UBC Undergraduate Research

A study of the feasibility in relocalizing the food system at the University of British Columbia Hague, Jennica Joanne; Ramsay, Heather; Chan, Willem Wai Lun; Kwon, Hyun-Joo; Lukasiewicz, Adam Steven; Kwan, Doris Cheuk Man; Tong, William Kwok Hung Mar 31, 2004

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
18861-Hague_J_et_al_SEEDS_2004.pdf [ 1.05MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 18861-1.0108691.json
JSON-LD: 18861-1.0108691-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 18861-1.0108691-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 18861-1.0108691-rdf.json
Turtle: 18861-1.0108691-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 18861-1.0108691-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 18861-1.0108691-source.json
Full Text
18861-1.0108691-fulltext.txt
Citation
18861-1.0108691.ris

Full Text

UBC Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Student Report       A Study Of The Feasibility In Relocalizing The Food System At The University Of British Columbia Jennica Joanne Hague, Heather Ramsay, Willem Wai Lun Chan, Hyun-Joo Kwon , Adam Steven Lukasiewicz, Doris Cheuk Man Kwan, William Kwok Hung Tong  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”.       A STUDY OF THE FEASI BILITY IN RELOCALIZING THE FOOD SYSTEM AT THE UNIVERSI TY OF BRITIS H COLUMBIA         Marc h 31, 2004     Profe ssor Ale j a ndro  Roja s AGSC 450  – Land, Food, and Comm unit y III The Unive rsi t y of Brit i sh Colum bi a , Vanc ouve r, Cana da     By Group 17:   Jenni ca Joa nne Hague Hea t he r Ramsa y Will e m Wai Lun Cha n Hyun-J oo Kwon Ada m Ste ve n Luka si e wi cz Dori s Che uk Man Kwa n Will i a m Kwok Hung Tong     2         Table of Contents    Abstract ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 3 Value Assum pti ons a nd Group Nar rati ve ................................ ............................... 4 Assessing Group 14’s Indicators ................................ ................................ ............ 6 Ecologic al Indicato rs ................................ ................................ .............................. 9 Economi c I ndicators ................................ ................................ ............................. 12  Social Indic ators ................................ ................................................................ .... 13  Educati on Piec e ................................ ................................................................ ..... 15  Conclusi on ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 16  Referen ces ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 18  Appendix 1 – Questi onnaire: Awa ren ess of a Lo c al Food S yst em ...................... 20  Appendix 2 – Questi onnaire ev aluation guid e ................................ ...................... 21  Appendix 3 – Educati on Piece ................................ ................................ .............. 22      3     Abstract  We looke d at the fea si bi li ty of a reloc al i ze d food sys t e m at UBC. The ultim a te goa l of this pro je c t is not to prom ote the adopt i on a sole l y loc al die t , but to find the right bala nce of loc a ll y -p roduc e d, sea sona l and importe d foods purcha se d tha t woul d most fea si bl y support a “sustainable diet” in terms of environmental, economic, and social i m pac t s. Bene fi t s of a l oca li ze d food syst e m inc l ude less carbon emissi ons from the shorte r tra nsport at i on dist a nc e of food produc t s, boost i ng the loca l econom y, and a personal re -c onne c ti on with food and the farme r. According to our ecol ogi c al , econom ic and soc ia l indi ca t ors, we have dete rm i ne d the leve l of fea si bi l i t y to be high if 50% of produc t s purc hase d by UBC food servi c e s are ava i la ble loc al l y, 10% of tota l expendi t ure s is towa rds food proc urem e nt is for local food, and there is ≥50% awareness level of the UBC comm uni t y towa rds the bene fi t s of purc ha si ng loca l foods and will i ngne ss to do so. We also descri be the use of an educa ti onal post e r to inc re a se awa re ne ss of a loca l food syst e m on campus and provi de methods for research for next year’s AGSC 450 class.         4  Introduction T he sust ai na bi l it y of the food syst e m at UBC went unde r revi e w by the 2003 AGSC 450 cla ss. Result s indic at e d many are a s for improve m e nt , one being the nee d for more loc al food proc urem e nt prac ti c e s. We, g roup 17, belie ve that the adopti o n of a more loca li ze d food syste m at UBC has many bene fi t s and woul d cont ri but e to the ove ra l l sust ai na bi l it y of t he syst e m . Not only woul d a more loc al i ze d approa c h improve the sust aina bi li t y of the UBC food syst e m , it is also a very nec e ssa ry ste p to take in orde r to avoi d the compl et e colla pse of the syst e m due to its curre nt unsust a i na bl e condit i ons. We will atte m pt to determi ne how fea si ble it woul d be to introduc e a more loc al i ze d food syst e m and UBC and will also addr e ss the nee d for inc re a sed awa re ne ss on campus through the use of an educa t i on piec e .  