Open Collections

UBC Undergraduate Research

The UBC Farm : essential to the sustainability of the food sytem at the University of British Columbia Cesar, Laureen; Fung, Amy; Hewett, Craig; Kruger, Toby; Lo, Belinda; Poon, Kit; Zemanova, Zuzana 2004-03-31

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

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
18861-Cesar_L_et_al_SEEDS_2004.pdf [ 990.75kB ]
Metadata
JSON: 18861-1.0108666.json
JSON-LD: 18861-1.0108666-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 18861-1.0108666-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 18861-1.0108666-rdf.json
Turtle: 18861-1.0108666-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 18861-1.0108666-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 18861-1.0108666-source.json
Full Text
18861-1.0108666-fulltext.txt
Citation
18861-1.0108666.ris

Full Text

UBC Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Student Report       The Ubc Farm:  Essential To The Sustainability  Of The Food System At  The University Of British Columbia   Laureen Cesar, Amy Fung, Craig Hewett, Toby Kruger, Belinda Lo, Kit Poon, Zuzana Zemanova  University of British Columbia AGSC 450 March 31, 2004           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”.   1      THE UBC FARM:  ESSENTIAL TO THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THE FOOD SYSTEM AT THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA                March 31, 2004 AGSC 450/001  Group 14  Lau reen Ces ar Amy Fung          Craig Hewett  Toby Kru g er                                           Beli nd a Lo   Kit Poon Zuzana Zeman o v a              2  TABLE OF CONTENTS   ABSTRACT    iv   INTRODUCTION    1  Problems of the University of British Columbia Food System (UBCFS)   1  Value Assumptions: Weak Anthropocentrism    2  MODEL TO ASSES THE SUSTAINBILITY OF THE UBCFS AND THE UBC FARM 3 INSTRUMENTS OF DATA COLLECTION       4  UBC FARM SUSTAINABILITY WILL HELP TO ACHIEVE OVERALL UBCFS SUSTAINABILITY           5   Social Sustainability    5   Economic Sustainability    5   Ecological Sustainability    5   Social-Economic Sustainability    6   Social-Ecological Sustainability    6   Economic-Ecological Sustainability    6   IDENTIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION OF THE UBC FARM    7       Guiding Values           7  Physical Description    7  Current Production Methods    8  Sales and Marketing    9  RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE UBC OFFICE OF CAMPUS SUSTAINBILITY  10   Secure Contracts with On-Campus Food Providers    10   Cater Directly to Students    12   Begin Interfaculty Involvement    12   Have Winter Production    13   Forge Relationships with Agricultural Businesses in the Community   14   Take Advantage of Major Sources of Revenue    14   FINAL REFLECTIONS    14  REFERENCES   16            3  APPENDICES  A: Indicators of Sustainability and their Methods of Measurement   17   in the UBCFS and the UBC Farm  B: Methods to Measure Each indicator in the UBCFS   18  1.  Social Sustainability   18 2.  Economic Sustainability   19 3.  Ecological Sustainability   20  4.  Social-Economic Sustainability   21 5.  Social-Ecological Sustainability   22  6.  Economic-Ecological Sustainability   23  C: Methods to Measure Each Indicator at the UBC Farm              24   1.  Social Sustainability   24  2.  Economic Sustainability     25  3.  Ecological Sustainability     26  4.  Social-Economic Sustainability    26 5.  Social-Ecological Sustainability   27  6.  Economic-Ecological Sustainability   28  D: Instruments of Data Collection         29   1.  Social Sustainability   29  2.  Economic Sustainability     29  3.  Ecological Sustainability     30  4.  Social-Economic Sustainability    30 5.  Social-Ecological Sustainability   31  6.  Economic-Ecological Sustainability   31  E: SWOT Analysis of UBC Farm                  33   F: Documents Pertaining to the UBC Farm                34   UBC Market Garden 2002-2003 Sales   34  Sales by Month   34  Sales by Type   35  Sales by Item   35  Map of UBC Farm                   36   Legend                    36             4     ABSTRACT   This paper is an int e gr ati ve document aim ed at i mproving the sust ainabili t y of th e food s ystem at UBC. Mor e spe cificall y, thi s paper looks at t he role th e UBC Farm can pl a y in improvin g the sust ainabili t y of th e gr e ater UBC food s ystem i n which it pla ys a p art. In ord er to do thi s, we have identified a core set of values to guide our investi gati on, developed a model, created methods of data coll ecti on, and finall y, made recomm end ati ons to the UBC office of Campus Sustainabil it y. Our recomm endati ons emph a siz e the connecti ons bet ween the ecolo gical, so c ial, and economi c components of the food s ystem at UBC, and give eq ual weight to each component. Furthermo re, thi s do cument is cogniz ant of th e fact that in order to achiev e over al l sus tainabil it y withi n a sys tem , ev er y component itself must be wholl y sust aina ble. It is the hope of thi s paper that throu gh improving the sust ainabili t y of the Farm, we are str en gthening on e part of the UBC sys tem, and thus contribut ing to the sust ainabili t y of the UBC Food S ystem as a whole.    Group 14 INTRODUCTION  Problems of the University of British Columbia Food System (UBCFS)  A system is “a set of arrangements of things so related or connected as to form a unity or organic whole,” (Webster, 2000).  Sustainability is defined as meeting “the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs,” (University of California, 1997).  Based on the above defi nit ions of a system and of sust ainabili t y, our gro up beli eves that f or an enti re food s ystem to be sust ainable, ea ch of its indi vidual components - so cial, economi c, and ecol ogic al - must be sust ainable .  The UBC Campus Sustainabil it y Offic e (UBC C S O) shares the vie w that att aini ng these three t enets is necessar y to achiev in g ov erall campus sust ainabil it y (UBC C S O, 2004).  It is important to note, however, that there are co nnecti ons between each of these three branch e s, and achievin g sust ainabili t y in one ma y posi ti vel y or negati vel y af fe ct the s ustainabil it y of anothe r.   To repres ent these relations hips, we hav e empl o yed the use of indi c ators that value the conne cti ons between each of the thr ee components of the system, not just each component in itself. One problem tha t The Universit y of Britis h Colum bia Food S yst em (UBC FS ) has is assessing its state of sust ainabi li t y, a problem we have att emp ted to addr ess throu gh the cr eati on of our indi cato rs. Fu rthermor e, thi s app roach  5  allows us to identif y whether an app arent unsust ainabili t y ex ist s because of problems with in one particular branch of susta inabili t y or bec ause on e branch is negati vel y aff e cti ng anoth er.  Indic ators pert aini ng to social, economi c, ec ologic al, social -e conomi c, social -ecolo gic al, and economi c-e colo gical sus tainabil it y can be appli e d to the UBCFS as a whole, or the y can be app li ed to each of its components.  As presented in the guid eli nes for the AGS C 450, Sustainabil it y of the UBCFS Coll aborati ve Project III, some of thes e UBCFS components are:  a studen t -run Agor a, costs of loc all y-produced food, food milea ge, and the UBC Farm (Rojas & Wagner, 2004 ). For the enti re UBCFS to be sust ainable, each of thes e components must be maintained with respect to each other.  Onl y wh en eac h component of the UBCF S is deemed sust ainable can the enti r e UBCFS be deeme d sust ain able as well .  This follows from the idea that in a s ystem, the whole is onl y as stron g as i ts indi vidual parts .   The whole of the UBCFS can onl y be as stron g and sust ain a ble as its weakest compo nent . Thus, if an y one divi sion is weak and unsust aina ble, then no matter how strong and sust ainable the other parts are, the enti re UBCFS will be unsust ain abl e.   This report will discuss the UBC Farm. Mo re specificall y, we hav e looked at the potential of formi ng ma rket rel ati onshi ps between the far m and on campus foo d providers, and how those relations hips can contrib ute to the overall sust ain abil it y of the UBC FS .   Currentl y, it is not know n if the UBC Farm is sust ainable or not.  Because of thi s, we cannot determi ne if the enti re UBCFS is sust ainable since, as stated above, th e sust ainabili t y of a whol e can onl y be dete rmined whenc e ea ch of its indi v idual comp onents has be en ad dressed. If the farm is determi ned to be unsust ain able, it ma y or m a y not be the “weakest link” UBCFS, but it would none -the -les s ne gati vel y aff ect the overall UBCFS sust ainabi li t y. It is a goal o f this report to evaluate thi s sust ainabil it y, and if nec essar y, to fin d wa ys to improve it. Value Assumptions:  Weak Anthropocentrism Our group took a weak anthropocentric appro ach as our ethi cal perspecti ve to anal yz e the UBCFS and the UBC Farm.  According to No rton (1993 ), weak anthropocent rism focuses on nature’s value in human societ y, in addit ion to its human -centered view.  As a group, we feel that it is important to reali ze  6  that the sust ainabili t y of the UBCFS reli es on th e s yner g y and rel ati onshi ps between each compo nent - social, economi c and ec ological - of the s ystem .  