.  Working with UBCFSP partners, and including additional input from the general campus community, we have organized and prioritized the actions to compose a draft of the document which will help guide future UBCFSP scenarios.  The plan includes guidelines to help successfully implement the actions, as well as metrics to track the success of the initiatives.  In conducting this project, we have brought together different sections of the campus community and set the agenda for food sustainability action across UBC.            Value assumptions The members of our group come from a number of different fields within Land and Food Systems, as well as Geography.  As a result, we have diverse perspectives and experiences regarding the concept of food system sustainability; however, we all agree that sustainability is important on both a personal and a societal level. This value has influenced the way that we developed the campus-wide survey as well as the information that we hoped to obtain from UBCFSP stakeholders and the broader campus population. For example, the survey reflects our value assumptions as it does not ask survey participants whether or not they think that sustainability is an important goal; instead, this perspective is already implied through the inclusion, and omission, of certain questions.  Our group also began with the assumption that the majority of people on campus care about contributing to a more sustainable food system, or perhaps need more information about the impact of their food behaviours. It is our belief that education is fundamental in changing attitudes and beliefs, so we approached this project with a genuine investment in the outcome and how it might help to encourage food system sustainability on the UBC campus.  UBC Vision for a Utopian Food System The ‘UBCFSP Vision for a Utopian Food System’ represents an idealized sustainable food system that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. The twelve pillars in the Utopian food system act as future goals that we should strive for, and thus are good guiding principles which reflect the values of sustainability.  Therefore, as a group we agree with the concepts and overall theme of the vision. However, a point of concern is that there are no clear concrete steps for achieving these goals. Although the vision is considered a “Utopian” food system, we must have a realistic and tangible plan as we move towards the utopian vision. Some team members felt that in lacking a true realistic goal, it could be illogical for us to divert time and resources to these idealistic pillars when, without a plan we will surely fall short. A specific point of disagreement between our group and the vision statement was with pillar three. Pillar three states that an ideal food system contains “Food [that] is locally grown, produced and processed in support of local people, infrastructure and economies”. Having an absolutely local food system first requires one to define the term local. Does local only mean one’s immediate community, or does it extend to their entire country? The lack of clarity here can lead to different interpretations and possible confusion. Furthermore, some members of the group have noted that a 100% local food system could hurt the import/export industries of both domestic and foreign countries. A change to a completely local food system would be rather drastic and require overwhelming support from the population.  We believe that a society which has successfully implemented the twelve pillars of the UBC Food System to be the ideal representative of a Utopian Food System. The pillars are all based on sustainability, justice and other important aspects. However, our concerns about practicality, feasibility, and implementation are legitimate concerns that would need to be answered.  Methodology   Our project utilized a mixed methods approach which included the implementation of a focus group and a campus-wide survey.  These methods were used in order to produce data which would inform and direct the future of the UBCFSP.   The focus group was held on February 27th, 2013 with a number of UBCFSP stakeholders (n=9) and allowed us to gather information on priority action areas for the UBC food system.  The information gathered was used to finalize the questions for the survey that was implemented on March 11th, 2013 and remained open until March 17th, 2013.  The use of this online survey gave us access to the entire UBC campus, allowing for the collection of perspectives from different faculties on campus. With a substantial response rate (n=1,543) for the survey, we obtained significant quantitative data that gave us a better understanding of the general knowledge, practice, and attitudes regarding the UBC food system.                      Combining the results of the survey and the focus group, we were able to determine the feasibility and desirability of the identified action areas. Together, the focus group and survey provided us with the information required to draft the “Food Action Priorities” document.  Literature Review Prior to the implementation of the focus group and the survey, our group undertook a literature review in order to familiarize ourselves with our chosen methods. Academic databases were consulted using the search terms ‘focus groups’, ‘surveys’ and ‘methodology’, to find articles that detailed various approaches and tools that would inform our work. Important sources of information came from university publications and qualitative methodology journals, which provided us with a strong foundation from which we were able to design our project. The following information highlights our key findings from a review of the literature.     Focus Groups Focus groups can take different forms and are used for a number of different purposes; however, they typically have the goal of answering a research question by drawing on the perspectives of numerous participants who share certain characteristics, such as common backgrounds (Rodriguez et al., 2011).  The discussion that is generated between participants in the focus group can be used by researchers to discover shared perceptions and experiences, which can help to support theories or identify areas for action (Hofmeyer et al., 2007).           The advantages of focus groups relate primarily to the quality of data that may be obtained during a focus group. Breen (2006) identifies focus groups as being particularly advantageous when researchers have the goal of generating new ideas in a social context or want a deeper understanding of particular issues by bringing in multiple perspectives. Additionally, the qualitative data from focus groups can be used to complement and enrich statistical data. Onwuegbuzie (2009) also highlights that focus groups can be used to obtain information from multiple individuals at one time, making them more efficient than individual interviews. Furthermore, participants may feel more comfortable in a group setting and the group interactions tend to produce valuable data.           While focus groups are widely recognized as an effective research tool, they do have disadvantages. One of the most significant drawbacks of focus groups is the tendency for certain participants to dominate the discussion, leading to the marginalization or exclusion of certain voices (Breen, 2006; Peterson et al., 2007).  Hofmeyer et al. (2007) caution that groups with existing power differentials, such as participants from the same workplace, can pose barriers to focus group discussions by making some participants feel pressured to conform or more reluctant to speak honestly within the group.           An abundance of research has been done into strategies that can be used to overcome the challenges presented by focus groups. Focus groups should be small in size but may contain anywhere from four to 12 participants (Breen, 2006; Onwuegbuzie, 2009), and researchers should ensure that all participants have the same expectations when they arrive for the focus group (Breen, 2006). Breen (2006) recommends going over ground rules with participants as well as ensuring that they are comfortable with researchers either taking notes or recording the discussion. To facilitate an organized discussion, Onwuegbuzie advocates for having one moderator to lead the discussion and ask questions, as well as an assistant moderator who will take notes, observe group dynamics and ensure that the environment is comfortable. Peterson et al. (2007) have found that having participants write their ideas on sticky notes, which are then stuck on the wall and organized/prioritized, can be a useful tool in focus groups.  Hofmeyer et al. (2007) also emphasize the importance of encouraging participants to speak to researchers privately following the focus group if there are any ideas that they were unable or unwilling to express in a group context.  Surveys A survey is often the best way to get information and feedback to use in planning and program improvement. The design and implementation of a survey is a systematic process that gathers information on a specific topic by asking individuals questions and then generalizing and analyzing the data (Thayer-Hart et al., 2010). There are numerous different types of surveys, with each one having different advantages and disadvantages. Two of the most prominent and effective distribution methods for surveys are online and in-person surveying. The combination of these two can be used to maximize the effectiveness of the result, although that is still contingent on their implementation (Thayer-Hart et al., 2010). Each distribution method, however, is not without drawbacks. Reliability in online surveying is at risk because the survey may appear differently to different respondents, depending upon browser and computer platform. In-person surveys can work in tandem with online surveys to mitigate some of the previously stated drawbacks (2010). In-person surveys require much more time to gather information, however the quality of the responses usually increases, and it allows us to build a relationship with the surveyed for follow-up questions/surveys down the road if needed (2010).  