Problem Statement  T he ultim at e goa l of this proj e ct is no t to prom ote the adopt i on a solel y loc a l die t , but to find the right bala nc e of loc a ll y-pr oduc e d, sea sonal and import e d foods purc ha se d tha t woul d most fea si bl y support a “sustainable diet” in terms of environmental, economic, and social impacts. Whether o r not the re-l oca li za t i on of the UBC food syst e m is fea si bl e depe nds on a numbe r of fac t ors, incl udi ng:  food servi c e provi de rs cont i nue to make simil a r or bette r economi c return  a soc ia l l y acc e pt a bl e leve l of vari e t y of produc t s is stil l ava i la ble at an ac c e ptabl e cost  a soc ia l inte re st and will i ngne ss in maki ng loc al and sea sona l food choi ce s  a n ove ra l l reduc t ion in nega t i ve envi ronm e nta l impa c t s  a bi li t y of loc a l food suppl ie rs to respond to inc rea se d demands from UBC purcha si ng depa rt m ent , in term s of qua nt it y, a va i l a bil it y, and compe ti t i ve price s  Value Assumptions and Group Narrative Va l ue s serve as the unique lens through whic h the worl d is see n by eac h indi vidua l . The y sha de perc e pt i ons of eve nts, right s and wrongs, probl e m s and solut i ons. Our group sh a re s the same wea k -a nt hropoc e nt ri c value point of vie w with last year’s Group 14. We pla ce our own survi va l as pri ori t y ove r othe r things, but we also value our surroundi ngs bec a use that is wha t sust a ins our own  5  e xi st enc e . Our group also value s the comm uni t y and, at the same time , value s the indi vi dua l . As we are awa re that indi vi dua l s are the thre ad of the comm uni t y, the two are see n as inse pa rabl e . Some of the group membe rs plac e d a highe r value on the healt h of the comm uni t y and the indi vi dua l in term s o f nutri t i on and food safe t y, whil e othe rs were more conce rne d with the impac t of the food syst e m on the natural envi ronm e nt or the econom i c sta bil it y of the food syst e m . Ove ra l l , we agre e d the hea lt h of the comm unit y, the indivi dua l , the natura l envi ronm e n t , and the econom y ar e all syne r gi st i c a ll y relat e d whe n eva l ua t ing the sust a i na bil i t y of a food syst e m .  One limi ta ti on of our perspe c ti ve s may be tha t no one in the group fee l s extrem e l y passi ona t e about the prima ry import anc e of just one of the environm e nt a l , economi c or soc i al indi ca t ors of sust a i na bi l it y. Although in the long run it is most desi ra ble to appre c ia te the bala nc e betwe e n the thre e indic at ors, it is also ver y bene fi c i a l to have strong cont ra st i ng opinions in the group.  These woul d serve to stim ula t e the deve l opm e nt of more cre a ti ve solut i ons tha t acc ount for the cont ra sti ng nee ds and varia ble of each cla ss of indi ca t or. For exam pl e , havi ng one strong envi ronm e nta l advoc a t e woul d kee p the group from ignori ng an y less obvi ous nega t i ve impa ct s tha t one sugge st e d solut i on may have on the envi ronm e nt .  In disc ussi ng pos si bl e actions and rec omm e nda t i ons of the re -l oc al i za ti on of the food syst e m , our group’s values became more and more obvious. For example, we had a debate about how “local” r e -localization needed to be.  We opted for “local” to mean produced within BC.  We decided not to i nc l ude Washi ngt on produc e as loca l , eve n though Washi n gt on is close r to UBC tha n some part s of BC.  Thi s is not only for th e sake of simpl i ci t y, sinc e data is ofte n more rea di ly ava i l a bl e at the provi nc i a l leve l , but also large l y bec a use of group p atri ot i sm . Buyi n g Cana di an also helps buil d a food syst e m tha t we have more poli ti ca l cont rol ove r tha n one base d in the US. Here , our value s about our personal connections with the “Canadian community” won out over the close physical proxi mi t y of Washi ngt on.   6  We did agre e , howe ve r, tha t alt hough the foc us of this course was sust ai na bi l ity, we nee de d to foc us on fea si bi l it y. Fea si bi l it y mea ns the degree to whic h the acti on under que st i on will yie l d suc c e ss with rea sona ble effort . Fea si bi li t y ana l ysi s tends to be weight e d towa rds economi c conc e rns, but also incl ude s the ecol ogi c a l and soc ia l aspe c t s as well , like susta i na bi li t y.  In othe r words, a fea si bl e opti on is econom ic a ll y doa bl e , and carryi ng out that opti on maint ai ns or provi de s a net improve me nt in the econom i c , soc i al and ecol ogi c al q ua l it y of the syst e m . After coming to a conse nsus on this defi ni t i on, we were able to ide nt i fy barrie rs to re -l oca li za t i on (fa c t ors that coul d make re -localization “unfeasible”) and created economic, social and ecological indicators based on t he se .    Assessing Group 14’s Indicators Our group chose to assess Group 14’s model from last year’s class .  