Furthermor e, we beli eve that the viabili t y of each component of the UBC FS , such as the UBC Farm, also pla ys an imp ortant role in perpetuati ng the sust ainabili t y of th e enti r e s ystem.  Whil e we thi nk that it is important to step back and dec entrali z e our human values to pres er ve and protect the environment - as it is, after all , natur e that suppo rts the foundati on of human acti vit ies (Dawe and R yan, 2002) - it is alm ost impossi ble to totall y ab and on the ex ist ence of human id e nti t y and their int er ests (Plum wood, 1996). We feel thi s point is especiall y pertinent in an environment such as UBC whe re an enormous number of people are invol ved in the system.  Because we beli eve that no single indi cator is more or less important than the other ones, as the y are all int er -relat ed to each other, we hav e adopt e d the con cept of weak anthropocentrism as our general approach to const ruct our model.  Although we beli ev e that the sust ainabili t y of t he UBC FS is a sum an d balanc e of its social,  economi c, and ecolo gic a l perspecti ves, there are limi tations to achieve thi s balance.  For ex ampl e, the UBCFS is a massive, compl ex s ystem th at invol ves areas that are outsi de the ph ysical bounda ries of UBC.  Bec ause of the relations hip betwe en t he UBCFS and the world, it is ver y difficu lt to sim ult aneousl y att ain so cial, economi c, and ec ological sust ain abil it y i n all syst ems, since dif ferin g s ystems have di ffe rent perspecti ves. Furthe rmor e, upon discussi on in our group, we found th at weak anthro pocentrism some w hat igno res the sense of comm unit y and human i nteracti on in so ciet y be c ause it mainl y focus es on balan cing human needs and t he protecti on of the envi ronment . Henc e, in our model, we hav e tak en care ful consi derati ons in choosi n g ou r indi cators rep rese nti ng the sust ain abil it y of the UBCFS and the UBC Far m, making sure th at no one sustainabil it y persp ect ive dominates the oth ers. MODEL TO ASSES THE SUSTAINBILITY OF THE UBCFS AND THE UBC FARM  In ord er to develop our model for thi s ye ar, our group went through the models developed by the AG S C 450 class of 2003.  Of all of them, we believe that the models of Groups 3 and 9 are the best ones .  Of all of the models, Group 3’s contained the most detailed descriptions of its “Sustainable - 7  Unsustainable” continuum, which measured the UBCFS on a sca le of 1 to 5, with 1 being unsust ainable and 5 bein g sust ainable.  Group 3 clea rl y ex plained in both qu ali tative and quanti tative t erms ex actl y what a rankin g of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 meant.  However, Group 3’s model (like all the other models of 2003) treated  social, economi c , and ecolo gic al sust ain abil it y as thre e s epar ate enti ti es and did not ex pli cit l y show the int errel ati onshi ps between them .  This is wh y ou r group beli eves that both Group 9 and Gr oup 3 produced the  best mode ls of 2003 .  To repres e nt the conne cti ons betw een the so cial, economi c, and ecolo gical indi cato rs, Group 9 had thre e addit io nal indi cators:  social - ec ological, so cial -e conomi c, and economi c- ecological.  These three “combination” indicators clearly showed the relatio nshi ps between the other three.  Bec ause we feel that th e models of Groups 3 and 9 combi ned compris ed the best of 2003, we decided to combi ne the two of them to come up with our model to ass ess the sustainabil it y of the UBCFS .  This model is presented in Appendix A.  We, like Group 9, have six indicators of sust ainabili t y:  social, economi c, ecolo gical, so cial -economi c, social - ec ological, and economi c - ecolo gical.  The enti re model with its indi cators can be used to assess the sust ai nabil it y of both the ent ire UBCFS as well as the UBC Farm.   The m ethods we propose to measure ea ch indi cator in the UBC FS and at the UBC Farm ar e shown in Appendices B and C, respecti vel y.  Our indi ca tors and methods of measurement are a combi nat ion of Groups 3 and 9.   Note that the indi cators and m ethods of measurem ent of the UBC Farm are si mi lar to those of the UBCFS but are mor e specifi c to asses s the farm dire ctl y, in acc ordance with our specifi c task.  All of our indi cators, like those of Group 3, are measured on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being unsust ainable and 5 being sust ainable .  Thus, the scale presents a “Sustainable - Unsustainable” continuum on which to locate the UBCFS and th e UBC Farm wit h respect to each of the sust ain abil it y indi cators.    When using our model to measure the sust ainabili t y of a s ystem (eit her t he enti re UB CFS or the UBC Farm), we feel th a t each and eve r y indi c ator must have a value of at le ast 3 (neutral ) in order to achieve sust ain abil it y.  If an y on e indi cator is below 3, then the enti r e s ystem is consi d ered to be unsust ainable.  Again, thi s is because th e sust ain abil it y of an enti re s yste m is onl y as sust ainable as its  8  most unsust ainable indi cator.  As an ex ampl e, let us sa y th at we ar e ass essi ng the UBC Fa rm.  If fi ve out of the six indi cators are measured to be 4 (mild ly sust ainable) and the on e remaini ng indi cator is onl y 2 (mild l y unsust ainabl e), then the enti re UBC Far m is consi dered to be mil dl y unsust ainable.  If just one part of the s ystem is wea k and unsust ainable, then it does not matter how strong and sust ainable the other parts are.  The one weak and unsust ainable part will make the enti re s yst em weak and unsust ainable as well .   INSTRUMENTS OF DATA COLLECTION The inst ruments of data coll ecti on to measure each indi cator of sust ainabili t y at the UBC Far m are locat ed in Appendix D. UBC FARM SUSTAINABILITY WILL HELP TO ACHIEVE OVERALL UBCFS SUSTAINABILITY  As stated above and as shown in our model depicted in Appendix A, our group beli eves th at in order to be deemed su stainable, a system mu st be sociall y, economi call y, ecolo gicall y, soci all y-economi call y, sociall y- ec ologicall y, and economi c all y- ecolo gicall y sust aina ble.  We have created a li st of indi cators to assess these relations hips that ex ist not onl y in the enti re UBCFS but in its components as well .  Social Sustainability  Our group beli eves that t o achiev e social sust aina bil it y in th e UBCFS , foo ds provided in the UBC comm unit y must be hi ghl y avail abl e and ac cept able.  To become sust ai nable, it is important that foods produced b y the UBC Farm, a part of the UBCF S , are sold at as man y UBC food outl ets as possi ble, that all methods of pa ym ent (cash, debit , and cr edit ) are ac cepted at these outl ets, and that people in the comm unit y per ceive the food choices to be hi ghl y acc eptable in terms of variet y.  Economic Sustainability  9   All components of the UBCFS must be profit able to become economi call y sust ainable. To reach the economi c sust ainabili t y of itself as well as the enti re UBCFS , the UBC Farm, as a result , must be able to make enough rev enue to not onl y the cove r costs of producti on but also to make a profit and then improve itself by furtheri ng its goals of social and ecolo gical ex tension.  Ecological Sustainability  “A sustainable food system is one in which the health of the environment is sustained and enhanced for use by all beings and by future generations,” (Kloppenburg et al., 2000).  In the case of the UBC FS , the healt h of the environment can be maintai ned by redu cin g food wastes. Food wastes such as non-biode grad able pa cka gin g materi als can be rec yc led to redu ce harm to the environment.  In ad dit ion, the compos ti ng of or gani c food wastes can not onl y redu ce the amount of soli d food wastes at UBC (thus, reducing harmful emissions emitted from UBC’s landfill materials) but can also decrease the number of trips needed to transf er wastes out of the campu s (UBC Waste Mana ge ment, 2004).  As a part of the UBCFS , the UBC Farm can be empl o yed to decreas e or ganic food was tes by using environme ntall y-friendl y practi ces such as the use of compos t as a fertili z er.  Social-Economic Sustainability  Not onl y is the avail abil i t y and acc eptabili t y of fo ods in the UBC comm unit y important, but so is its affordabil it y.  If fo ods provided b y th e UBC Farm are af fordabl e and the n sold in man y food outl ets on campus , then the ove rall afford abil it y of foods on campus will increas e.   Social-Ecological Sustainability  Awar eness or knowled ge is another main feature of a sust ainable food s yst em. All members withi n a comm unit y mu st be able to gain knowledge about their food s ystem. The knowled ge m ust be easil y acc essi ble and wi del y dist ributed (Kloppe nburg et al., 2000).  In addit ion, comm unit y m e mbers must be well informed of the sit uati on of their own food s ystem and the concept of sust ainabili t y (Kloppenbur g et al., 20 00).  A hi gh aw aren ess and knowled ge of the UBC Farm and its r ole in the  10  sust ainabili t y of the enti r e UBCFS contribut es to the awar eness and knowl edge of the UBC FS itself and its result ant sus tainabil it y.  Economic-Ecological Sustainability  Food trav eli ng gr eat distances from field to table is environmentall y and ec onomi call y costl y.  It is environmentall y costl y because of the ecologi cal costs associated with the recov er y and combus ti on of the fossil fuels used to transport the food (Kloppenbur g et al., 1996).  