Data Collection    Focus Group The focus group took place on February 27th, 2013 from 2:30-4:00pm in the Scarf building on the UBC campus. The purpose of the focus group was to bring UBC Food System Project partners together to discuss the priority action areas for the project as well as have them vote on the questions to be included in the campus wide survey. The focus group outline as well as the facilitator schedule is included in Appendix A. All project partners from the various departments affiliated with the Food System Project were invited to attend the focus group by email (n=16). In the week leading up to the focus group, participants were emailed a draft of the survey that included 18 questions which they were asked to review and respond to with any comments or concerns that could be addressed prior to the focus group (questions can be found in Appendix C). Partners who were unable to attend the focus group were asked to submit their votes to the student group via email. The partners who were available to participate in the focus group (n=9), represented the Alma Mater Society (AMS), UBC food services, waste management, the faculty of Land and Food Systems (LFS) and the Social Ecological Economic Development Studies program (SEEDS) (list of participants in Appendix B).  The focus group began with an introduction of the student group as well as the project partners. The first activity was the survey vote, in which the focus group participants were given a copy of the full survey, excluding demographic questions, and asked to highlight the top 10 questions that they believed should be included in the final survey, as well as any other questions or comments that they had about the survey design. Once the vote was completed, the student group collected the surveys so that the results could be tallied. The second activity was a ‘dotmocracy’ exercise that was intended to provide an overview of the action areas that are the highest priorities for UBCFSP partners for each category.  The action areas were listed on a piece of flipchart paper attached to the wall and each participant was given 5 dots to stick beside their top priorities in the categories of production, procurement, preparation and consumption and waste management. The results of this exercise can be viewed in Appendix D. The final activity was the breakout groups, which allowed for a richer discussion among project partners, who were divided into either Production, Procurement, or Waste Management, based on their affiliations with the Food System Project. Each group had a designated facilitator as well as a note taker. During the break out groups, participants were asked to write down each of their priority action areas on separate sticky notes which they then placed on a piece of flipchart paper and grouped according to whether the action was a higher, medium or lower priority. The action areas could come from the existing list that was presented during the dotmocracy exercise, but participants were asked to provide more specific details as well as metrics that could be used to measure each action. The information generated during this activity is included in Appendix E.    Once all of the sticky notes were up on the wall, the facilitators prompted the participants to talk about what they had written down, which invited discussion between participants about each item. The facilitators then made suggestions about how similar action areas might be grouped together and asked for any clarification from participants. At the conclusion of the breakout groups, each facilitator shared with the larger group the ideas that their groups had generated, and participants were invited to add sticky notes to any of the other categories. The flip charts were then collected by the student group to be analyzed for themes that would inform the “Food Action Priorities” document draft. At the conclusion of the focus group, the student group thanked the partners for their participation as well as informed them about the next steps for the survey as well as the “Food Action Priorities” document. Participants were invited to contact the student group if they had any further questions or feedback following the conclusion of the focus group.  Survey The UBCFSP partners called for an improved communication strategy which would allow them to determine the direction of the project and the needs of the campus community. Through this request came a realization that a set of metrics are needed to help the partners and project leaders of UBCFSP to understand the behaviors, practices, and priorities across campus. Thus, the main objective of the survey was to capture information about the campus food system from all participants (students, staff, faculty, families). Planning for the survey began in early February. As a basic blueprint, the survey from the previous year was reviewed in its entirety. The original survey contained 39 questions, but lacked a concise, uniformed objective. As a result, heavy revision was required. With the help of Sophia Baker-French, Josh Edwards, and Liska Richler, we began creating a new survey. By February 23rd the survey was drafted, consisting of 30 questions, with the goal of cutting that in half through the focus group voting. After the UBCFSP partners voted on their top 10 survey questions at the focus group, an analysis of their information reduced the survey to 16 questions (excluding demography questions) that best represent the ideas of the UBCFSP partners, while still keeping the overall theme of the survey and its clarity intact. When the survey questions were finalized, the next step was to actually create the survey.  It was agreed that an online survey would allow us to reach the broadest audience and provide for the easiest data collection and analysis.  We used a survey software program called “Vovici”, which would not violate any of UBC’s legal policies. After creating an initial draft of the actual survey, a pilot test was done to ensure that the survey was finalized and finished before going out to the public. The pilot test was sent out to 14 of the partners, of which only 8 responded. Through the constructive feedback they provided the necessary changes were completed and the survey was finished. The survey was released the morning of Monday, March 11th and ended on the 18th of March, 2013 at 11:59pm. Potential targets of the survey were members of the UBC Point Grey Campus community that purchase and consume food on campus. This includes students, faculty members and staff across different departments and services offered on campus, and residents living on campus. The aimed sample size was 1000. In order to reach the target and to obtain comprehensive representation of the campus community members, various groups of different social backgrounds were contacted, including student societies, unions, departments and faculties, and UBC resident associations. In total, twenty groups were contacted, and the following nine groups disseminated the survey through emailing lists to their associated members: UBC Alma Mater Society (AMS), UBC Graduate Student Society (GSS), CUPE 2950, Centre for Interactive Research on Sustainability, Department of Educational Studies, Department of Marketing and Communications at Sauder School of Business, Faculty of Arts, Faculty of Land and Food System, and the University Neighborhoods Association.  The survey had a completion rate of 66.4%, and the final sample size achieved through the web-based survey was 1,543 responses.  The respondents represent students (n=1359), staff (n=110) and faculty members (n=54), in additions to a variety of respondents who are associated with other groups (n=20), which provided us with a diverse sample population.       Findings  Focus Group The dotmocracy activity allowed the focus group participants to indicate their top priorities in all of the categories included in the “Food Action Priorities” document. The results of the dotmocracy can be viewed in Appendix D.  From this activity, we were provided with a visual representation of which areas are the highest priorities for the UBCFSP partners. In the production category, marketing, education, and promotion was overwhelmingly the top priority. The top three priorities in procurement were marketing, education and promotion; local; and seasonal. Within preparation and consumption, participants voted for marketing, education and promotion; special dietary needs; and healthy snacks as the top priorities. Finally, in the category of waste management, post-consumer waste management including behaviour change programs and infrastructure, as well as post-consumer packaging waste reduction, were the top priorities. The next section of the focus group divided the participants into breakout groups, where the participants discussed specific actions for the areas of Production and Preparation; Waste; and Procurement (the notes for these discussions are found in Appendix E).  