Thei r mode l pre se nte d a clea r desc ri pti on of the indi c at ors chosen and thei r rese a rc h methodol ogy. Gro up 14 had chose n one indi ca t or for eac h of the ec ol ogi c al , soc ia l and econom i ca l aspe ct s and pre se nt e d a resea rc h desi gn for mea suri ng each indi c ator. Through our own group disc ussi on we have imple m e nt e d seve ra l modi fi c at i ons to bett e r cove r eac h aspe ct of sust a i nabi l it y and inc re a se the prac t ic al i t y and  fea si bi l it y of the rese a rc h methods.  Last year’s group chose food mileage as the indicator for the ecological aspect. The AMS Food and Beve ra ge depa rtm e nt , UBC Villa ge , and the UBC food servi c e s sourc e d a vari e t y of food and ingre die nt s from food suppl i e s broke r. More than 6 mill i on dolla rs eac h yea r are spe nt on food proc urem e nt prac ti c e s by UBC Food Ser vi c e s alone .  For the social indicators, last year’s group chose awareness of nutritious food. Our group a gre e s that to asse ss UBC soc i a l susta i na bil i t y sta t us, awa re ne ss of nutri t i ous food shoul d be the main approa c h. Unli ke group14, we also felt tha t awa re ne ss of loc al food held the same import a nc e . We beli e ve that asse ssi ng a repre se nta t i ve popul at i on in the UBC campus through a surve y -t ype  7  que st i onna i re can give poli c y make rs and stake hol ders the perspe c ti ve the genera l campus -popul at i on has towa rd food syst e m sust a i nabi li t y.  Group 14 chose afforda bi l i t y of nutri t i ous food as the econom ic indi ca t or. Through pri c e compa ri son of food on and off campus an d assessing how much of an individual’s income goes toward buying nutritious food, they can relate how costs of food might affect an individual’s fi na nc i al sta bi li t y. But wit h the vast numbe r of comm odi ti e s ava il a bl e on campus and in the Vill a ge , we agre e d tha t the re has to be a set numbe r of foods tha t we shoul d use to compa re price .   Literature Review We beli e ve that a more loc a li ze d food syst e m at UBC woul d cont ri but e to the sust a i na bi l it y of the syst e m for a number of rea sons.  Food has bec om e inc re a singl y more like a global comm odi t y tha n a loca l product (Lie bl e i n, 2001). In the USA, the ave ra ge dista nce tha t a food item tra ve l s from the farm to the consumer’s kitchen is now 50% further than it did in 1979, with eac h ite m tra ve li ng an ave ra ge of 2000 kilom et e rs (Pre tt y, 2000). The resul t is an inc re a se in the use of non -re ne wa bl e fossil fuels and the production of greenhouse gases in distributing food. Also, in the early 1900’s fa rm e rs were rece i vi ng 44% of the consumer cost of their product, but by the 1990’s were only re c ei v i ng 9% (Pre t t y, 200 0). Now, marke t i ng take s 66% and produc ti on cost s take s 25% of the tota l pri c e (Pre tt y, 2000). In globa l food syst e m s, peopl e are bec om ing inc rea si ngl y dist a nt  from thei r food, resul t i ng in diffi c ul t ie s ide nt i fyi ng and maki ng connec t i ons with the produc e rs and proce ssors of the i r food (Lie bl e i n, 2001). Indi vi dua l s, the re fore may pla c e less pri orit y on agri c ul t ure , food syst e m s, natura l resource s, and long -t e rm sust ai na bi li t y ( Lie bl e i n, 2001). A loc al food syst e m works to help solve the above probl em s. Envi ronm ent al bene fi t s of a local food syst e m inc l ude dec re a se d tra nsport exte rna l it i e s, food mile s, and gre e nhouse gas emissi ons and more sust a ina ble produc t i on syst e m s (Pre t t y, 20 01).   8   Econom i c bene fi t s of a loca l food syst e m woul d incl ude a gre a t er perc e nt of purc ha si ng cost of a food ite m being re -a lloc a te d to the farme rs (Pre tt y, 2001). Not onl y woul d farm e rs earn grea t er inc ome s, the re woul d be a grea t e r fina n c i al cont ri buti on to the loc al econom y (Pre t t y, 2001). Loc a l farm s are more likel y to purc ha se input s loc al l y, provi de jobs for loc a l resi de nts, and reinve st profi t s in the comm unit y ( Lys on, 1999). Buyi n g dire c t l y fro m the farm e r at a farm e rs marke t is als o a less expe nsi ve way of purc ha sing high qua l i t y produc e . Howe ve r, purc ha si ng from a loc al food produc er may init i a ll y resul t in incre a se d food pric e s bec a use of lowe r econom i e s of scal e and the high cost of farm l a nd nea r urba n area s (Herri n, 1989). On th e othe r hand, if the true long -t erm cost s of the envi ronm e nt a l degra dat i on of the pre se nt food produc t i on syst e m are counte d in the cost of food, the n in the long-t e rm , loc al food produc t i on woul d resul t in rela ti ve l y less expe nsi ve food (Herri n, 1989). Soc i a l bene fi t s of a local food syst e m inc l ude gre a ter proxi ma l and psyc hol ogi c a l connec t i ons betwee n the consum e r and the produce r and the con sume r and food (Pre t t y, 2001). By knowi ng the ori gi n, hist ory and ide nti t y of the food, a highe r leve l of trust is give n to the safe t y and nutri ti onal value of the food (Lie bl e i n, 2001). Consum e rs and produce rs can conne ct through