It is also economi call y costl y because of the costs of t he lar ge amount s of en er g y need ed fo r transpo rta ti on, packa gin g mat erial s, and food pres ervati ves (Klop penbur g et al., 1996).  To ensure a sust ainable fo od s ystem, food milea ge must be minim iz ed.  Thus, to become sust ainable, alm ost all sour ces of foods used as ingredients or se r ved by UBC and AMS Food Services that can be at tained locall y must be bought from loc al suppl iers. Furthermo re, the use of UBC Farm foods as foo d ingredi ents or served products can reduce the overa ll food mileage of the UBC FS .  IDENTIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION OF THE UBC FARM Guiding Values Upon evaluating the UBC Farm’s current and past business models, it becomes appar ent that this entity’s decision making processes are guid ed by fou r steadf ast values . First, the farm is con stantl y strivi ng to att ain a high er level of profit abil it y, which is evidenced b y the ex pansion of its marketi ng efforts and produ cti on ar ea. Se cond, de emed to be an ex tension of the gre ater UBC food and e duc ati on s ystems b y it ope rators, t he farm emphasiz es hand s on educ ati on to incre as e aw aren ess about the be nefits of locall y based agricult ure, as its producti on pr ocess pa ys tribut e both t o the environment and t o the indi viduals that inhabit it. This is achieved by invol ving both students and members of the greate r community with the Farm.  Third, the Farm’s operators adhere to production methods that strictly limit, if not eli mi nate, environmental de grad ati on. One ex ampl e of thi s is the incorporati on of i nte gr at ed pest mana gement techniqu es inst ead of empl o yin g harmful pesti cides. Fou rth, alt hough the Farm is not certified as or ganic , suc h principles do guide the Farm in its choices when it comes to producti on  11  meth ods. This, among other things, also attests to the businesses’ human centered component as organic producti on does have ac c ompan yin g he alt h benefit s.  Physical Description The Farm occupies forty acres of prime real estate on UBC’s south campus.  How ever, onl y about half of thi s area is curr e ntl y bein g used for prod ucti on . Crops are prim ar il y centered on the most fertile and produ cti ve re gions, which are consi der ed to be on th e eastern portion of the Farm - alt hou gh ev en thi s area is not bein g used to its full potential. Furthermore, the Farm is outfit ted with several free sta nding structures includin g fou r greenhous es, onl y one of which is cu rrentl y in operati on, the Hoop Hous e. (se e Appendix F for compl ete farm map). Mo reove r, it shoul d be noted that b y- laws for futur e dev elopm ent of buil dings on the Farm state that structur es ar e not to be permanent.  New facil it ies cannot have a foundati on nor can the y be equipped with a permanent power suppl y, thu s it is crucial to max imiz e the resourc es off ered b y th e current bui ldi n gs. Current Production Methods In contrast to the contem porar y and pe rvasive ma chiner y based agricult ura l producti on techniques in North America, the Farm’s production process is heavily reliant on huma n capit al, as it is labor int ensive. This is somew hat ineffici ent, ev en fo r a small farm, as required worker hours are long an d their associated costs high.  For ex ampl e, weedin g th e farm b y hand would tak e far mor e time and mone y than sa y a tra ctor suit ed for thi s same task .  However, the latter method is unavail able as it requires a capit al investm ent that, due to a  shortage of funds, is out of rea ch at the pr esent.   The Farm’s staff members consist of a marketing coordinator, market garden coordinator, two laborers and about seventy volunteers. Temporal division of duties amongst the Farm’s staff consi sts of 1/3 of time designated for marketi ng and 2/3 for producti on, which ma y be planned or sim pl y consequenti al. Input cost s other than salar y ex pense are nomi nal and ac cru e to onl y about two -thou sand doll ars for the growin g season, as fertili z ers, se eds, ener g y and the like are eit her ve r y che ap or free (Bomford, 2004 ).   12  In rec ent ye ars, the UBC Farm has enjo yed an increas e in its revenues from sales at the Market Garden and to campus food providers (person al comm unicati on with Mark Bomford, 2004). In 200 2 -2003, tot al revenu es tot a led $19 742.64, compa re d with an esti mated op er ati ng cost of $60 000. M ost of the sales at the farm oc c ur betwe en the mont hs of June and Octob er, a fac t that highli ghts the se as onali t y of the farms ope rati ons. An ex act breakdown of sales by mont h is avail a ble in Appendix F. Clearl y, the Market Gard en at the farm is running at a defici t, with the majorit y of the costs accru ed to salar ies for farm empl o yees. Ho wev er, despit e thi s appar ent shortfall , 2002 -2003 showed the stron gest rev en ues to date fo r the farm, and as producti on methods evol ve and producti on area in creas es, revenu es are ex pected to conti nue to incre ase i n the upcomi n g ye ars. Vegetables are responsi ble for the m ajorit y of the Farms revenues (53%), while pumpki ns, eggs, flow ers, and t-shirts made up the rest of the revenues. Furthermo re, du e to poo r admi nist rati ve plannin g in 2003, the farm missed an oppo rtunit y to sell all of its pumpki ns, result ing in th e spoi la ge of much of the crop. Th e sta ff responsi b le for m arketi n g the pum pkins termi nated its posi ti on at the end of October, de spit e a potential to sell pumpki ns well int o November. This shortfall is being ad dressed thi s yea r, a mov e that is anti cipated to in creas e pumpki n crop rev enues thi s yea r. It is ex pected that vegetables will become even more important to the farm’s revenues in upcomi ng ye ars, as eggs will no longe r be av ail able for sale at the Mark et Garden. Hist oricall y, eggs wer e provided to the farm free of char ge b y the Avian centre, but that relations hip i s ex pected to end this ye ar . There ar e man y opportu nit ies that ex ist for the farm to replace the lost revenue from eggs, which will be further dis cussed in th e subsequent se cti on on recomm end ati ons. Fo r a mor e compl et e list of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunit ies, and threats of the UBC farm, ple ase refer to the SWOT analys is in Appendix E.  Sales and Marketing C urrentl y, the majorit y of revenue at UBC far m is coll ected during market da y s ales, which repres ent 57% of tot al sa les b y t ype. Sales t o on campus food providers, such as Sage Bistro, St. John’s  13  Coll ege, Green Coll ege and AMS food services make up onl y a small part of tot al revenues (approx . 8%), however, the fact that a relations hip ex ist s between the farm and thes e pr oviders indi cates t o us a great potential for future rel ati onshi ps. Furthermore , the farm also has connecti ons with off -ca mpus components of the food s ystem in pla ce (both su ppli ers and consum ers), such as the Good Food box and West Coast Seeds, which serve to stren gthen the ties between UBC farm and the gr eate r s ystem of the Cit y of Vancouve r in which it pla ys a part. Nev ertheless, we feel that as in the past, major sources of revenue fo r the farm in the future will lie in direct market relations hip s with consum ers on campus , through ini ti ati ves such as the market ga rden an d on campus food providers. Also, as will be elaborated on in the secti on on reco mm endati ons, we feel there is gr eat potential for developi ng a dir ect relati onshi p with on campus residents, particularl y in Fairvie w and Acadia pa rk resid ences, throu gh an ini ti ati ve of ‘bringing the produce to them’. One wa y for the UBC Farm to in cre ase its rev enues is throu gh eff ecti ve sales and mark eti ng strate gies . For the most part, the sales strateg y at the farm is in its ver y nas cent stages, and has the potential to flourish if approached properl y. It is the opini on of our group t hat there is no reason wh y the farm could not become a financiall y indep endent operati on in the near fut ure. The farm can achiev e thi s goal throu gh the increas ed use of current resour ces, streaml ini ng of pro ducti on processes, and buil ding upon ex ist ing relations hips withi n the UBCFS . It is also the hop e of ou r group that thi s pape r can be of use to the farm in enh anc ing its operati ons. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE UBC OFFICE OF CAMPUS SUSTAINBILITY  The subj ect of thi s se cti on will be to highli ght the opportuni ti es where we feel the UBC Farm has the greatest opportuni t y to increase its revenue , with the overall goal of having its market ga rden acti vit ies become financ iall y indep endent. The re are 6 major areas wh er e we feel the UBC Far m can improve i ts operations with the goal of at least “breaking even” financially, each of which is outlined below. Secure Contracts with On-Campus Food Providers  14  The UBC Farm has an opportunit y to further imp rove the sust ainabili t y of the UBC Food S yst em by acti n g as an int e gr al suppl ier of fresh produc e. In ord er to do that, however, con cret e relatio nshi ps between the UBC Fa rm and other stakeholders i n the UBC Food S ystem , such as UBC Food and AMS Food and Bev era ge serv ices, must be perpetuated. These relations hips wou ld have to benefit all parties invol ved and respe ct cur rent contra cts, as there are cur rentl y m an y purch asing ba rriers and const r aint s that would inhi bit the expansion of long -te rm rel ati onshi ps between the UBC farm and UBC Fo od and AMS Food and Beve ra ge services.   