Production and Preparation The participants indicated that the highest priority regarding production and preparation is labeling, as they believe that consumers are not able to make informed decisions on any food choice without accurate labels.  They also noted the importance of keeping labeling consistent throughout the campus. People with different dietary requirements, such as gluten and dairy free, as well as those who prefer locally or organically produced items will need to depend on labels for obtaining information. The participants also stated that a chart at each establishment with specific labels should be created.  Another point of discussion was the limited choices for healthy snacks around campus. Partners suggested that homemade snacks with less sugar are usually better choices than processed food items. Moreover, increasing the number of food options that are “heart smart” in the vending machine is another way to improve this issue. The participants also indicated that healthy snack options should expand with different special dietary needs. For example, the AMS is bringing more gluten free food products to one of their establishments, Blue Chip Cookies. Vegetarian and gluten free food products will increase consumers’ food choices. However, the participants expressed concern that expensive pricing would be a barrier for this goal. As a result, they believe that it is important to know what the consumers actually want in order to accomplish this goal successfully.  Waste The top priorities identified by participants in the waste breakout group related to post-consumer waste management, particularly with reference to the need for the diversion of organic waste to the appropriate composting facilities on campus. Participants cited the current problem of contamination of organic waste; that is, the presence of non-compostable items in organic waste. One of the high priorities for campus partners is to achieve zero contamination, which will require more infrastructure as well as a concerted effort to increase education and promotion about composting across campus. A suggested action within this area was to initiate an education campaign in the 2013 fall semester to raise awareness in the campus community. This campaign will coincide with the implementation of standardized waste signage as well as more availability of compost bins, which should help to educate people about how to compost their organic waste. An associated metric for this action included the use of surveys and focus groups in the future to measure the campus community’s behaviour, knowledges and practices in waste management.  In addition, it was suggested that the university continue to implement waste audits, potentially on smaller scales, which could allow for the collection of data on diversion rates for different departments and outlets. Participants also highlighted the need to focus on reducing post-consumer packaging waste. Some actions in this area included eliminating the use of saran wrap and instead using display cases. Similar to the metric for post-consumer organic waste, a tracking system could be implemented to assess the diversion rates of packaging across different locations, indicating which areas on campus need the most improvement. Participants agreed that the Eco To-Go program could be useful in reducing post-consumer packaging waste; however, it needs to become standardized and convenient in order for the program to be effective. To assist with this, a priority action is to increase education and raise awareness about the program on campus.  Comparing the baseline data obtained from our campus wide survey that indicates levels of awareness about the Eco To-Go program to future survey results will be a useful tool in measuring the success of education campaigns.  Procurement This focus group indicated that the majority of the project partners believe that the highest priority in procurement is to educate students on campus about eating local.  They noted a lack of information and resources on campus where students can receive the information on eating locally or seasonally. Identifying the reasons why consumers choose food locally or seasonally, the community partners will be able to promote their products based on consumers’ needs. Project partners also felt that students should understand the motivations behind eating local but not just follow the trend blindly, and suggested that creating magazines, E-books, or cooking demonstrations would be the a good way to provide this information to students. With this information, more consumers would be more likely to choose local and seasonal food without questioning where the food is from or what kind of food is in season. For the AMS in particular, these education campaigns would be a good method for creating communication and dialogue with students. Another priority identified by partners associated with the UBC farm is to increase communication with the campus restaurants.  It was suggested that the Farm should have a clear list from the chefs about the quantity of food they should provide.  In this case, UBC farm will have a clear idea on how much quantity they should produce in order to meet the criteria. This would also allow the Farm to explore what items they could provide to the restaurants that they are not currently. AMS also thinks that a good communications between the campus workers is necessary. AMS indicates that the new SUB will provide lots of opportunities for the students and campus workers. They want to know that if the new SUB can provide the food that the students want. Also, communications between the partners will help them to know what they should provide and where they should get the food resources from.  UBCFSP 2013 Campus Food System Survey The survey looked at UBC Point Grey Campus community members various practices and knowledge of UBC Food System.  This included the use of reusable containers (both drink and food) including use of The Eco–To Go program; plastic recycling practices; composting practices; familiarity with food labels; food preferences including vegan, vegetarian, local, and organic options; the UBC Farm and campus food events.  The survey also included an open-ended question, which allowed participants to give their input as to changes that they would like to see in the UBC food system. The full survey including questions and responses can be found in Appendix F and G.  Practices around Waste Management and Reusable Containers The first section assessed participants’ practices in regarding the use of reusable containers. When asked in the last of purchasing food or drinks on campus, did you bring your own reusable container, 45.8% responded “No, never”, while 39.1% said “Sometimes”. An additional 7.7% said “Yes, every time”, while 7.4% did not buy food or drinks on campus.  For the respondents that used reusable containers, 26.7% said the discount for using them was the reason for using reusable containers. 26.4% of respondents said the discount was not the reason for using the reusable containers, and almost the third did not know that there was a discount offered (29.9%). Regarding their familiarity with UBC’s Eco - To Go program, the majority of respondents (72.7%) have never heard of the program, while 18.9% had heard of the program (but were not members) and 8.4% were members. In terms of waste management practices, when asked if they recycled their plastic food packaging and utensils in the last week, over half of the participants replied yes (52.4%), while 26.7% replied “in some locations”.  8% did not use plastic packaging or utensils and 12.9% did not recycle. Regarding composting practices in the last week, 29% of respondents composted all of their compostable as possible and 35.1% composted in some occasions, while 34.2% said they never composted and 1.8% did not know what composting was. Those respondents that did not recycle or compost expressed that the absence of recycling or compost units around where they were was the main reason for not recycling (42.1%) or composting (67.9%). Other reasons for not recycling were not knowing which recycling bins to which put the items (17%), in a hurry and not having time to sort the items (8.2%), and the items were not recyclable (19.4%). Other reasons for not composting were that they were unsure as to what items could be composted (18.2%), they were in a hurry and did not have time to sort the items (8.5%), and they did not know which bin to put their compostable items (5.4%). Question 8, which was designed to analyze participants’ knowledge on compostable items, showed that all food scraps (87.0%), compostable to go hot beverage lids (81.2%), teabags (78.4%) and napkins (71.9%) were the most known compostable items by the majority of respondents. Further 60.7% of respondents knew that paper bags are compostable and 57.9% knew that bones from meat products were also compostable. Less than the half of respondents knew that coffee stir sticks (45.6%) and chopsticks (41.0%) were compostable.         Vegetarian and Vegan Food This section of the survey was intended to gather information on participants’ satisfaction regarding the selection of vegetarian/vegan food on campus.  While 43.2% of respondents did not know or did not care if the selection was satisfactory, 27.9% responded that it was satisfactory and 28.8% responded not satisfactory. The following question looked to identify primary reasons for choosing vegetarian/vegan options. The most prevalent response was personal health reasons (27%), followed by taste preference (26.4%), environmental reasons (11.5%) and ethical/animal welfare (11.3%). 