the purc ha se of loc a ll y grown foods at farm e rs marke t s, consum e r groups and coope ra ti ve s, comm unit y garde ns, and box sche me s (Pre t t y 2001). A loc al food syst e m has a numbe r of unique cha rac te ri st ic s as compa re d to the globa l food syst e m . A loc a l food syst e m foll ows the the ory of c ivi l soc i e t y, in tha t wha t is good for the farm i n inse pa ra ble from wha t is good for the comm unit y as a whol e , and for future gene ra ti ons (Lyson, 1999). A loca l food syst e m also depe nds on a relat ive l y large numbe r of many diffe re nt type s and size s of far m s. Loc a l farms have relat i ve l y high tra nsa c t i on cost s but much lowe r marke ti ng, pac ka gi ng, proc e ssi ng and tra nsporta ti on cost s (Lyson, 1999). The re also may be a reduce d vari et y of produc e ava i la bl e loca ll y and a gre at e r nee d for sea sona l vari at i on in the die t (Lys on, 1999). A stud y  10  BC Agri c ul t ural Comm odi t y Li st for thi s purpose (BCMA FF 2001).   An exa mpl e of this ana l ysi s is give n in Tabl e 1.       Table 1. Sample tabl e for sele ct e d fre sh frui t s use d at UBC.     Commodity Grown/raised in BC Apples  No Strawberries Yes Bananas Yes Tomatoes No   If time is very limi t e d, this data set coul d be use d to calc ula te a crude fea si bi li ty indi c a t or.  Feasi bi l i t y can be rate d as foll ows:   75 -100% of produc t s ava ila bl e loca ll y: reloc a li za t i on is ver y ecol ogi c a l l y fea si bl e .  50 -74% of food produc t s ava i l a bl e loca l l y: reloca l i za t i o n is ecol ogi c al l y fea si bl e .  25 -49% of food produc t s ava i l a bl e loca l l y: reloca l i za t i on is some wha t ecol ogic a ll y fea si bl e .  0 -24% of food produc t s ava i l a ble loc a ll y: reloc al i zat i on is not ecol ogi c al l y fea si bl e .  In this case , 2/4 of the produc t s ana l yze d are on the BC Agri c ul t ure Comm odit y List , so the indic a tor value is 50% and reloca l i za t i on is some wha t fea si ble.   Next, sea sona l it y data can be adde d to the anal ysi s.  In Tabl e 2, mont hs in whic h a produc e item is ava il a ble are marke d with an X.  Note that se a sona li t y is take n to inc l ude mont hs in whic h the fre sh produc t is ava il a bl e in stora ge .  This coul d be exte nde d to inc lude froze n produc t s (e.g., fro ze n stra wbe rrie s), but only fre sh produc e is consi de re d here for simpli ci t y.    Table 2.  Identi fyi n g Se a sona l it y Commodity J F M A M J J A S O N D Apples  X X X      X X X X Strawberries      X X X X    Bananas             Tomatoes  X X X X X X X X X X   Next, for each mont h tha t a product is ava il a bl e , dete rm i ne what proport i on of the qua nt it y orde re d by UBC Food Servi c e s is ava i l abl e loca ll y.  Spea ki ng direc tl y with a broke r may be  11  suffi c i e nt if a smal l numbe r of produc t s are ana l yze d.  Othe rwise , look at the tota l amount of the frui t / ve ge t a bl e produce d (or ava i l a bl e in stora ge ) in BC for tha t mont h.  Assi gn a value of 1 to indi ca te tha t in that mont h, suffi c i e nt volume of the produc t is ava i la ble , should UBC be will i ng to pay for it.   A value less tha n one is the proporti on of the requi re d volum e that coul d be obta i ne d if desi re d.  To summ a ri ze the m onthl y value s, calc ul a te the Suffi c i e nc y Inde x.  The Suffi c i e nc y Inde x is calc ula te d as the sum of the se proport i ons divi de d by 12 mont hs.  Hypot he t i ca l data is pre se nt e d in Table 3.   Table 3.  Volum e and sea sona l it y  Volume of product available locally as proportion of UBC’s needs Sufficiency index Product J F M A M J J A S O N D (Sum/12) Apples  0.7 0.5 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0.8 0.45 Strawberries 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 1 1 0.5 0 0 0 0.25 Bananas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tomatoes 0 0.5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0 0.75  Once the table is comple t e, count the numbe r of produc t s with a Suffi c i e nc y In de x of 0.4 or highe r 3  and divi de by the tota l number of produc t s exa m i ne d.  This give s a value showi ng the perce nt a ge of frui t s/ ve ge t a bl e s for whic h at lea st 40% of the i r re qui red volume could be purc ha se d loc al l y in the ave ra ge mont h.  For the data in Tabl e 3, this value is 2/4, or 50%.  Compa ri ng this to the fea si bil it y sca l e , reloc al i za t i on is fea si ble for this group of produc t s.   The limi t at i on of this indic a t or is tha t it doe s not tell us whe t he r those loc al produc t s are produc e d more or less sust a i na bl y tha n the i r non -l oca l count e rpa rt s.  For exampl e , gre e nhouse tomat oe s ofte n have a muc h large r ecol ogi c a l foot pri nt tha n the i r fiel d -grown counte rpa rt s, eve n consi de ri ng the food mile s.  Also, it ignore s pote nti a l qua l it y di ffe re nc e s betwee n loca l and non -l oca l food.  What we have done here , howe ve r, is to look only at one aspe ct of reloca l i zat i on.  