An important aspect of suppl yin g food to the campus food services is year round avail abil it y (Yip, Parr, Too good and Sewa da, 2004). In order to sta y economi call y vi able, the food servic es must be able to sati sf y consum e r deman d with a variet y of nutrit ious foods that are avail able throughout the enti r e ye ar. Unfortunatel y, alt hou gh the UBC Farm provid es produce th at is nutrit ious, their variet y is enti rel y dependent on cli matic and environmental condit ions. Consequentl y, the y cannot p roduc e much food during the winter season, which happens to be the most important tim e for the food servic es.   Since the UBC campus is in full operati on during the fall and winter se a sons, the campus food services and th eir variou s outl ets must be able to suppl y adequat e amount s of food on a dail y basis . This means that the food services must be able to full y rel y on their suppl iers to provide sufficient quanti ti es of food. Again, the UBC Farm cannot produ ce the volum e nor selecti on of products that are re quir ed to sust ain eit her AMS or UBC Food servic es (Yi p, Parr, Toogood and Sewada, 2004).  In addit ion, a significant volum e of what the UBC Farm does produce is currentl y bei ng sold at the Farmers Market, which could inhibi t flow to other food providers (P arr, 2004).   Lastl y , be cause ecolo gic all y sound produ cti on methods, such as not using fertili z ers, pesti cides or herbicides, form the basis of the Farm’s principles, the harvested products do not always have the consi stenc y in unifo rmity and siz e of conventi o nall y grown products. Unfortunatel y, thi s is seen as a problem by man y consu mers and ther efor e is a const raint for the food se r vices (Yip, 2004).    15   Aside from s ever al cons traint s, there ar e also pe rtinent poli cies of th e campus food servic es in terms of fo rming lon g-ter m relations hips with the UBC Farm. For ex ampl e, if the volum e and s electi on of produ ce were in fact made avail able b y the UBC Farm , then there wou ld sti ll be a need to work out several important details. To begin with, the cu rre nt produce suppl iers to UBC Food and AMS Fo od and Beve ra ge servi ces woul d need to be informed that the y ar e no lon ger t he ex clusi ve providers t o UBC (Parr, 2004 ). This would have to be done as an addendum to the cur rent contra cts (Par r, 2004).  If the effe ct of thi s was si gnificant in terms of volum e reducti on from the cu rre nt provid ers, then it could hav e adverse effects on the UBC Food and AMS Food and Beverage service’s purchasing price (Parr, 2004).  This would result in limiting the overall success of food services’ partnerships with both the current produce provid ers and th e UBC Farm (Pa rr, 2004) .    In addit ion, if a partnersh ip with the UBC Farm was reco gniz ed, both food services would ne ed to establi sh standards regar ding such iss ues as th e quanti t y and sel ecti on of needed produ cts, deli ver y times, cleanli ness of products, t he produce’s quality and uniformity in terms of appearance, and payment terms (Yip and Parr, 2004 ).  Cater Directly to Students  The UBC farm has gr eat potential in forgin g dire ct market rel ati onshi ps with students living on campus , a proposal that we view as a win -win si tuation. There cu rrentl y ex ist few produc e sou rc es on campus , and the y are limi ted to the few groce r s in the UBC vil lage. In order to gain ac cess to fresh produce, campus residen ts (we will use the ex ample of Fairvie w residen c e) need to eit her pa y premi um prices in the vil lage, or take time out of their bus y s chedules to secur e produce from an off campus locati on. This can be quite an undertaking for so me Fa irview resid ents, as the y are located in an area of campus sit uated quit e far from bus stops . B y br ingin g produc e to Fairvi ew residen ce b y means of a traveli ng ca rt or tempora r y stand, UBC farm can eli mi nate the middle man by sell in g dire ctl y to campus res idents. In doin g so, we beli eve th e y will be able to sell at prices co mparable or che aper tha n other providers on campus , whil e at the same time maintaining a healt h y prof it margin. We beli eve th at the  16  costs associated with operati ng a stand on locati on in Fairview during ce rtai n hours of the day in the peak mont hs of UBC farms producti on will be easil y of fset b y added gains in revenue. Fairvie w residents benefit from the stand in that; their travel time to secure produc e will be gr eatl y reduc ed, prices wil l be comparable or che aper to what the y would usuall y pa y, and the y would ex perienc e a closer conn ecti on to the source of th eir food. B y cat erin g dire ctl y to students, the UBC farm will directl y be enhanci ng the sust ainabili t y of the food s ystem he re at UB C .  Begin Interfaculty Involvement In an effort to enhanc e the presenc e of the enti re UBC s ystem withi n the farm, we beli eve that it is essential to foster int erf a cult y invol vement at the farm. This invol vement serves man y purpos es, so me of which include gr eate r aw areness fo r the farm, an opportuni t y for the rest of campus to take advanta ge of the farms resourc es, and a chance fo r the farm to procure addit ion al huma n resources. B y creati n g a series of opportuni ti es withi n t he farm fo r students of various facult ies , a s ym biot ic relations hip is created. Students obtain the oppo rtunit y to gain hands on ex perience in diff erent aspects of the farm (i.e. - botan y students can stud y plant s, en gineerin g students can dev elop solut ions for max im izing producti vit y of gr eenhouses, comm e rce students can work on sales and marketi ng, etc. ), while at the same time gaini ng credit s towards th eir de gree. Th e farm can reap the be ne fits of the solut ions offer ed b y students working on these projects, all the while saving on costs of hiring staf f to perfo rm the same tasks. It shou ld be noted that in order to efficientl y cr eate such a system of int erfacult y invol veme nt, a full time pa id position of “involvement coordinator” must be established, in order to streamline the efforts of the students involved. In the past, there have been problems wh ere tr ai ning volunt eers has cut i nto the time of full time staff to actuall y perfo rm their ro les, and it is hoped that this posi ti on will all eviate that burden. Furthe rmore, we beli eve the costs of creati ng su ch a posi ti on wil l be offs et b y the incr eased ef ficienc y of the farms operati ons due to incr eas ed input acti vit y.  Have Winter Production  17  On e of the major weakn esses of the cu rrent UBC Fa rm model is the seaso nali t y of its oper ati ons. If the Farm could ex pand its operati ons to yea r round producti on, it wo uld become more att ract ive to potential custom ers seek ing a const ant suppl y. There ex ist on the farm a number of gr eenhouses that sit idl e for the winter – facil it ies that could be used to produce high mar gin crops such as tom atoes. One of these greenhouses, the Hoop house, has a boil e r i n place fo r he ati ng pu rp oses. Furthe rmore, th e ener g y required to run thi s boil er comes at no addit ional cost to the UBC farm, as uti li t y costs are provide d free of cha r ge b y UBC pla nt operati ons (Bomford, 2004). This low cost of ene r g y gives the Fa rm a competit ive advanta ge over othe r grow ers of sim il ar product, all owin g th e farm to und ercut other providers of food without reducin g its profit mar gin. If thi s ventu re proves success ful, other greenh ouses on the Farm could be outfit ted wit h gener ators fo r heati ng purpos es, creati ng the potential for more food producti on.    Forge Relationships with Agricultural Businesses in the Community Another major weakness of the UBC Farm is its lack of capit al investm ent, for ex ampl e, its tra ctor is over 20 years old. Th e procu rement of certain mechanic al assets has t he potential to gr eatl y in creas e producti vit y at the Farm, the source of which cou ld be the busi n ess comm unit y in the surroundin g area. Businesses have the inc enti ve to participate in the Farms acti vit ies thr ough oppo rtunit ies such as an enhanc ed publi c ima ge and tax writ e -offs. Th e ex plorati on of such relati onshi ps is but one of th e roles that could be fulfill ed b y students wit hin the Facul t y of Comm erc e invol ve d with the Farm.  