8.1% of respondents chose vegetarian/vegan options for other reasons.  Knowledge and Education around the UBC Food System Question 11 aimed to determine participants’ familiarity with the following food labels. The majority of respondents were familiar with labels for Organic (82%), Fair Trade (79.3%), and Ocean Wise (69.9%). The half the respondents were familiar with Health Check symbols (56.2%), while a relatively small proportions of respondents were familiar with Buy BC (26.3%) and Campus labels (such as LOV) (4.1%). Familiarity with local food (local food being defined as being produce within a 150 mile radius of UBC) on campus also seemed to be small: the majority (57.8%) indicated that “they did not know which products were local,” while (21.1%) said yes, and (21.1%) said no. In For those respondents that were familiar with local food, when asked how many local items they bought in the last week, the majority (85.1%) responded one to three items, while those purchased four to six items were 8% of respondents and more than six items were 6.9%.  Regarding UBC Farm and campus food related events; question 16 found that only 35% of participants had bought products directly from the UBC Farm last year.  In terms of events such as Meet Your Maker, the Blueberry Festival, the Apple Festival, FarmAde, and Fair Trade Week, about the quarter of respondents have participated in one of these events (24.9%). Others were either have heard but not attended (42.6%) or have never heard before (32.5%). For those who had heard about one or more events, the most common way to hear about these events was through friends, followed by emails from UBC, bulletin boards, UBC farm email list, in-class announcements, and a variety of other UBC related websites. When asked what additional information participants would like to know about the UBC Food system in question 20, over half of participants (56.6%) mentioned additional information about the food they purchase on campus.  Almost a third (31.8%) of respondents indicated that they would like nutritional information, while 18.1% said they would like to know where the product was produced. Other 12.1% also indicated that they would like to know if the packaging is compostable.  Improvements for the UBC Food System Question 22 asked participants to identify what element of the UBC food system they felt they would most likely to change. The majority (449) of responses were related to food options available on campus, and primarily identified the need for more food options. 223 respondents asked for more affordable food, 131 for more healthy food, 86 for more variety in general, 59 for more locally sourced food and 57 for more vegetarian options available on campus. Second most responses received are regarding waste management practices on campus, including composting and recycling. As for composting, 41 respondents requested for increased accessibility to composting, and 22 respondents requested for more information about proper composting on campus. In terms of recycling, 23 respondents asked for more accessibility to recycling bins and 13 respondents requested for more information on recycling. 28 respondents also expressed their desire for overall/complete shift towards compostable/recyclable containers and utensils.    Demographics The final section of questions was demographics questions.  Question 23 indicated that the majority of respondents (36.5%) were students who had been at UBC for 3 or more years, followed by UBC students with 1-3 years at UBC (30.2%), new students to UBC (21.4%), staff (7.1%), faculty (3.5%) and other. The respondent pool was varied, with slightly over a third associated with the Faculty of Arts (30.3%), while another significant portion were associated with the Faculty of Science (20.4%).  The majority of participants were commuters, with only 26.4% living on campus.    Discussion        The data gathered through the dotmocracy, focus group, and survey indicated that the top priority action within production relates to marketing, education and promotion for the UBC farm. Campus partners would like to see projects which raise awareness about activities on the farm and the need for this is represented by the lower percentages of survey respondents who attended UBC food-related events or bought produce directly from the farm. The survey results suggest that the best ways to raise awareness among students about campus activities and events is by word of mouth, through UBC email networks and postings on bulletin boards.  The need for education, marketing and promotion is also a prominent theme in the area of procurement. UBC food system project partners emphasized the need for more awareness among the student body about the importance of eating locally and in season. The survey results suggest that the campus community not only needs, but is also interested in obtaining, this kind of information. The majority of respondents were not aware of whether or not the products they were purchasing were local. This is an issue that could be addressed by focusing on developing a consistent labeling system for locally produced goods as well as incorporating information about eating locally into education campaigns. The need for more coordination between the UBC farm and food services was also highlighted in the focus group, suggesting that there are more opportunities for collaboration across campus in order to increase the level of procurement from the farm and get more locally produced products into campus establishments.  The themes in the area of preparation and consumption centre around access to information and the affordability/quality of food provided on campus. The survey results demonstrate that there is a desire among the UBC community to access more information about the food on campus, particularly with reference to nutrition and sourcing. UBC food system project partners appear to have an understanding of this need, given their interest in developing more a more consistent labelling system for the food offered on campus. The campus community has also suggested that the cost of food on campus is too high for the lack of variety and quality that is provided. UBCFSP partners addressed the need to increase the availability of healthy, homemade snacks on campus but expressed concerns about affordability for the campus community. This suggests that further analysis is needed to determine how much people are prepared to pay for higher quality, healthier food.  A major theme that emerged in the area of waste management was the need to work on managing post-consumer organic and packaging waste. In the dotmocracy and the focus group, the need for increased infrastructure and education was a strongly identified need. This is further supported by the survey results, which demonstrate that much of the campus community does not find it convenient to recycle or compost and a significant number of people do not know which items can be placed in recycling and compost bins. The fact that almost half of the campus community does not use reusable containers for food and drinks and that the majority of respondents had never heard of the Eco To-Go program indicates a significant need for education and marketing in this area. Improved, consistent signage as well as an increased number of recycling and compost bins could significantly increase organic waste diversion as well as reducing contamination. As well, strategic marketing around the Eco To-Go program would likely reduce the level of post-consumer packaging waste.   Stakeholder Recommendations   The first tangible outcome of our project is the “Food Actions Priorities” document, which outlines and prioritizes UBC food system related actions to be developed into projects over the next several years.  As the document was designed in conjunction with the UBCFSP coordinator, the next step of the project is for this draft of the document to be revised and edited by the UBCFSP coordinator.  However, as the actions outlined in the project apply to a variety of the UBCFSP stakeholders (such as the AMS, UBC Food Services, and SEEDS), revision of the document should be carried out through further focus groups with the partners during the Summer 2013.  In these revisions, partners should evaluate if the actions outlined in the document are achievable, the metrics/indicators are appropriate, and the actions are assigned to the appropriate partners.  A final version of the document should be completed prior to Autumn 2013, as it will be used to direct projects for LFS 450 starting January, 2014.   In addition to informing the “Food Action Priorities” document, the survey was designed to evaluate the campus community’s knowledge, practices, and attitudes regarding the UBC food system. Because of this, the survey can be used in future projects to track changes in the community from year to year.  We recommend that this is done each year, as the survey provides extremely valuable information on the UBC food system, indicating the positive and negative elements of the system from the consumers perspective, and allows community members to express their own ideas for improvements.  