Reloca li za t i on is a compl ex proc e ss, an evol ut i on tha t can be anal yze d in sta ge s of 1) loc a ll y                                                  3  Arb itra r y t hr eshold level, chosen as a “reasonable proportion” for local food at UBC during the early stages of r elo ca lizatio n.    12  sourc i ng the foods we curre nt l y eat, 2) shift i ng die t s towa rd foods tha t are curre nt l y produc e d loc al l y, and 3) dive rsi fyi ng loc a l produc ti on to provi de a wide r range of produc t s whe re ecol ogi c al l y fea si bl e .    Economic Indicators  Agri c ul t ural input s in the form of goods, labour, or servi c e s can be sourc e d from many pla ce s, but whe n the y come from the loca l econom y, the expe ndi t ure helps to sust a i n loc al busi ne sse s and live li hoods (Vis & Standi sh, 2004). Group 14 of last year’s Agricultural Sciences 450 class c hose the cost of nutri t i ous food on campus as an econom ic indic at or of loca l food syst e m sust a i na bi l it y – a measure of how muc h of indi vi dua l inc ome withi n the UBC comm uni t y must be devot e d to obtai n ade quate nutrit i on on a dail y basi s or, in othe r words, how muc h of an econom ic burde n the c ost of qua l i t y food impa rt s.  Although a vali d mea sure of sust a i na bi li t y, our foc us in this pape r was outli ne d as asse ssi ng the fea si bil it y in reloc al i zing the proc urem e nt pra c tic e s of food servi c e provi de rs at UBC. As food servi c e provi de rs alrea dy make so litt le per dolla r spe nt on food proc ure me nt – only 3 cent s per doll a r s pe nt by consum e rs accordi ng to Andre w Parr on Marc h 3 – only the purc ha se of less e xpe nsi ve loc al alte rna ti ve s woul d be fea si ble .  As suc h, the thre shol d for the fea si bil it y in reloca li zi ng an y food produc t is defi ni t e and clea r -cut , as only loc a l alte rnat i ves whic h are less expe nsi ve can be term e d a fea si bl e alte rnat i ve .  Future cla sse s in AGSC450 who reac h the sta ge of impl em e nt i ng the se idea s woul d bene fi t from rese a rchi ng the current pri ce s at whic h UBC Food Servi c e s buys vari ous non -l oca l l y produc e d foods, and the n searc h for alt e rnat i ve reta il e rs of the se foods here in the Lowe r Mainla nd . Curre nt l y, pri c e inform a ti on provi ded by Sta t i st ic s Cana da come s at a heft y pri c e , although proba bl y stil l less expe nsi ve tha n conduc ti ng pri m ary rese a rc h on pric es.  If in fac t less expe nsi ve, the se loca l food suppl i e rs woul d make the reloca li za t i on of some food produc t s econom ic a ll y fea si ble .  13  Ac qui ri ng foods produc e d loc al l y at lowe r pric e s woul d lea d to a win -win situat i on for bot h consum e rs and vendors on campus. Elim i na ti ng the vari a bl e of c ost s associ at ed with some sele c te d loc al food produc t s, consum e rs woul d have more ince nt i ve to buy loc a l l y. Con ve rse l y, vendors woul d not only ha ve a mora l inc e nt i ve in the sale of suc h ite m s, but also an econom ic bene fi t . The resul t ing expe ndit ure s spent on loc a l food produc t s – some proportion of the university food system’s ove ra l l budge t – could be used as an indicator of the university’s commitment to relocalization . A benc hm a rk perce nta ge of loc a ll y-produc e d food purc ha se d shou l d be esta bli shed – a Unive rsi t y of Wisc onsi n stud y re ve a l e d eve n a 10% inve stm e nt in purc ha si ng loca l foods can have trem e ndous impac t s on the loc al econom y ( Uni ve rsi t y of Wisc onsi n, 2004). We conc l ude tha t using the cost of nutrit i ous foods on campus, th e mea sure of sust a i na bi li t y propose d by group 14 last yea r, would not be enti re ly rea l i st ic as an indi c at or of the econom ic fea si bi l it y in reloc al i zi ng the UBC food syst e m . We rec om m end part i cul a r attent i on be paid to those compone nt s of the syst e m , indi vi dua l food produc t s, whic h may be purc ha se d loc a ll y at a lowe r cost to the vendor. This may be the case of some food produc t s curre ntl y being pro c ure d, but not othe rs. As such, an additional investigation by next year’s AGSC450 class could examine exactly w hi c h commodi ti e s, e.g. appl e s, milk, sala d gree ns, coul d be purc ha se d loc al l y at a lowe r pri ce tha n the curre nt prac t ic e . A comm it m e nt by the unive rsi t y to ensure some proport i on of food proc ure me nt to be loca l woul d invol ve sett i ng a benc hma rk perc e nt age of tota l expe ndi ture s, simi la r to the exam ple of 10% gi ve n above .   