Take Advantage of Major Sources of Revenue B y identif yin g the crops produced at the Farm that have the high est profi t margin, the Farm can coordinate its crop plann in g ac cordin gl y. It shoul d be noted that thi s recomm endati on does not advocate mono -croppin g in an y way, but encou ra ges the is olation of a small plot of land on the Farm for major revenue ge ner ati ng crops , in order to ensure the economi c viabili t y of the operati on. This contribut es to  18  the gr eater go al of sust ainabili t y withi n the Fa rm by creati ng a stead y fun ding sourc e while at the same time all owing for the pro ducti on of a wide ran ge of crops with other, not ne cessaril y profit oriented goals, such as resea rch and ex tension. We recogniz e that economi c viabili t y is but one part of the Farms overall goals, and b y ensurin g that the economi c component of sust ainabili t y at the Farm is not in jeopa r d y, ou r recomm endati on has the potential to increase the sustai nabil it y of the UBC FS as a whole since, after all , a system is onl y as stron g as its weakest link. FINAL REFLECTIONS Our group firml y beli ev e s that the UBC Fa rm has a great potential to enhan ce the sust ainabili t y of the enti re UBCFS . Throu gh the use of our indi cat ors , their respe cti ve meth ods of data coll ecti on, an d our recomm endati ons to the UBCC S O, it is our hope that thi s paper can be const ructi vel y used in the future for the ongoin g project of sust ainabili t y withi n the UBC food s ystem. We beli eve we have tak en the best elements of previous ye a rs and combi ned them to produce our mod el, whi ch we hope will be put i n use by next year’s class. Being that our model and indicators are guided by the principles of weak anthropocentrism , we seek to increase so cial welfar e on thi s campus , all the whil e upholdi ng sound economi c and ecolo gical principles. As a group we place enormous valu e on the connecti ons between components of sust ainab il it y and of the s ystem, and it is hoped that our paper presents a cle ar indi cati on of those values. Ou r model gives equal weight to each indi c ator of su stainabil it y, which is, again, a fundamental tenet o f our report – the ide a that the s ystem is onl y as stron g as its weakest pa rt.  The proc ess that we und ertook in creati ng ou r paper was ex actl y as it is laid out in thi s paper; determi ne our valu es, de velop a model that is consi stent with our values to assess both the enti re UBCFS and the UBC Fa rm, iden ti f y ou r indi cators and t heir respecti ve inst rume nts of data coll ecti on, ex ami ne the UBCFS and th e UBC Farm, and come up with a list of recomm endati o ns to enhance the sust ain abil it y of the enti re s ystem. Our recomm endati ons are target ed at creati n g a food s ystem at UBC that is holi sti call y sust ainable, and are av ail able on our websit e as well as in a precedin g secti on. Our main recomm endati on for th e UBCC S O and nex t ye ar s groups is to read thi s paper, adopt our model, briefl y  19  modi f y it if necessar y, and most importantl y, act upon it. We feel as though throu gh the creati on of thi s document, we hav e deve loped a soli d foundati o n on which to buil d, and through the combi nati on of our paper and that of Gro up 9, the UBC Farm can be gin in earnest t he proc ess of amelior ati ng its sust ainabili t y and, conse quentl y, that of the gre ater UBCFS as a whol e.  20  REFERENCES Bomford, Ma rk. 2004. Personal Comm unicati on and UBC Farm Do cume nts .   Dawe, N. K. & Rya n, K. L.  (2002).  The Fault y Three - Le gged -S tool Model of Sustainable Develop ment.  Conversati on Biol o g y.  17(5):  1458 -1460.  Kloppenbur g, J ., Hendric kson, J . & Stevenson, G. W .  (1996). Comi ng int o the Foodshed. Agricult ur e and Human Values. 13(3 ): 33 -42.  Kloppenbur g, J ., Lez ber g, S., Master, K. D., Stevenson, G.W . & Hendri c kson, J .  (2000). Tasti ng Food, Tasti ng sust ainabili t y:  Defining the Attribut es of an Altern ati ve Foo d S yst em with Competent, Ord inar y people. Human Or ganiz ati on. 59(2): 177 -186.  Norton, B.G.  (1993 ).  Environmental Ethi cs and Weak Anthropocentris m.  In Armst ron g & Bo tz ler, Environmental Ethi cs:  Divergenc e and Conver gen ce.  McG raw Hil l, Toront o, ON.  Pa rr, A. 2004.  UBC Foo d Services.  Email Comm unicati on.  Plum wood, Val.  (1996) .  Androcentrism and Anthrocentrism .   Ethics and the Environment.  1: 119 -152.R ojas, A. & Wagne r, J .  (2004).  Agricult ur al Sciences 450:  Land, Food, & Comm unit y III .  The Sust ainabili t y of th e UBC Food S ystem Coll abor ati ve Project III.  The Universit y of Britis h Colu mbi a, Vancouve r, BC.  Sawada, B. 2004.  UBC SEEDS .  Email Comm unicati on.  Toogood, N. 2004.  AM S Food and Bever a ge Se r vices.  Email Comm unicati on.  Universit y of Brit ish Co lum bia.  (2004).  Office of Campus Sustainabil it y.  http:/ /www.sust ain.ubc.ca/ .  Access d ate:  March, 15, 2004.  Universit y of Britis h Colum bia.  (2004).  Waste Managem ent:  Compos ti ng Project.  http:/ /www.rec ycle.ub c.c a/compost .htm l .  Access date:  March 20, 2004.   Universit y of Cali fornia.  (1997).  What is Susta inable Agricult ur e?  Sustainable Agricult ur e Res earch and Educati on Pro gram.  http:/ /www.sarep.ucdavis .edu/concept.ht m .  Acces s date:  March 19, 2004.  Webster.  (2000).  Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language, College Edition.  The W orld Publi shing Compan y.  Clevelan d and New York, USA.  Yip, D. 2004.  UBC Foo d Services.  Email Comm unicati on.          21  APPENDIX A  Indicators of Sustainability and their Methods of Measurement in the UBCFS and at the UBC Farm  Indicator of Sustainability Method to Measure the Indicator of Sustainability in the UBCFS Method to Measure the Indicator of Sustainability at the UBC Farm Social Avail abil it y and acc epta bil it y of foods  Avail abil it y and acc ep tabili t y of UBC Farm foods  Economic P rofit abil it y of UBC an d AMS Food Servic es  Profit a bil it y of the UBC Farm  Ecological P roporti on of food was tes that are bein g compos te d and rec ycl ed  Proporti on of environmentall y -friendl y farming practi ces at the UBC Farm  Social-Economic Afford abil it y of foods  Afford abil it y of UBC Farm foods  Social-Ecological Awar eness and knowled ge of the UBCFS and the con cept of sust ainabili t y  Awar eness and knowle dge of the UBC Farm and its role in contribut ing to the overall sust ainabili t y of the UBCFS  Economic-Ecological Food milea ge of foods used as ingredi en ts or se rved by UBC and AMS Food Servic es  Proporti on of UBC Farm foods that are sold to UBC and AMS Food Services as ingr edients or to be served to custom ers dir ec tl y                       22  APPENDIX B  Methods to Measure Each Indicator of Sustainability in the UBCFS  1.  Method to measure the social sustainability of the UBCFS: availability and acceptability of foods.  Sustainable 5 Highl y av ail able and acceptabl e.  F ood outl et s are withi n a 3 minute walk from ever y buil ding.  At le ast two - t hirds  of  the food outl ets in the SUB are open 24 hours a da y, 7 days a week.  At least two - thi rds  of outl ets that are not in the SUB ar e open fo r at least 12 hours a da y (i. e. – 7 am to 7 pm), 7 da ys a week.  All food outl ets  take all methods of paym ent (cash, de bit , and credit ).  People perc eive the food choices to be hi ghl y acc eptable in terms of both variet y (i.e. – vegetari an, organi c) and cult ural appropriaten ess.  **80-100% of foods are available and acceptable** Mildly sustainable 4 S omewhat avail able an d acc essi ble.  Food ou tl ets are a 5 - 10 minute walk from ever y buil ding.  Half of the food outl ets in the SUB are open 24 hours a day, 7 da ys a week.  Half of the outl ets that are not in the SUB a re open for at least 12 hours a day (i.e. – 7 am to 7 pm), 7 da ys a week.  The other half is op e n at least 8 hours a da y (i.e. – 7 am to 3 pm), 7 da ys a week.  Two - thi rds of all food outl ets take all methods of paym ent (cash, de bit , and credit ).  People pe rceive the foo d choices to be somewhat acceptabl e in terms of both variet y (i.e. – vegetarian, or gan ic) and cult ural appropriaten ess.  **60-80% of foods are available and acceptable** Neutral 3 Fairl y av ail able and ac c essi ble.  Food outl ets ar e a 10 - 15 min ute walk from ev er y buil din g.  A third of the food outl ets in the SUB are op en 24 hou rs a da y, 7 da ys a week.  A third of the outl ets that are not in th e SUB ar e open for at le ast 12 hours a da y (i.e. – 7 am to 7 pm), 7 days a week.  The other two - thi rds a r e open at least 8 hours a da y (i.e. – 7 am to 3 pm), Monda y to Fri da y.  Half of all food outl ets take all met hods of pa yment (cash, debit , and cr edit ).  People perc eive the food choices to be fairl y ac cep table in terms of both variet y (i.e. – vegeta rian, or ganic) and cult ur al appropriaten ess.  **40-60% of foods are available and acceptable** Mildly unsustainable 2 S omewhat unavail able and inaccessi ble.  Food outl ets are a 15 - 20 minute walk from ever y buil ding.  Onl y a fifth of the food outl ets in the SUB a re open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.  The other food outl ets (eit her inside of outsi de the SUB are onl y op en 8 hours a da y (i.e. – 7 am to 3 pm), Monda y to Frid a y.  Onl y a thi rd of all food outl ets take all methods of paym ent (cash, debit , and credit ).  Peo ple pe rcei ve the food choic es t o be somewh at unacc eptable in te rms of both variet y (i.e. – vegetarian, or ganic) and cult ural app ropriaten ess.  **20-40% of foods are available and acceptable**  23  Unsustainable 1 Highl y unavail able and inacc essi ble.  Food ou tl ets are more than a 20 minute walk from ever y buil ding.  All foo d outl ets (eit her insi de or outsi de the SUB) are onl y op en 8 hours a da y (i.e. – 7 am to 3 pm), Monda y to Frida y.  All food outl ets take cash as a method of pa ym ent, bu t few (less than 10% t ake debit and/or credit ).  People pe rc eive the food choic e s to be highl y unacc eptable in te rms of both variet y (i.e. – vegetarian, or ganic) and cult ural app ropriaten ess.  **0-20% of foods are available and acceptable**      2.  Method to measure the economic sustainability of the UBCFS:  profitability of UBC and AMS Food Services.  