It also provides information which illustrates the success of sustainability initiatives on campus and indicates where progress can be made. We recommend that the the survey is implemented through SEEDS, and by updated through a LFS 450 project every 3 years, to ensure the questions remain relevant.  However, the survey will need to be edited prior to the next distribution, based on the evaluation feedback in the next section.  In addition, the UBCFSP, perhaps in coordination with UBC Planning, could consider implementing a separate survey which focuses on other elements of the food system, such as distribution of food locations, the    Future LFS 450 projects can be extracted from the “Food Action Priorities” document.  In addition to this, a future group could also develop a method for delivering the results of the UBC food system survey to the campus community, as respondents expressed an interest in learning about the results of the survey.  Evaluation  Focus Group The focus group was considered to be a success by the members of the organizing group. The participants generated data that was invaluable for the completion of the final survey as well as the Action Priorities Document. The inclusion of key stakeholders in activities concerning the Food System Project was agreed to be an essential aspect of the evaluation and monitoring process. The breakout groups were particularly useful for generating detailed information around the priority action areas and obtaining the first-hand knowledge of project partners. Following the focus group, the organizers determined that providing an example for the participants at the beginning of the break out groups might have helped to produce more specific metrics. It was thought that perhaps not all participants understood what was being asked of them and therefore not all of the ideas that were generated included how they might be measured and tracked over time. Future focus groups using a similar model should consider providing a generic example of a priority action area and an associated metric that would give participants a clear picture of how to present their ideas. Participants were sent a 5 question evaluation survey following the focus group which asked them about the time, location, content and overall organization of the focus group. Those who responded to the survey (n=4) indicated a high level of satisfaction with the focus group, including the convenience of the time and location, the length, activities and facilitation. One participant made a recommendation that the break out groups should include an opportunity for rotating, so that participants would have the ability to contribute their ideas to the other categories and ensure that all voices were represented in each area. While this was initially a consideration in the planning phase of the focus group, we determined that it would be too challenging to incorporate into the hour and a half time frame, but perhaps is a useful recommendation for other focus groups using this model.  UBCFSP Survey The most significant issue that arose was the structure of the survey, including in particular the design of two questions.  Question 10 asked students to rank 2 answers, yet a number of respondents (n=14) indicated that they did not identify with one or more of the answers.  Question 21 had a similar problem, where participants were asked to rank 6 answers, but nine respondents indicated that they did not have a preference for any of the answers.  Though this numbers are small relative to the total number of respondents, it is possible that the actual number is much higher.  As a result, the data for these two questions could be considered compromised.  In addition, the wording of all questions to ensure they are not leading respondents towards specific answers, and do not omit potential responses.  One way to counter this is to allow for an “Other” option where participants can write their own response, though it is important to keep in mind that this makes data analysis more complex.                A variety of respondents also used the survey feedback section to provide additional information on their expectations of the UBC food system.  This included this included issues such as the variety and affordability of food on campus, as well as the quality and health factor of the food.  The distribution of food locations and the hours of operation were also mentioned. Though this information was often beyond the scope of our survey, it indicates that campus community members have strong opinions on and expectation of the UBC food system, and are eager to provide feedback and improvement suggestions.      Overall, the feedback results regarding our survey were positive with respondents expressing their enthusiasm for our project and the sustainability aspect of the UBC food system.  Numerous respondents also indicated that they would like to be updated on the results of the survey.  Reflections on the Project  Focus Group In the stage of organizing the focus group, we felt that we were able to successfully collaborate to organize the focus group. In this process, Sophia Baker-French, UBC Food System Project Coordinator, and Liska Richer, SEEDS Program Coordinator, played an invaluable role in orchestrating the focus group. It was challenging to work together with a diverse group, including staff, faculty members and students, to find common ground in terms of focus and areas for future action; however, this provided us with an opportunity to share a broad spectrum of knowledge and ideas that help guide the content of UBC Food Survey and the drafting of Food Action Plan. Since many of focus group members offered experienced knowledge, it gave us much to think about, in terms of how to bring a gap that exists between the needs and desires of general population and vision and goals put forth by a relatively few experts.  Survey It was challenging to organize the content of the survey such that a relatively small number of questions can provide a broad spectrum of information we were looking for. In terms of implementation, we felt we had a very successful distribution of the survey and a response rate. Both of these success can be attributed to a number of groups and associations, including the Alma Mater Society, Graduate Student Society and a variety of faculty and staff associations.   Overall, while group work is often a challenging endeavour, our team has been successful in combining our interests, experiences and opinions to produce a well-rounded result. We feel that the work was distributed amongst the team members in a balanced manner and everyone contributed towards the project.   Media Release  As members of the Land and Food Systems 450 class, Molly Henry, Amy Alexander, Jenna Drabble, Aras Param and Stephanie Liang were presented with the task of monitoring and evaluating the success of the UBC Food System Project. With the help of UBC community members and the results of a campus wide survey, the group identified a variety of action areas for improving the sustainability of the campus food system which have been organized into a “Food Action Priorities” document.  This document, to be released later this summer, will be used to track and monitor priority initiatives in the campus’ food system and will direct future projects for the UBCFSP.  With a total of over 1,500 responses in a week, the campus wide food survey highlighted the enthusiasm and strong opinions held by the campus community regarding the sustainability of our food system.  By linking community partners’ goals and the results of the survey our research has shown that there are mutual issues that both UBC partners and UBC consumers are concerned about, including areas such as education and promotion, affordability of food, and the labeling of food.  In conducting this project, we have brought together different sections of the campus community, setting the agenda for food sustainability action across UBC.       Bibliography  Baker-French, Sophia. (2012). The UBC Food System Project Summary Report 2012. http://sustain.ubc.ca/sites/sustain.ubc.ca/files/seedslibrary/UBC%20Food%20system%20project%20summary%20report%202012.pdf  Breen, R. L. (2006). A Practical Guide to Focus-Group Research. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 30(3), 463–475.  Hofmeyer, A. T., & Scott, C. M. (2007). Moral Geography of Focus Groups with Participants Who Have Preexisting Relationships in the Workplace International Journal of Qualitative Methods 6(2), 69–79.  Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2009). A Qualitative Framework for Collecting and Analyzing Data in Focus Group Research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(3), 1–21.  Peterson, E. R., Barron, K. A., Irving, E., Brown, G., Dixon, H., & Haigh, M. (2007). How to Get Focus Groups Talking: New Ideas That Will Stick. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 6(3),140–144.  Rodriguez, K. L., Schwartz, J. L., & Lahman, M. K. E. (2011). Culturally Responsive Focus Groups: Reframing the Research Experience to Focus on Participants. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 10(4), 400–417.  Thayer-Hart, N., Dykema, J., Elver, K., Schaeffer, N., Stevenson, J. (2010). Survey Fundamentals. Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin. http://oqi.wisc.edu/resourcelibrary/uploads/resources/Survey_Guide.pdf [Accessed January 20th, 2013].    