Social Indicators  T he soci a l indic at or chosen to mea sure the fea si bi li ty of a re -l oca li ze d UBC food syst e m was consum e r awa re ne ss about the food suppl y and will ingne ss to eat a more loc a l and sea sona l die t . The group felt tha t the first step in movi ng towa rd a susta i na bl e food sy st e m would have to invol ve increasing the level of awareness among consumers. As last year’s group 13 stated “if students are  14  una wa re of the issue s surroundi ng sust a i na bi l it y, the y will be una bl e to assi st in the move m e nt towards sustainability” (Bouris, 2 003). A study by Hedm a rk indic at e d that 42% of peopl e que st i one d were not inte re ste d about the sourc e of the i r food (Li e bl ei n, 2001). The goa l of inc rea si ng awa rene ss is not only to furt he r convi nc e those who alre a dy beli e ve in the value of a more loc al i ze d food syst e m , but also to rea c h those who do not norm al l y think about the ir food in this sense and provi de the m with fac t s and evidenc e to deve l op an inform ed opini on.  In a more loc al food syst e m , there woul d be improve d unde rsta nding betwe e n the produc e r and the consume r, lea di ng to incre a se d aware ne ss of the importa nce of supporti ng loc a l farme rs and the loc al econom y ( Lie bl ei n, 2001). In this way, the re -l oc a li za t i on of food is a key conc e pt in inc rea si ng awa rene ss of fo od in the comm uni t y, just as inc re a si ng awa re ne ss of the bene fi t s of loc al i za ti on is a key compone nt in inc rea si ng the feasi bi l it y of a more loca li zed food syst e m by allowing it to be more acce pt e d and apprec ia t ed.  It is also import a nt to determ i ne if the popul a ti on at UBC woul d be inte re st e d and will i ng to support more loc a l and sea sona l food on campus. If the consum e r dema nd is not pre se nt , the n inc rea si ng the suppl y woul d be ine ffe c t i v e . If the re is no consum e r dema nd for loc al and sea sonal food on campus, the n the fea si bil it y o f a re-l oc al i ze d UBC food syst e m woul d be low. The way to inc rea se dema nd is through inc re a si ng awa re ne ss and provi di ng the consume rs with the tool s and abili t ie s to make an inform e d dec i sion whe n purc ha si ng food. The outc om e woul d, hope ful l y, be a feel i ng of highe r persona l responsi bi li t y to make sust a i na ble food choic e s. Assum i ng tha t awa re ne ss of the bene fi t s of a re -l ocal i ze d food syst e m is current l y low, the group has also pla nne d to imple me nt an educ at i ona l tool tha t will be disc usse d late r.  In orde r to eva l uat e the stat e of awa re ne ss and will i ngne ss to eat a more loca l and sea sonal die t in the UBC comm uni ty, a que st i onnai re was deve l oped (se e Appe ndi x 1). This sampl e que st i onna i re inc l ude s a sec ti on on atti t ude s, beli e fs, beha vi ours and ide n t i t y. Beha vi our is the easi e st compone nt to cha nge , foll owe d by atti t ude s and then belie fs. Knowing the individual’s general  15  c ha ra c te ri sti c s woul d help cate gor i ze whic h groups of peopl e on campus are more or less rec e pt i ve to the prom ot ion of loc al and sea sona l food choi ce s. As see n in the eva l uat i on guide in Appendi x 2, a highe r indi vi dual score out of 60 indi ca t e s a high leve l of awa re ne ss and inte rest in eati ng a loc al and sea sona l diet , while a score below 30/60 woul d indica t e that the introduct i on of loc al food woul d not be fea si ble , since the consum e r dema nd is too low. In this case , more educa t i on and aware ne ss prom oti on woul d be nee de d, suc h as an educ at i ona l post e r. The que st i onna i re coul d be repli ca te d and dist ri but ed among a random sample of indi vi dua l s on the UBC campus. To rec ei ve the highe st amount of fee dba c k, it woul d be bene fi c ia l to send a campus wide emai l to all stude nt s and fac ult y aski ng the m to comple te the attac he d que st i onna i re . A sma l l ince nti ve woul d also inc re a se the numbe r of repl ie s, suc h as the eligi bil it y to be ente red in a draw for a UBC food servi c e gift cert i fi c at e . The que st i onna i re coul d also be hand dist ri bute d at diffe re nt foo d servi c e locat i ons on campus, to be fille d out and returned at the same time .  Education Piece An effe c t i ve wa y to conve y the import a nc e of the reloc a li za t i on of the food sys t e m is through an educ a ti onal pie ce .  Our group has chose n to crea te a poste r as the visua l educ a ti on pie ce , with a sample form a t in Appe ndix 3. The objec ti ve of the post e r will be to inform stude nt s and the genera l public about locally grown food products.  A possible slogan to attract people’s attention could be: “Eat thought ful l y, Bu y Lo c a ll y .”  T he post e r woul d pri m ari l y expl a i n wha t a loc a l food syst e m is, whil e list i ng qua li ta t i ve diffe re nc e s betwee n loc a ll y grown food and conve nt i ona l food product s in a table form a t .  In the post e r, a few acti ons that stude nts or the comm uni t y can take into consi de rat i on are propose d as exa m pl e s to encoura ge purcha si ng loc a l food produc t s.  By addi ng sta t i st ic s of diffe re nt kinds of loc a ll y grown product s provi de on campus onto the poste r, it will make the idea of bu yi ng loc a l l y m ore real i st i c and effe c t i ve .   