Sustainable 5 Each mont h, UBC and AMS Food Services make enough rev enue to not onl y cover costs but to improve its food outl ets as well (i.e. – bett er seati n g, bri ghte r lighti ng,  mor e staff )  **Revenue >> costs  high profit** Mildly sustainable 4 Each mont h, UBC and AMS Food Services make enough rev enue to earn some profit .  It is not, however, enou gh to be used to improve food outl ets (i.e. – bett er seati ng, bright er lighti ng, m or e staff).  **Revenue > costs  some profit** Neutral 3 Each mont h, UBC and AMS Food Services br eak even.  **Revenue = costs  zero profit** Mildly unsustainable 2 Most mont hs (at least six ), UBC and AMS Food Services break even.  Other months (less than six ), the y do not.  **Revenue = costs (for at least six months of the year)  zero profit OR net loss** Unsustainable 1 Most mont hs (at least six ), UBC and AMS Food Services do not break ev en.  Othe r months (less than six ), the y do.  **Revenue > costs (for at least six months of the year)  net loss**              24  3.  Method to measure the ecological sustainability of the UBCFS:  proportion of food wastes that are being composted or recycled.   Sustainable 5 C ompos ti ng and rec ycl ing bins (eit he r small or lar ge s cale dependin g on the siz e of the area) ar e readil y ava il able and easil y acc essi ble in ever y resid enti al and food s ervic e area.  Edu cati onal programs, brochu res, an d post ers are readil y av ail able to ensur e that people are compos ti ng and rec ycli n g appro p r iate foods in the corre ct wa y.  **80-100% of food waste is being composted or recycled** Mildly Sustainable 4 Appropriatel y siz ed com post ing and rec ycli n g bi ns (dependin g on the siz e of the area) are avail able and acc essi ble (wit hin walki ng dist ance) in a majorit y of residenti al and foo d service areas. Posters are se en nea r the bins to inform people of compos table and rec ycl able foods and th e cor rect wa ys to com post and rec ycle them.  **60-80% of food waste is being composted or recycled** Neutral 3 S mall - scale compos ti ng and rec yc li ng bins are seen somewhat throughout the campus . One or two lar ge - sc al e bins ex ist . For those int erested, educati onal progr ams on proper compos ti ng and rec ycli n g are avail able.  **40-60% of food waste is being composted or recycled** Mildly Unsustainable 2 Few small compos ti ng and rec ycli n g bins ar e ava il able on campus . Most waste ends up in a landfil l.  Ther e are hardl y an y educati onal programs on prope r com post ing and rec ycli n g.  **20-40% of food waste is being composted or recycled** Unsustainable 1 No compos ti ng or rec ycl ing bins ex ist .  All food waste is sent to a landfil l.  There are no ed ucati onal pro grams on pr oper compos ti ng and rec ycli n g.  Howev er, there ar e some indi vidu als who compos t or rec ycl e on their own (i.e. – h ave home gard e ns, take their pop bott les to off - campus rec yc li n g depots, et c).  **0-20% of food waste is being composted or recycled**                  25  4.  Method to measure the social-economic sustainability of the UBCFS:  affordability of foods.  Monthly costs of eating are taken from the Cost of Eating in BC report written by the Dietitians of Canada in October, 2003.  Sustainable 5 Mont hl y student loans minus mont hl y costs (t uit ion, rent, and transportati on) is over $100 more than the mont hl y cost of eat in g ($206.14 for a male age 19 - 24 ye ars or $151.41 for a fem ale age 19 - 24 ye ars ).  **monthly costs of eating are being met, and over $100 per month is saved** Mildly Sustainable 4 Mont hl y student loans minus mont hl y costs (t uit ion, rent, and transportati on ) is up to $100 more than the mont hl y cost of eati n g ($206.14 for a male age 19 - 24 ye ars or $151.41 for a fem ale age 19 - 24 ye ars ).  **monthly costs of eating are being met, and up to $100 per month is saved** Neutral 3 Mont hl y student loan s minus costs (tu it ion, rent, and transportati on) is ex actl y equ al to the mont hl y cost of eati ng ($206.14 for a male age 19 - 24 ye ars or $151.41 for a fem ale age 19 - 24 ye ars ).  **monthly costs of eating are being met, but no money is leftover to save** Mildly Unsustainable 2 Mont hl y student loans minus mont hl y costs (t uit ion, rent, and transportati on) is up to $50 less than the monthl y cost of eati ng ($206.14 for a male age 19 - 24 ye ars or $151.41 for a fem ale age 19 - 24 ye ars ).  **monthly costs of eating are not being met, and the student is up to $50 short** Unsustainable 1 Mont hl y student loans minus mont hl y costs (t uit ion, rent, and transportati on) is over $50 less than to the monthl y cost of eati ng ($206.14 for a male age 19 - 24 ye ars or $151.41 for a fem ale age 19 - 24 ye ars ).  **monthly costs of eating are not being met, and the student is over $50 short**                 26  5.  Method to measure the social-ecological sustainability of the UBCFS:  awareness and knowledge of the UBCFS and the concept of sustainability.  Sustainable 5 High awar eness and kno wledge of the componen ts of the UBC FS and of the con cept of sust ainabili t y.  Mor e th an two - thi rds of people are aw are of how to relate the sust ainabilit y conc ept to the UBCFS .  **80-100% of the UBC population have an awareness and accurate knowledge of the UBFS and sustainability** Mildly Sustainable 4 S ome awar eness and kno wledge of the component s of the UBC FS and of the concept of sustainabil it y.  Mor e of than half of the people are aw are of how to relate the sust ainabilit y conc ept to the UBCFS .  **60-80% of the UBC population have an awareness and accurate knowledge of the UBFS and sustainability** Neutral 3 Fair aw aren ess and kno wledge of the componen ts of the UBC FS and of the con cept of su stainabil it y.  Half of th e people ar e aw are of how to relate th e sust a inabili t y conc ept to the UBCFS .  **40-60% of the UBC population have an awareness and accurate knowledge of the UBFS and sustainability** Mildly Unsustainable 2 S ome lack of awa ren ess and knowled ge of the co mponents of the U BCFS and of the conce pt of sust ainabili t y.  Less than half of th e people are aw are of how to relate the sust ainabilit y conc ept to the UBCFS .  **20-40% of the UBC population have an awareness and accurate knowledge of the UBFS and sustainability** Unsustainable 1 Lit tl e aw ar eness and kno wledge of the compon en ts of the UBCFS and of the conc ept of sus tainabil it y .  Less than on e - thi rd of people are awa re of how to relate the sust ainabili t y concept to the UBCFS .  **0-20% of the UBC population have an awareness and accurate knowledge of the UBFS and sustainability**                   27  6.  Method to measure the economic-ecological sustainability of the UBCFS:  food mileage of foods used as ingredients or served by UBC and AMS Food Services.  Sustainable 5 Almos t all sources of fo ods used as in gredi ents or serv ed b y UBC and AMS Food Service s that can be att ained locall y are bou ght from local suppl iers.  Suppli ers are consi der ed lo cal when the y are located wit hin Britis h Col umbi a.  **80-100% of food that can be attained locally is bought from local suppliers** Mildly Sustainable 4 S ources of foods used as ingredi ents or serv ed b y UBC and AMS Food Servic es that can be att ained locall y are bou ght from loc al or nati onal suppl iers.  Suppli ers are consi der ed na ti onal when the y are loc ated wit hin Canad a.  **60-80% of food that can be attained locally is bought from local suppliers** Neutral 3 S ources of foods used as ingredi ents or serv ed b y UBC and AMS Food Servic es that can be att ained lo call y ar e mo stl y bou ght from local, na ti onal, and cont inental suppl iers.  Conti nental suppl iers are consi de red conti nen tal when the y ar e locat ed withi n North America.  **40-60% of food that can be attained locally is bought from local suppliers** Mildly Unsustainable 2 S ources of foods used as  ingredi ents or serv ed b y UBC and AMS Food Services that can be att ained locall y are half bought from local, nati onal, conti nent al, and glob al suppl iers.  Global suppl iers are an yw her e around in t he world.  **20-40% of food that can be attained locally is bought from local suppliers** Unsustainable 1 S ources of foods used as ingredi ents or serv ed b y UBC and AMS Food Services that can be att ained locall y are ha r dl y bou ght from local suppl iers.  Almos t all is bought from nati onal, conti nental, or global suppl iers.  **0-20% of food that can be attained locally is bought from local suppliers**                 28  APPENDIX C  Methods to Measure Each Indicator of Sustainability at the UBC Farm  1.  Method to measure the social sustainability of the UBC Farm:  availability and acceptability of UBC Farm foods.  Sustainable 5 Highl y avail able and ac ceptable.  UBC Farm foods are sold at alm ost all UBC food outl ets.  There are si gns in those outl ets that inform people of whic h foods are from the farm.  The UBC Farm’s market gard en is open for at least 8 hou rs a da y (i.e. – 9 am to 5 pm), 7 days a week.  The gard en takes all methods of payment (cash, debit , and credit ).  People perceive the fo od choices to be highl y ac ceptable in ter ms of variet y (i.e. – organi c, at least 20 d ifferent t ypes o f food).  **80-100% of foods are available and acceptable** Mildly sustainable 4 S omewhat avail able and acc eptable.  