Appendix Outline   Appendix A – Focus Group Outline   Appendix B – Focus Group Participants  Appendix C – Focus Group Survey Pre-edit   Appendix D – Focus Group Dotmocracy Results  Appendix E – Focus Group Breakout Discussion Summary  Appendix F – Final Survey   Appendix G – Survey Data                            A) Focus Group Outline  Below is the outline used by our group for the Focus Group. The focus group was composed of UBCFSP partners who were invited for us to better understand their areas of priorities. Through the focus group we were able to record their areas of priority and modify the survey to reflect their top areas.   Focus Group Outline  Breakdown:  Total time: 1.5 hours - 5 min: Introduction to the scenario and survey  - 15 min: Voting on the survey questions - 5 min: Introduction to action priorities document  - 50 min: Break out groups organized by themes - 15 min: Conclusion  1. Introduction: (Molly, Jenna, Stephanie, Arash)  Our names are Molly, Jenna, Stephanie and Arash, and we are a group of students from LFS 450.  Our scenario is to draft a “Food Action Priorities” document for the UBCFSP using information gathered from you today, as well as conduct a survey to gauge the knowledge and actions of the UBC community regarding the campus food system.  We aim for the survey to reach 1,000 UBC students, as well as potentially other UBC campus community members, and the results will be used to measure and track trends in the campus food system.  We have already sent you a draft of this survey, but it is currently too long, so one of the activities we will be doing today is to vote on the top 10 questions.  In determining the final survey questions, we are looking for questions that are measureable over time, and would provide the UBC Food System Project and the Committee organizations represented at this meeting valuable information about the campus’ food system.  We will give you the next 10 minutes to review the questions, which you have hopefully already had a chance to consider, and choose the top 15 questions, which you feel, would provide the most useful information to the UBSFSP.  We will review your feedback and create a final survey of approximately 20 questions, which will be distributed to the campus community in early March. Please feel free to include questions and comments for us, as well as new and reworded survey questions on these sheets.   2. Voting: (Jenna and Arash) - Send out (approximately) 20 questions the week prior to the focus group with information about the survey  “In determining the final survey questions, we are looking for questions that are measurable over time, and would provide the UBC Food System Project and the Committee organizations valuable information about the campus’ food system.  If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact us prior to or after the focus group at molly_mh@hotmail.com.  If necessary, there will also be a short period for questions prior to the vote.”  - Hand out a sheet on the day of the focus group with the questions and they can check their top 10. Allow five minutes for any questions. - Collect the survey.  3. Intro to Action Priorities: (Sophia and Liska) - A document aimed at prioritizing activities on campus and informing the choice of food based scenarios into the future.  - The document will also help the UBCFSP Coordinator in process and outcome evaluation of the project. This will help in telling the story of the project.  4. Focus groups: (Molly, Jenna, Arash, Stephanie, Sophia, Josh) - Before dividing, explain how the focus groups will operate (5 minutes max.) - Divide participants into 3 pre-determined groups around the subcategories based on the participants strongest affiliations: Waste Management and Packaging, Production/Procurement & Preparation/Consumption. o Each group has two students: one facilitator and one notetaker. The responsibility of the facilitator is to instruct participants on what to do and answer any questions, as well as guide a discussion among participants about what they wrote down. The responsibility of the notetaker is to write down everything that is said, which will be analyzed for themes after the conclusion of the focus group.   Focus group discussion  Have a ‘suggestion’ list of action areas. Focus group participants can add more specific actions within each category.  Eg. locally processed: focus on snack offerings in vending machines.  Have participants write their priority action areas for the next year and associated metrics or suggested tracking methods (either their own or from the list) on sticky notes.   Have them collectively place their notes on a flipchart which will have the table pictured below:           Action Priorities  Higher priority   Medium priority   Lower priority     Discuss why they picked those priorities and ask for any clarifications needed   Probes:  Specific metrics, indicators, targets, and actions they would like to see   Tools to address/accomplish the priorities  Group similar actions together  Explore agreements/disagreements about the higher priorities  5. Conclusion   Facilitators take turns sharing the ideas generated by their break-out groups with the larger group. Participants are given the opportunity to circulate around the room and add their ideas to the other categories.   The student group thanks the participants for their time and explains the next steps of their project, including when the survey will be implemented, as well as how the data collected from the survey and focus group will help to inform the Food Action Priorities document. Participants are invited to follow up with the student group if they have any questions or comments related to the focus group or the overall project.                            B) Focus Group Participants  This list outlines the UBCFSP partners participated in the focus group on February 27th, 2013, along with the class Instructor, Sophia Baker-French, and the TA, Josh Edwards.  Release of information forms have been signed by all participants whose names will be made public.   Liska Richer – UBC SEEDS – Coordinator  Nancy Toogood – AMS  – Food and Beverage Manager  Collyn Chan – AMS – SUB Sustainability Coordinator  Uli Laue – AMS – Director of Operations Andrew Riseman – UBC LFS – Associate Professor  Steve Golob – UBC – Head Chef of Vanier Residence  Josh McWilliams –  UBC – Chef of Point Grill restaurant  Veronik Campbell – UBC Farms – Academic Assistant                            C) Focus Group Survey Pre-Edit  This is a copy of the survey that the UBCFSP members were asked to vote on during the focus group. The results were then analyzed and used in the creation of the finalized survey.   Hello UBCFSP committee members,  As part of the focus group that is being conducted tomorrow, February 27th, we will be asking for your input on a UBC food systems survey that will be distributed to members of the UBC community.   The goal of this survey will be to gather information on community members’ knowledge, practices, and awareness regarding the UBC food system.  This information will be used to provide the UBCFSP with information to help direct future projects, and will also provide baseline data on the UBC community which may be tracked through future surveys.  In preparation for the focus group, we would appreciate it if you could review the following questions, which may be included in the survey.  At the focus group tomorrow, we will ask you to vote on the 10 questions which you believe would provide the most valuable information to the UBCFSP and that you would like to see included in the final survey.  Following the voting process, we will tally the votes, and use this information to draft the final version of the survey for distribution to the campus community.  Please note that the final survey will also include a variety of demographics related questions not listed here.  Please feel free to email any questions regarding the survey to molly_mh@hotmail.com .  We greatly appreciate your time and look forward to seeing you tomorrow! Sincerely,  Molly, Jenna, Arash, Stephanie, and Amy  UBC FSP 2013 Campus Food System Survey 1. In the last week, when purchasing drinks on campus, did you bring your own re-usable drink container?  a) Yes, every time I purchased a drink on campus b) No, never c) Sometimes (One or more times, but not every time.) d) N/A, I did not drink anything at UBC 2. In the last week, when purchasing food on campus, did you bring your own container or dish instead of using a disposable take-away container? a) Yes, every time I purchased food on campus b) No, never c) Sometimes (One or more times, but not every time) d) N/A, I did not purchase food on campus 3. Do any food establishments on campus offer a discount for bringing your own reusable food or drink container?  4. If yes, is the discount a factor in your decision to bring your own container? a) Yes b) No   a) Yes b) No c) N/A 5. The Eco-to-Go program provides reusable to-go containers (as well as cleaning of those containers) to campus community members. Which of the following applies to you? a) I have never heard of the Eco-to-Go program. b) I have heard of Eco-to-go, but I am not a member. c) I am a member of the Eco-to-go program. 6. Do you feel there is a sufficient selection of vegetarian/vegan menu options on campus? a) Yes b) No c) Do not know/ Do not care 7. Why do you choose vegetarian and/or vegan menu options?   a) Ethical/animal welfare reasons b) Environmental reasons c) Personal health reasons d) Taste preference e) Other reasons not mentioned here (please specify) f) I never choose vegetarian/vegan dishes  8. Do you find it convenient to recycle plastic products on the UBC campus?  