16  It woul d also be bene fi ci a l to hand out and eva l uat e the awa re ne ss que st i onna i re before the post e r is deve l ope d. By gaugi ng the awa re ne ss and inte re st leve l in a loca l food syst e m , the poste r coul d the n be tail ore d to the nee d s of the audi e nc e . For exa m pl e , if a low level of awa re ne ss was dete rm i ne d, the poste r woul d have to be ver y stra i ght forward and persua si ve in its messa ge , but if awa re ne ss was high, the inform a t i ona l cont ent of the pape r coul d be more compl e x and sta t i st i ca l . Onc e deve l ope d, the poster would be dist ri but e d throughout the campus. The most import a nt loc at i ons for the poste r to be displa ye d woul d be around food servi c e outle t s, whe re peopl e are in the proc e ss of maki ng food purc ha si ng choic e s. Afte r see i n g the poste r, we hope tha t the y ma y inqui re at the outl et if loca l food choi c e s are offe re d. Ove ra l l , the purpose of the post e r woul d be to inc rea se awa re ne ss about loca l food choic e s and the impa ct s of those choi ce s.  Conclusion We beli e ve that the re -l oca l i zat i on of the UBC food syst e m woul d cont ri bute to the ove ral l sust a i na bi l it y of the syst e m . Acc ordi ng to our ecol ogi c a l , economi c and soci a l indi ca t ors, we have dete rm i ne d the leve l of fe a si bi li t y to be high if:  50% of produc t s purc ha sed by UBC food ser vi c e s are ava i la ble loc a ll y  10% of tota l expe ndi t ure s is towa rds food proc ureme nt is for loca l food  there is ≥50% awareness level of the UBC community towards the benefits of purchasing l oc al foods and willi ngne ss to do so Our rec om m enda ti ons to the UBC offi c e of campus sust a i na bi l it y inc l ude stri vi ng for the foll owi ng:   a comm it me nt by food servi c e provi de rs to purc ha se at lea st 10% of food loc a ll y  de ve l opme nt of food proc ure me nt guide li ne s tha t inc l ude an outl i ne for ethi c al deci si on maki ng towa rds sust ai n a bil i t y  furt he r rese arc h on the ecol ogi c a l foot pri nt of loc al versus globa l food produc t s  17   i nc rea se d awa rene ss on campus through the use of educ a ti onal poste rs and offe ri ng more loc al l y produc e d food  In conc l usi on, we feel tha t our rec om me nde d methods for next year’s AGSC 450 class provi de a soli d basi s from whic h to eva l uat e the fea sibi l it y of a reloc al i ze d UBC food syst e m . The proc e ss through whic h to dete rm i ne fea si bil it y is a compl ex one with see m i ngly endl e ss fac t ors to take into acc ount . Howe ve r, the bene fi t s of a more loc a l food syst e m are well wort h the time , effort and resea rc h.     18  References   Ai ya dura i , M.  2004. Persona l communi ca ti on, Marc h 23, 2004.   BCMA FF. 2001b. Agri c ul t ure Sta t i sti c s.  Acce sse d Marc h 25, 2004: http:/ / www.a gf. go v.bc .c a /st a t s/ i nde x.ht m .   BCMA FF.  2001a . BC Agri c ult ural Comm odit y Li st . Acc e sse d Marc h 21, 2004: http:/ / www.a gf. go v.bc .c a /st a t s/ 103a .htm .  Bouri s, K. 2003. 2003 UBC Food Syst e m Coll a bora ti ve Proj e c t: Summ a ry of Findi ngs . Unive rsi t y of Brit i sh Colum bi a , Campus Sust a i na bil it y Offi c e .  Group 14 Pape r. 2003. The Sust a i na bil i t y of the UB C Food Syst e m : Colla borat i ve Proj e ct II (2003). Acc e sse d Marc h 20, 2004: http:/ / www.we bct .ubc .c a .  Hart , M.  2000.  Indi ca t ors of Sust a i na bi li t y Tra i ni ng Course .  Acce sse d Marc h 24, 2004 : http:/ / www.sust a i na ble m ea sure s.c om / T ra i ni ng/ Indi c a t ors/ inde x.ht m l.    Health Cana da Food Guide . 2002. Offi c e of Nutri t i on Poli c y and Prom ot i on. Acc e sse d Marc h 20, 2004: http: // www.hc -sc .gc.c a / hpfb -dgpsa / onpp -bppn/ food_gui de _ra i nbow_e .htm l .  Herri n, M. & Gussow, J. D. 1989. Desi gni ng a sust a i na bl e regi ona l diet . Nutri t i on Educa ti on 21(6): 270-275.  Indust r y In form a t i on. 2000. Agri c ul t ure and Agri -Food Cana da . Acc e sse d Marc h 19, 2004: http:/ / www.a gr.gc .c a / food/ i ndust ryi nfo/ i ndust r yi nfo _e .ht ml .  Kloppe nburg, J. et al. 2000. Tasti ng food, Tast i ng Sust a i na bi li t y: Defi ni ng the Attri but e s of an Alte rna t i ve Food Syst e m with Compe te nt , Ordina ry Peopl e .  Huma n Orga ni zat i ons, 59 (2): 177 -186.  Liebl e i n, G., Fra nc i s, C.A., & Torj use n, H. 2001. Future Inte rc onne ct i ons A mong Ecol ogi c a l Farm e rs, Proc e ssors, Marke t e rs, and Consume rs in Hedm a rk County, Norwa y: Cre at i ng Sha re d Visi on. Huma n Ecol ogy Revi e w, 8(1): 60 -71.  Lys on, T. A. & Gree n, J. 1999. The agri c ult ural marke t sca pe: a fra me work for sust a i ni ng agri c ult ure and com m uni t ie s in the nort he a st . Journa l of Sust a i na bl e Agri c ul t ure 15(2/ 3): 133 -150.  Parr, A. 2004. Personal comm unic at i on, Marc h 3, 2004.  Pret t y, J. 2000. Towa rds sust a i na bl e food and farm ing syst e m s in indust ria li ze d count ri e s. Inte rna t i ona l Journa l of Agri c ul t ural Resourc e s, Gove rna nc e and Ecol ogy 1(1): 77 -94.  Pret t y, J. 2001. Some Bene fi t s and Dra wbac ks of Lo c a l Food Syst e m s. Brie fi ng note for sust a i na ble Agri - food Network, Nov 2 nd . Agri -food Network, London, page s 1-11.   