UBC Farm foods are sold at three - qu arters of UBC food outl ets.  There are signs in those outl ets that inform people of whi ch foods are fro m the farm.  The UBC Farm’s market garden is open for at least 8 hours a day (i.e. – 9 am to 5 pm), 5 da ys a week.  The garden tak es all methods of paym ent (cash, debit , and cr edit ).  People perceiv e the food choices to be hi ghl y acceptabl e  in terms of variet y (i.e. – ¾ organic, at least 15 differ ent t ypes o f food).  **60-80% of foods are available and acceptable** Neutral 3 Fairl y avail abl e and ac ce ptable.  UBC Farm foods are sold at onl y half of UBC food outl ets.  There are signs in those  outl ets that inform people of whic h foods are from the farm.  The UBC Farm’s market garden is open for at least 6 hours a day (i.e. – 10 am to 4 pm), 5 days a week.  The garden tak es only cash and debit as forms of pa yment.  People perc eive the food ch oic es to be fairl y acc eptable in t erms of variet y (i.e. – ½ organic, at l east 10 different t ypes o f food).  **40-60% of foods are available and acceptable** Mildly unsustainable 2 S omewhat unavail able and inaccessi ble.  UBC Farm foods are sold at onl y on e - qu a rter of UBC food outl ets.  There are no si gns in those outl ets that inform people of which fo ods are from the farm.  The UBC Farm’s market garden is open for only 4 - 6 hours a da y (i.e. – 10 am to 3 pm), onl y 3 - 4 times a week.  The gard en takes onl y cash a s a met hod of pa yment.  People perceiv e the food choices to be somewh at unacc eptable in te rms of variet y (i.e. – ¼ organic, at least 5 differ e nt t ypes of food).  **20-40% of foods are available and acceptable** Unsustainable 1 Highl y un avail able and unacc eptable.  UBC Farm foods are sold at less than one - qu arte r of UBC food outl ets.  The r e ar e no si gns in those outl ets that inform people of which foods ar e from the farm.  The UBC Farm’s market garden is open for only 4 hours a day (i.e. – 10 am to 2 pm ), o nl y 3 - 4 times a week.  The garden takes onl y cash as a method of pa ym ent.  People perceiv e the food  29  choices to be hi ghl y un acc eptable in terms of variet y (i.e. – less than ¼ organic, less than 5 different t ypes o f food) .  **0-20% of foods are available and acceptable**      2.  Method to measure the economic sustainability of the UBC Farm:  profitability of the UBC Farm.  Sustainable 5 Each mont h, the UBC Farm makes enou gh rev enue to not onl y cover costs but to improve itself as well (i.e. – new farming te chnologi es, better equipm ent)  **Revenue >> costs  high profit** Mildly sustainable 4 Each mont h, the UBC Farm makes enou gh reve nue to earn some profit .  It is not, however, enough to be used to improve itself (i.e. – new farming te chnolo gies, bett er equi pment).  **Revenue > costs  some profit** Neutral 3 Each mont h, the UBC Fa rm breaks ev en.  **Revenue = costs  zero profit** Mildly unsustainable 2 Most mont hs (at least six ), the UBC Farm brea ks even.  Other mont hs (less than six ), it does not.  **Revenue = costs (for at least six months of the year)  zero profit OR net loss** Unsustainable 1 Most mont hs (at least six ), the UBC Farm does not break even.  Other months (less than six ), it does.  **Revenue > costs (for at least six months of the year)  net loss**                     30  3.  Method to measure the ecological sustainability of the UBC Farm:  proportion of environmentally-friendly farming practices.  Sustainable 5 Almos t all of the farmin g pr acti c es on the farm are eit her or ganic or ecolo gicall y - friendl y.  **80-100% of the farming practices are environmentally- friendly** Mildly Sustainable 4 Most of the farming pra cti ces on the farm are eit her organic or ecolo gicall y - f riendl y.  **60-80% of the farming practices are environmentally- friendly** Neutral 3 Half of th e farming pra cti ces on the farm ar e eit her or ganic or ecolo gicall y - f riendl y.  **40-60 of the farming practices are environmentally- friendly** Mildly Unsustainable 2 Most of the farming pra cti ces on the farm are ne it her organi c nor ecolo gicall y - f riendl y.  **20-40% of the farming practices are environmentally- friendly** Unsustainable 1 Almos t all of the farming pra cti ces on the farm are neit her or ganic nor ecolo gicall y - friendl y.  **0-20% of the farming practices are environmentally- friendly**  4.  Method to measure the social-economic sustainability of the UBC Farm:  affordability of UBC Farm foods.  Sustainable 5 UBC Farm foods are 80% che aper  th an the sa me foods sold in supermarkets.  **farm prices = 80% of supermarket prices** Mildly Sustainable 4 UBC Farm foods are 85% che aper  th an the sa me foods sold in supermarkets.   **farm prices = 85% of supermarket prices** Neutral 3 UBC Farm foods are 90% che aper  th an the sa me foods sold in supermarkets.  **farm prices = 90% of supermarket prices** Mildly Unsustainable 2 UBC Farm foods are 95% che aper  th an the sa me foods sold in supermarkets.  **farm prices = 95% of supermarket prices** Unsustainable 1 UBC Farm fo ods ar e th e same price as the same foods sold in supermarkets.  **farm prices = supermarket prices**        31  5.  Method to measure the social-ecological sustainability of the UBC Farm:  awareness and knowledge of the UBC Farm and its role in contributing to the overall sustainability of the UBCFS.  Sustainable 5 High awar eness and kn owledge of the UBC Farm and of the concept of sust ainabili ty.  Mo re than two - thi r ds of people  are awar e of how the UBC Farm relates to th e sust ainabili t y of the UBCFS .  **80-100% of the UBC population have an awareness and knowledge of the UBC Farm and its role in sustainability of the UBCFS** Mildly Sustainable 4 S ome awar eness and knowledge of th e UBC Farm and of th e concept of sust ainabili t y.  Mor e of than half of the  peopl e  are awar e of how the UBC Farm relates to th e sust ainabili t y of the UBCFS .  **60-80% of the UBC population have an awareness and knowledge of the UBC Farm and its role in sustainability of the UBCFS ** Neutral 3 Fair aw ar eness and kn owledge of the UBC Farm and of the concept of sust ainabili t y.  Half of the people are awar e of how the UBC Farm rel ates to the sust ainabili t y of the UBCFS .  **40-60% of the UBC population have an awareness and knowledge of the UBC Farm and its role in sustainability of the UBCFS ** Mildly Unsustainable 2 S ome lack of aw are ness and knowled ge of the UBC Farm and of the concept of sust aina bil it y.  Less than half of the people are awar e of how the UBC Farm r elates to th e sust ainabili t y of the UBCFS .  **20-40% of the UBC population have an awareness and knowledge of the UBC Farm and its role in sustainability of the UBCFS ** Unsustainable 1 Lit tl e aw ar eness and kn owledge of the UBC Farm and of the concept of s ustainabil it y .  Less than on e - thi rd of people ar e aw are of how the UBC Farm re lates to the sust ainabili t y of the UBC FS .  **0-20% of the UBC population have an awareness and knowledge of the UBC Farm and its role in sustainability of the UBCFS **             32  6.  Method to measure the economic-ecological sustainability of the UBC Farm:  proportion of UBC Farm foods that are sold to UBC and AMS Food Services as ingredients or to be served to customers directly.   Sustainable 5 Almos t all of the UBC Farm foods are being s old to UBC and AMS Food Services as ingredi ents or to be served to custom ers directly.  Any remaining foods are sold in the farm’s market ga rden.  **80-100% of farm foods are being sold to food services** Mildly Sustainable 4 Most of the UBC Farm foods are being sold to UBC and AMS Food Servic es as ingredi ents or to be serv ed to cu stom ers directl y.  The remaining farm foods are sold in the farm’s market garden. **60-80% of farm foods are being sold to food services** Neutral 3 Onl y half of the UBC Farm foods are bein g sold t o UBC and AMS Food Servic es as ingredi ents or to be serv ed to cu stom ers directl y.  The other remainin g half of the farm foods are s old in the fa rm’s market gard en.  **40-60% of farm foods are being sold to food services** Mildly Unsustainable 2 Most of the UBC Farm foods are not bein g sold t o UBC and AMS Food Servic es as ingredi ents or to be serv ed to cu stom ers directl y.  Inste ad, most of the far m  foods are sold in the farm’s market ga rden.  **20-40% of farm foods are being sold to food services** Unsustainable 1 Ver y litt le UBC Fa rm fo ods are being sold to UBC and AMS Food Services as ingredients or to be served to custom ers directl y.  Most of the  farm foods are sold in the farm’s market garden. **0-20% of farm foods are being sold to food services**                       33  APPENDIX D  Instruments of Data Collection  1. Social Sustainability of the UBC Farm:  Availability and Acceptability of UBC Farm Foods   The social indi cator of t he UBC Farm is measu red b y th e avail abil it y and a ccept abil it y of its foods.   The following questi ons can be answe red b y the AGS C 450, Class of 2005 students upon rese arch of the UBC Farm and UBC food servi ce outl ets.  1.  List all the UBC food ser vice outl ets that serve UBC Fa rm products.  2.  In those food outl ets that serve UBC Farm produ c ts, are th ere an y si gns th at inform peopl e which foods are from UBC Fa r m?  3.  How man y da ys of the week and how man y ho urs of the da y do es UBC Far m’s Market Garden open?  4.  How many methods of payment does UBC Farm’s Market Garden accept?  5.  