a) Yes b) No c) In some locations  9. When you do not recycle plastic utensils (forks, spoons and knives), what is the main reason?  a) They are not recyclable  b) I do not know where to recycle them c) It is not convenient to recycle them d) N/A – I do not use plastic cutlery on campus 10. Do you find it convenient to compost on the UBC campus?  a) Yes b) No c) In some locations d) I don’t know what composting is  11. When you do not compost compostable items, what is the main reason?   a) I was not sure what items could be composted b) There were no compost units where I was at the time (not convenient) c) I did not know which bin to put the compostable items into d) I was in a hurry and did not have time to sort my waste items. e) Other (please specify) f) _______________________________ 12. Which of the following items can be placed in the green compost bins found on the UBC campus?   (Check all that you believe apply) a) Metal utensils (forks, knives, spoons) b) Napkins  c) Bones from meat products  d) Paper bags  e) Coffee stir sticks  f) Chopsticks g) To go cup lids h) All food scraps i) To go hot beverage cups  j) Teabags k) Plastic utensils (forks, knives, spoons) 13. Indicate if the following statement is true or false: It does not matter too much in which bin (landfill, recycling or compost) I put my waste items because the content of the bins will be sorted.  a) True b) False  14. Which of the following labels are you familiar with?     a) Buy BC b) Organic c) Health Check symbols d) Campus labels (such as LOV) e) Oceanwise f) Fair Trade  15. In the last week, did you purchase any Fair Trade products on campus?              If yes, answer question 15b  15b. Which of the following Fair Trade     food products did you purchase on campus?  a) Yes b) No  a) Coffee b) Tea c) Bananas d) Chocolate e) Ice tea f) Other ____________ 16. Campus food providers define local as food produced within a 150-mile radius of UBC.  In the last week, did you purchase local foods on campus?              If yes, answer question 16b.  16b. How often did you purchase locally produced food on campus?  a) Yes b) No c) I did not know which products were local    a) 1-3 times b) 4-6 times c) More than 6 times 17. In the last week, did you purchase organic foods on campus?              If yes, answer question 17b  17b. How often did you purchase organic products on campus?  a) Yes b) No c) I did not know which products were organic  a) 1-3 times b) 4-6 times c) More than 6 times  18. Last year, did you purchase any vegetables, fruits or other food products directly from the UBC farm or at a campus food outlet? a) Yes b) No                              D) Focus Group Dotmocracy Results  The purpose of this activity was to get a picture of the action areas for each category that was the highest priority for UBCFSP partners. The action areas were listed on a piece of flipchart paper attached to the wall and each participant was given 5 dots to stick beside their top priorities in the categories of production, procurement, preparation and consumption and waste management.    Production  - Campus gardens - Campus farm (1) - Edible Landscapes (1) - -In House Food Production - Marketing, education and promotion (6) - Food system strategies/guidelines  (1)  Procurement  - Fair Trade - Organic - Local (4) - UBC Farm and other on-campus production - Ocean Wise - Humane treatment of animals - Locally processed  - Seasonal (5) - Take-out ware  - Marketing, education and promotion (6) - Food system strategies/guidelines Prep and Consumption  - In-house preparation - Culturally appropriate foods - Healthy foods and snacks (2) - Special dietary needs (gluten, lactose, etc.) (2) - Vegetarian and vegan - Marketing, education and promotion (4) - Food system strategies/guidelines Waste Management - Pre-consumer organic  waste management - Pre-consumer recycling management - Pre-consumer packaging reduction - Post-consumer packaging waste reduction (4) - Post-consumer Recycling programs - Post-consumer organic waste management (infrastructure – i.e. bins, bin location, quantity, etc. ) (3) - Post-consumer waste management   (Behaviour change programs, incentive programs (6) - Post-consumer Landfill management Waste program - Marketing, education and promotion - Food system strategies/guidelines E) Focus Group Breakout Discussion Summary  The following outlines the discussions which were held during the breakout group portion of the February 27th focus group.  The chart outlines the High, Medium and Low priorities for each of the three discussions: Production; Waste; and Procurement.  These actions were used to inform the “Food Action Priorities” document.  Production  High Priority  1. Food preparation   Labels   Marketing/Ed/Promotion  o Labeling (consistent throughout campus) o Eco labeling and POS information 2 Healthy Snacks   Percentage of vending machines options that are Heart Smart  Numbers of new products added each year   Is there a market for this? o What research supports this?  3. Contract production with UBC Farm  Percentage increase from year to year   Number of Crops/lbs contracted  Diversity to include annual product (first and secondary degree process)   New crop testing/evaluation through discussion with chefs  Number of new crops grown/tested  4.Production   Number of existing campus garden   One additional garden each year  6. Food signage   Standardized food labels with local, campus made, UBC Farm, organic, veg, vegan  Measure with campus survey o Yes/No exists? o Audit to monitor use  7. Healthy options   Low processed/fresh/wholegrain options at more units with high visibility  Medium Priority 1. Connect “Healthiest Campus initiative/strategy” 2. Introducing New Snacks   e.g. salsa, olives, guac, hummus + other healthy dips  3. Food Prep  Less Packaged snacks 4. Percentage of healthy breakfast snack  Percentage of healthy vending machine snacks  Percentage of healthy night snacks  o Onsite muffins  5. Determine what is a healthy snack 6. Special Dietary needs   Percentage of vegetarian food options available   Percentage of vegan food options available   Percentage of gluten free food options available       Dietary Considerations   Vegan/vegetarian/gluten free  Where have we seen the increases across campus  o I.e. Pie R veg pizza increases 30% increase   Success of gluten free baked goods @ blue chip  7.Education/Marketing   AMS is a student-driven, non-profit  o Education/community engagement is our priority   New SUB opportunities/facilities (rooftop garden/community kitchen) to create programming education on food (local, seasonal, gardening, security, etc.)   Labels on business  Low Priority 1. Edible landscape   Ideally all on campus landscaping is edible   Can it be achievable   How much could it supply to food services on campus   How can it be implemented   2. Edible landscapes   Show food production on campus as a way to increase awareness   Number of garden producing food on campus   Waste   High Priority  1. Missing   Clean up of landscapes from waste   Energy recovery in commercial kitchen   Resource and communication  2. Production   Marketing/education procurement   Education on goods/ ingredients pre/consumption  Education educate fact/info  3. Waste signaled  Standardized across campus   Measure using rate of contamination    Diversion of organics o Compost 4. Reusable containers   Increase advertising & availability of eco to go  Increase ease of use of to-go containers   Compost survey  Audit of new systems  5. Post –consumer food waste management  How to effectively capture & separate food, waste for composting or other sustainable options  o For all major orientation points on campus   Kitchen, public etc.  Metrics  o Food waste diversion (on composting participation rates) for diff. groups   Student dining halls, OFC, kitchen   6. Post consumer waste management   How to best divert and eliminate waste   Develop a rating style for departments/outlet to be measured /label on   Get commitment from all participants on annual goals   How much to be divided   Voluntary time for issued goals.  7. Education/Promotion   Build deeper and more effective knowledge amount UBC students, staff faculty of how to sustainably manage our food waste + packaging – or how to properly use the available in FNA structure Metric: assess literacy 8.Waste  Post consumer composting      Make available campus wide   Find containers which truly compost Medium Priority 1. Post-Consumer Packaging waste reduction   Very similar to post-cons. Food waste management  o No Saran Wrap – use display cases   Metric: Packaging diversion rates for different groups/locations/facilities  2.Waste Reducing vending machine   Identify products  o I.E. collapsible chopsticks  o Beeswax saran wrap  Low Priority   Procurement   High Priority  1. Marketing/ Education/Promotion  What do students know about the advantages of eating according to the season and eating locally?  How to better focus promotion & education initiative?  