19  St a ndi sh, M., Vis, J. K. 2004. Ho w to Make Agri -Food Supply Chains Sustainable: Unilever’s Pe rspe c ti ve . Unil e ve r N.V. Disc ussi on Pape r. The Nethe rl a nds.  The Coll e ge Food Proj e c t. Unive rsi t y of Wi sc onsi n. Acc e sse d: Marc h 16, 2004: http:/ / www.re c yc l e .ubc.c a/ wa st e fre e/ Wa st e fre e m ai n.ht m .  We ll e r, T. 2003.  Loca ll y grown food best wa y to eat.  Kansa n Archi ve s. Acc esse d Marc h 10, 2004:  http:/ / www.ka nsa n.c om/ Ge t St ory.a spx? i d=5f3f2f3c f3374a 55945d51a a 1f430661.     20  Appendix 1 – Questionnaire: Awareness of a Local Food System  Please check off one box for each question.  (0=highly disagree, 1=somewhat disagree, 2=neutral, 3=somewhat agree, 4=highly agree)  Attitude  0 1 2 3 4 I am concerned with the origin of my food.      I am supportive of the development of a local food system.      I prefer to eat a seasonal diet rather than relying on imported food.      I am concerned about the environmental implications of my food choices.      I think that a local food system will not affect the diversity of food available.       Belief  0 1 2 3 4 I believe UBC farm has great community and educational opportunities.      I believe that purchasing locally grown food contributes to community development.       I believe locally grown produce is of higher quality than imported produce.      I believe a local food system will be an important contributor to a sustainable UBC       I believe UBC should encourage people to buy more locally grown produce.       Behaviour  0 1 2 3 4 I have purchased from the UBC Farmers' Market.      I am willing to pay slightly more for locally grown produce.      My diet usually varies with the seasons.      I usually try to buy produce that was grown in BC.      I have participated in UBC farm activity.        Identity 1. Gender: 1>male  2>female 2. Position at UBC: 1>undergraduate student  2>graduate student  3>faculty  4>other 3. Faculty: 1>Agricultural science  2>Arts  3>Commerce  4>Science 5>other (please specify:___________________) 4. Have you ever taken courses or participated in activities (reading, volunteering, etc) which focus on sustainable local food system? 1>Yes  2>No    2004-03-18 AGSC 450: Group17  Thank you for taking the time to complete our questionnaire. The results and analysis of this questionnaire will be available on the AGSC 450 Food System Project Website by December 2004.  21  Appendix 2 – Questionnaire evaluation guide     Add up score out of 60 to dete rm i ne leve l of awa re ne ss and fea si bi li t y of introduc t i on of loc al and sea sona l food on campus. Total score out of 60:    0 -15: Indi c at e s a very lo w leve l of awa re ne ss and inte re st in the sourc e of food purc ha se d and eate n. Introduci ng loc al and sea sona l food choi ce s at this time woul d not be feasi bl e or effe c t i ve . Introduc t i on on basi c educa t i ona l and prom ot i ona l tool s nee ded.  15 -30: Indi c at e s a low leve l of eithe r awa re ne ss or conc e rn for the food syst e m . Introduc i ng loc al and sea sonal food choi c e s at this time woul d stil l not be fea si bl e or effe c t i ve . More educa t i on and prom oti on is nee de d before the adopt ion of a local or sea sona l die t will be consi de re d.   30 -45: Indi c at e s a mode rat e leve l of awa re ne ss and conce rn for the food syst e m . Furt he r educa t i on and prom oti on of loc a l and sea sona l food choi ce s woul d be ver y su c c e ssful in inc rea si ng marke t dema nd. Introduc t i on of some loca l and sea sonal food choice s on campus is fea si bl e .   45 -60: Indi c at e s a very high leve l of awa re ne ss and inte re st in the sourc e of food purc ha se d and eate n. Indi vi dua l is will i ng to make personal sacri fi c e s to support a sust ai na bl e food syst e m and plac e s a high value on sust a i na bil i t y and soc i al responsi bi l it y of food choic e s. Marke t dema nd for loca l and sea sonal food choi ce s is high; the re fore , it woul d be econom i ca ll y and soc i a l l y fea si bl e to provi de more loc a l and sea sona l food opti ons.   23  Addi t i ona l websit e s whic h coul d be inte gra t ed into the p ost e r:  “Learning About Our Campus Food System”: http:/ / www.e c ofoot .m su.edu/ fi l e s/ pdfs/ food.pdf   “Brings local foods to customer”:  http:/ / we bhom e .c rk.um n.edu/ nwp/ c om m uni t y/ post e rs/ SM FN.ht m   “Buy locally grown poster”: ht t p:/ / www.l oca l foodworks.org/ We b/ S A/ SA We b.ns f/ b663df7c 7f96694580256bd8003b9129/ 840136c 465627dc180256e 3d003e 336b/ $FILE / Loc GrownO t he rCol or.pdf  “The Best Tasting Food Ripens Close to Home”: http:/ / www.l oca l foodworks.org/ We b/ SA/ SA We b.ns f/ b663df7c 7f96694580256bd8003b9129/ 840136c 465627dc180256e 3d003e 336b/ $FILE / T a st e Color11.20.pdf  “Plant your Dollars Close to Home”: http://www.localfoodworks.org/Web/SA/SAWeb.nsf/b663df7c7f96694580256bd8003b9129/840136c465627dc180256e3d003e336b/$FILE/EconomyColor11.20.pdf   I )  .         

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.18861.1-0108691/manifest

Comment

Related Items