How man y t ypes of pro duces are sold in UBC Farm?  What is the proporti on of these products being or ganicall y gro wn?  Based on the data you co ll ected, calcul ate the per centa ge of each cate go r y (e. g. for questi on 1 abov e, how man y food outl ets are servin g UBC Fa rm pr oducts out of all the on es in UBC? )  Take the low est percent a ge calculated fro m each questi on and app l y thi s number to the Me thod to measure the soci al sustainabil it y of the UBC Farm:  avail abil it y and accept abil it y of UBC Farm foods provided in Appendix C, to determine the social sust ainabili t y of the UBC Farm   2. Economic Sustainability of the UBC Farm: Profitability of the UBC Farm   The economi c indi c ato r of the UBC Farm is meas ured b y the pro fitabili t y of UBC Farm.    The foll owing qu esti ons can be answer ed b y the AGS C 450, Class of 2005 students upon resea rch of the UBC Farm.   1.  W hat was the ex act acco unti ng for cost of input s and tot al sales at the UBC Far m last yea r?  2.  How much rev enue was UBC Farm earnin g last year? Is UBC Farm making enou gh reve nue to cover costs an d improve the farm as well ?   3.  C omparing to previous years in gen eral, is UBC Farm ea rning mor e or less profit s last ye ar?  4.  C omparing to the ye ar wi th highest profit s, what p ercent a ge of those profit s was the UBC Farm earnin g last ye ar?   34  5.  In comparison to other universit y farms, was the UBC Farm earnin g more or less profit s last ye ar?  Use the Method to measu re the economi c sust aina bil it y of th e U BC Farm: profit abil it y of UBC Far m provided in Appendix C to determi ne the economi c sust ainabili t y of the UBC Farm.  3. Ecological Sustainability of the UBC Farm:  Proportion of Food Wastes that are Being Composted or Recycled   The ecologi cal indicato r of the UBC Farm is meas ured b y proporti on of foo d wastes th at are being compos ted or rec ycled   The foll owing qu esti ons can be answer ed b y the AGS C 450, Class of 2005 students upon resea rch of the UBC Farm and UBC food servi ce outl ets.  1.  How man y re c ycli n g and compos ti ng bins avail ab le throughout the campus and wher e ar e the y located.  2.  List all post ers and pro gr ams that inform and educ ate people about rec yc li ng and compos ti ng of food wastes.  3.  If a suf ficient number of rec ycli n g and compos ti ng bins is provided, h ow often do people use them?  4.  To calculate chan ges in percent a ge of  rec yc lable and compos table food was tes, compare th e amount of food and food packa gin g mate rials that are produ ced and used b y UBC food se rvice outl ines wit h that of being compos ted and re c ycle d each mont h.   5.  C alculate the amount of compos ted material that i s being used in the UBC Farm fo r growin g produces.  Use the Method to measu re the ecologi cal sus taina bil it y of th e UBC Farm: profit abil it y of UBC Far m provided in Appendix C to determi ne the ecolo gic al sus tainabil it y of the UBC Farm.  4. Social-Economic Sustainability of the UBC Farm:  Affordability of UBC Farm Foods   The social -e conomi c indi cator of the UBC Farm is measured b y the affo rda bil it y of its foods.   The following questi ons can be answe red b y the AGS C 450, Class of 2005 students upon rese arch of the UBC Farm and of local supermark ets.   1.  List all of the diff er ent t ypes of foods bein g sold at the UBC Farm. 2.  W hat are the pric es of th e above -m enti oned foods being sold at the farm? 3.  W hat are the superm arke t prices of the ex act sam e foods? 4.  Are the farm pric es great er than, equ al to, or less than the superma rket pric es?  35  5.  If the farm prices ar e les s than the supe rmark et prices, are th e y 95%, 90 %, 85%, or 80% of the supermarket p rices?  Use the Method to measure the social -e conomi c sust ainabili t y of the UBC Farm:  affo rdabil it y of UBC Farm foods provide d in Appendix C to determi ne the social -e conomi c sust ainabili t y of the UBC Farm.  5. Social-Ecological Sustainability of the UBC Farm: Awareness and Knowledge of the UBC Farm and its Role in the UBC Food System   The social -e cologi cal indi cator of the UBC Farm i s measured b y the aw are ness and knowled ge of the UBC Farm and its rol e in contribut ing to the overall sust ainabili t y of th e UBC FS   The following questi ons can be answe red b y the AGS C 450, class of 2005 students upon research of the UBC Farm and UBC food servi ce outl ets  1.  Are you awar e that there is a Farm on the UBC campus? 2.  If so, do you have an y ge neral knowled ge on what the Farm produces? 3.  H ave you ever heard the term “sustainability”? 4.  If asked, would you be able to clearl y de fine thi s term? 5.  Accordin g to your definiti on, do you thi nk the cur r ent UBCFS is sustainabl e or unsust ainable? 6.  Are you awa re that some campus food outl ets h av e purch ased food from th e Farm in the past, if so which ones?  7.  In yo ur opini on, do you thi nk that the UBC Farm can be furth er int e gr ate d int o and improve the sust ainabili t y of the UBCFS ?  Use the Method to m ea sure the soci al -e cologic al sust ainabili t y of th e UBC Farm: aw ar eness and knowledge of the UBC Farm and its role in th e UBCFS provided in Ap pendix C to determi ne the social -ecolo gic al sus tainabil it y of the UBC Farm.   6. Economic-Ecological Sustainability of the UBC Farm: Proportion of UBC Farm Foods Sold to UBC and AMS Food Services    The economi c -ecolo gic al indicator is measured b y assessing the proporti on of UBC Farm foods that are sold to UBC and AMS Food Services as ei ther ingredients or dir ectl y to the UBC comm unit y.   The foll owing qu esti ons can be rese arch ed and an swered b y AGSC 450 students.   1.  W hat proporti on of the food produced b y the UBC Farm is sold to UBC and AMS Food Services?   36  2.  W hat percenta ge of the t otal amount of food purc hased b y UBC and AMS Food Servic es does the Farm suppl y?  3.  Does the Farm hav e th e producti ve cap acit y to su ppl y UBC and AMS Foo d Services with all some or onl y a small pro portion of their over all need?  4.  Is the re an op portunit y to increas e the amount of Farm food purc hased b y UBC and AMS Food Services?  5.  W hat proporti on of Farm food purchas ed b y UBC and AMS Food servi ces i s sol d directl y to members of the UBC co mm unit y?   Use the Method to measu re the economi c -e colo gic al sus tainabil it y of the UBC Farm: profit abil it y of UBC Farm provided in Appendix C to determine the economi c - ecolo gic al sust ainabili t y of the UBC Farm                                     37  APPENDIX E  SWOT Analysis of the UBC Farm Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats (SWOT) of the UBC Farm  Strengths   More land at disposal  Have ex ist ing basic relati onshi p w/UBC food p rov iders  Strong knowledge base to draw from, faculty “experts”  P roducti on efficienc y in creasin g b y the year  buil ding mom entum , not a gr assroots project an ymor e  Intrinsi c und erstandin g of producti on potential  Knowled ge bein g passed on  Low input costs ot her th a n labour  Weaknesses   Moratorium on buil ding structures that requi re a foundati on and uti li ti es  S easonalit y (1/2 ye ar, ro ughl y)  High labou r costs  S taff turnover  Empl o yees knowled ge s pread too thi n. (Ex . 2/3 producti on, 1/3 mark eti ng, result  not all suppl y sold)  Lim it ed sourc es of capit a l (monetar y, machin er y, human)  Most efficient us e of land, some potential producti on ar eas not in use. (Ex . South and gr eenhouses )  Need stron g le adership and coordinati on in more efficient use of volunteer s and stude nts  Opportunities   S ecure donati ons in cash or equipm ent from Agri companies. ie trac tors, etc. Goodwil l or marketi ng str ate g y.   Inte rfa cult y invol vem ent, students on farm for credit  C reate a paid posit ion to organiz e students and volunteers – cost of fset b y increas ed ef ficien c y  W int er producti on – Greenhouses – hi gh mar gi n crops. Low cost of ener g y  competit ive advanta ge ov er othe r gro wers, sell at discount? No effe ct on profit mar gin  Take adv anta ge of comp eti ti ve advanta ges o Low dist ributi on costs o Low in put costs – fertili zers, etc. o Low ener g y costs o Low labo ur costs (volunt eers)  C ater dire ctl y to student s – no other produ cer – monopol y, espe ciall y at Fairview residen ce. No gro cer on campus .  S ecure cont racts with on campus food provide rs      38  Threats   Tempo ral coordin ati on of suppl y and demand (s ea sonalit y)  P oor pit ch to stakeholder s on farm value and pote nti al  Not acti ng/ ex panding on recomm endati ons of curr ent AGSC 450 projects and resourc es  UBC developm ent plan/s trate g y. (Condos? )  P oor crop mana gement, inv entor y is an important asset. Lo w yields  low revenue     APPENDIX F  Documents Pertaining to the UBC Farm (Source: Mark Bomford)  UBC Market Garden 2002-2003 Sales  UB C Market Garden: T o tal Sales by Mo nth$ 0 .0 0$ 1 ,0 0 0 .0 0$ 2 ,0 0 0 .0 0$ 3 ,0 0 0 .0 0$ 4 ,0 0 0 .0 0$ 5 ,0 0 0 .0 0$ 6 ,0 0 0 .0 0Mar-02Apr-02May-02Jun-02Jul-02Aug-02 Sep-02Oct-02Nov-02 Dec-02Jan-03Feb-03Mar-03                                                                 

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}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            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:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.18861.1-0108666/manifest

Comment

Related Items