Need to improve across campus  o Food magazine o Facebook o “E-book” with ‘what’s happening on campus’ o More promotions events (i.e. Demo’s meet your maker) 2. Local  All outlets are more local – no exceptions  o Retail, restaurant, catering o Apples, B.C. etc. together  3. Seasonal   All outlets involvement  o If out of season, restaurant, retail, catering, casual dining follows o No exceptions (i.e. VIP events) o If out of season don’t use 4. Communication of what is local and seasonal, FT Medium Priority 1. Local & seasonal food   AMS sustainability is looking to include metrics regarding procurement in our lighter footprint strategy   Procurement regarding our businesses to reduce our ecological footprint                              Working with campus partners  New SUB  lots of opportunity (palate, programming in faculties to bring more awareness for food procurement for business & students 2. UBC farm production   How to make sure there is good communication between chefs and the farm, so the farm produces wanted products in amounts quantities  3. Promotion/Marketing Education   How to ensure the consumer knows where food comes from? Could we go ahead with “UBC farm “ logo on dishes or “eat local” logo  Low Priority  F) Final Survey  This is a copy of the final survey that was created and distributed. The copy below was then transferred onto a program called Vovici. This is the final edited copy of the survey, after going through rigorous revision. This revision included the dotmocracy, opinions of UBCFSP partners, and our group analysis.   BC FSP 2013 Campus Food System Survey  Thank you for taking about 5 minutes to complete this survey. As someone who eats on the UBC campus, you are an important part of the UBC food system. Your responses will provide indispensable information on the sustainability of the UBC food system and how food oriented sustainability initiatives can be improved.  Your response will be kept confidential. No identifying information will be shared. The compiled survey results, not including any identifying information, will be shared with project partners and may be made publically available. By responding to this survey, you are giving informed consent for the outlined use of the information provided. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact:  This survey will take about 5 minutes to complete. The survey questions will ask you about meals, snacks, drinks and other foods purchased for immediate consumption on the UBC campus. Please indicate the response(s) that applies/apply to you most closely.  Reusable Containers  1)  In the last week, when purchasing food or drinks on campus, did you bring your own re-usable container? a) Yes, every time I purchased food or drinks on campus b) No, never c) Sometimes (One or more times, but not every time) d) N/A, I did not buy food/drinks at UBC 2) If you use a reusable food or a) Yes    The UBC Food System Project (UBCFSP) is a collaborative, community-based action research project that aims to improve the sustainability of the UBC food system. Some project partners include the UBC Farm, UBC Food Services, the AMS Food and Beverage Department and the Faculty of Land and Food Systems.  http://www.sustain.ubc.ca/campus-initiatives/food/ubc-food-system-project . drink container, is the discount for bringing your own container a factor in your decision to use the container? b) No c) I did not know that there was a discount offered. d) I never use reusable food/drink containers. 3) The Eco-to-Go program provides reusable to-go food containers to campus community members as well as cleaning and storage of the containers between uses. Which of the following best applies to you? a) I have never heard of the Eco-to-Go program. b) I have heard of Eco-to-go, but I am not a member. c) I am a member of the Eco-to-go program. Recycling & Waste  4) Do you recycle plastic food packaging and utensils (e.g., clear plastic “clamshell” containers and plastic forks) on the UBC campus? a) Yes b) No c) In some locations d) N/A (I don’t use plastic food packaging and utensils) 5) When you do not recycle plastic food packaging and utensils, what is the main reason? (Check all that apply) a) They are not recyclable b) I do not know which recycling bin to put the items into c) There were no recycling bins where I was (not convenient) d) I am in a hurry and did not have time to sort my waste items. e) N/A – I do not use plastic cutlery on campus f) Other (please specify)_____________________ 6) In the last week, did you compost on the UBC campus? a) Yes, all of my compostables   b) No, never   c) In some locations   d) I don’t know what composting is   7) When you do not compost compostable items, what is the main reason? (Check all that apply) a) I am not sure what items could be composted b) There are no compost units where I am at the time (not convenient) c) I do not know which bin to put the compostable items into d) I am in a hurry and did not have time to sort my waste items. e) Other (please specify) _______________________________ 8) Which of the following items can be placed in the green compost bins found on the UBC campus? (Check all that you believe apply) a) Metal utensils (forks, knives, spoons) b) Napkins c) Bones from meat products d) Paper bags e) Coffee stir sticks f) Chopsticks g) To go cup lids h) All food scraps i) To go hot beverage cups j) Teabags k) Plastic utensils (forks, knives, spoons) Labelling & Food Preferences  9) Do you feel there is a sufficient selection of vegetarian/vegan menu options on campus? a) Yes b) No c) Do not know/Do not care 10) Why do you choose vegetarian and/or vegan menu options? Choose 2 options a) Ethical/animal welfare reasons b) Environmental reasons c) Personal health reasons d) Taste preference e) Other reasons not mentioned here (please specify) f) I never choose vegetarian/vegan dishes 11) Which of the following labels are you familiar with? (Choose all that apply) a) Buy BC b) Organic c) Health Check symbols d) Campus labels (such as LOV) e) Ocean Wise f) Fair Trade 12) Campus food providers define local as food produced within a 150-mile radius of UBC.  In the last week, did you purchase local foods on campus?   13) If you answered ‘yes’to the last question, in the last week, how many food items (eg: pizza or cookie) did you purchase with one or more local ingredients on campus? a) Yes b) No c) I did not know which products were local        a) 1-3 items b) 4-6 items c) More than 6 items d) I don’t know 14) In the last week, did you purchase organic foods on campus?  15) If you answered ‘yes’ to the last week, how many food items (eg: pizza or cookie) did you purchase with one or more organic ingredients on campus? a) Yes b) No c) I did not know which products were organic  a) 1-3 times b) 4-6 times c) More than 6 times 16) Last year, did you purchase any vegetables, fruits or other food products directly from the UBC farm or at a campus food outlet? a) Yes b) No Campus Events  17) Each year, the UBC food community puts on campus food events such as Meet Your Maker, the Blueberry Festival, the Apple Festival, FarmAde, and Fair Trade Week. Which of the following applies to you?       a) I have never heard of these events b) I have heard of one or more of these events, but I have never attended one. c) I have heard of one or more of these events and I have attended. 18) How did you hear about these events? (Check all that apply) a) Through friends b) Class announcement c) Bulletin board d) Emails from UBC e) UBC events website f) AMS website g) Sustain website h) UBC Bookstore website i) Other _____________________ Information Availability  19) Is there information you would like to know about the food you purchase on campus that is not currently available to you? a) Yes b) No 20) If your answer to the last question was yes, what information would you like to know about the food you purchase on campus? (Choose top 2 options): (Nutrition information (such as ingredients, nutrition facts, whole grains, no added sugar, etc.); a) Location of where product was grown or produced (food miles, food origin); b) Where product was prepared (i.e., campus made); c) Cultural information (eg. Kosher, Halal, etc.); d) If the product is organic; e) If the product is Fair Trade; f) If the product is Ocean Wise; g) Labels for vegan/vegetarian foods; h) If the packaging is compostable/recyclable 21) What would be the best ways to learn more about the food you purchase at UBC? (Check up to two options) __ Campus Food Guide __ UBC’s Sustain webpage __ Campus food product labels __ Campus events or presentations __ Ubyssey Newspaper  __ Brochure, table tent, or display located where you purchase or eat your food  __ Web sites (for example, food provider websites) Other: _____________ 22) What is the one thing you would most like to change about the UBC food system?       Open-ended question Demographics  23) With regard to the UBC food system, which most closely applies to you? a) New student ( 0-1 year(s) at UBC) b) Student with some UBC experience (1-3 year(s) at UBC) c) Experienced student (3 or more years at UBC) d) Staff e) Faculty      f) Other: ____________________ 24) With which faculty or college are you associated?      Choose one from a drop down menu 25) Do you live on campus? a) Yes b) No 26) Do you have any comments or feedback about this survey?       Open-ended question  Thank you for your participation! If you would like a chance to win one of three $50 Visa gift cards,  please fill-in the following:  Name:________________________________ Phone number: _________________________ Email Address:_________________________         G) Survey Data:  Below is a breakdown of the survey results downloaded from the survey program, Vovici. A link of the survey was sent to UBC Food System participants through an email. The data is shown in a pie chart to provide a visual breakdown of the answers. The open-ended question answers were not included in the data due to the sheer volume.           

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.18861.1-0108510/manifest

Comment

Related Items