Policy Analysis and Reflective Essay Cultivating equitable ground: Community-based participatory research to connect food movements with migrant farmworkers

Despite popular momentum behind North American civil society initiatives to advance social justice and ecological resilience in the food system, food movements have had limited engaging with migrant farmworkers. This policy analysis and reflective essay describes a partnership between university researchers and a non-profit food network organization in Ontario, Canada with a mandate to advance healthy food and farming across the region. The purpose of the community-based research was to gather a broad range of actionable ideas from key informants to advance health and equity with migrant farmworkers. The ‘key solution ideas’ were gathered primarily through eleven in-depth interviews and ongoing feedback from relevant actors. We reflect on the unique features of approaching this often-divisive area of inquiry through a university-community partnership. Reviewing the key solution ideas, we categorize the proposals for advancing farmworker health and equity under four broad themes: a) health and safety; b) farmworker recruitment and mobility; c) community-building and social integration; and d) immigration policy. We then critically evaluate the constraints and opportunities for addressing these areas through the auspices of a network-based food organization that takes a ‘big tent’ approach to collaborative action on polarizing issues. As food networks are seeking to build meaningful alliances with migrant justice and labour movements, this study provides a timely contribution to literature and practice at the intersection of community-based participatory research, sustainable food networks, labour and immigration.

Keywords: Alternative food initiatives, Canada, community-based participatory research, farm labour, farmworkers, food movement, health equity, migrant workers Introduction For many initiatives with an aim to advance a more just and sustainable food system, issues concerning migrant farmworkers are ripe with tensions. While food movements have actively focused on issues of social justice and ecological sustainability, in the eyes of farmworker advocates, supporters of local food have been disengaged, in conflict with or unsupportive of farmworker equity (Ramsaroop & Wolk, 2009). Despite interests in reconnecting eaters with food producers and initiatives that promote appreciation of farmers, hired farmworkers have been notably absent from conversations on how to advance equitable and sustainable food systems (Gray, 2014;Minkoff-Zern, 2014;Sbicca, 2015). This is particularly the case for those who migrate across international borders for seasonal farm employment (Hjalmarson, Bunn, Cohen, Terbasket, & Gahman, 2015; Author name(s) removed). In Western Europe and North America, migrant farmworkers are rarely recognized on promotional materials for local food, invited to farm-to-table events, or represented within food policy organizations that discuss issues affecting their lives.
Southwestern Ontario 1 , Canada, reflects a widespread set of tensions; on the one hand, popular efforts are underway to promote ecological and socially just alternatives to the dominant food system. On the other hand, the economic viability of Ontario's food production and processing continues to depend on migrant farmworkers who face deep-1 In Canada, labour and agriculture are provincial fall under provincial jurisdiction, while immigration is primarily the purview of the federal government. seated racial and economic inequalities. Many Canadians deem farm work as an unattractive career based on the associated working conditions, low levels of remuneration, rural location, and low prestige. Farm operators are faced with pressure to keep food prices low in order to compete in a globalized market. Minimizing labour costs while increasing productivity becomes a key strategy for maintaining viability. In addition, farm employers and farmworkers operate within a weak regulatory environment for supporting either the economic viability of environmentally sound agriculture or more equitable farm labour conditions. The ensuing farm labour shortage can thus be understood as socially constructed rather than absolute (see Reid-Musson, 2014).
In response to the relative labour shortage, migrant farmworker programs have been designed to recruit people from the Global South to work and live in Canada on a temporary basis. Because of extreme global inequalities, migrants tend to evaluate farm wages and conditions in Canada against a reference frame of poverty, a lower currency rate and unemployment in their sending countries (Binford, 2013). Many migrants emphasize the importance of being able to support themselves and their families through Canada's temporary farmworker schemes, and 70% of surveyed Seasonal Agricultural Worker Program employees reported overall satisfaction with the program (Verduzco & Lozano, 2003). Simultaneously, however, many migrants describe persistent language barriers, social isolation, unsafe and unhealthy working and living conditions, structural disregard for their knowledge and skills, discontentment with the program's rules, structure and implementation, and few opportunities for integration into local communities (Basok, Bélanger, & Rivas, 2014;Binford, 2013;Preibisch & Otero, 2014).
Recognizing the potential for funnelling some of the resources and enthusiasm in popular food movements toward local and global inequities shaping the employment of migrant farmworkers, in this article we describe a university-community partnership project that aimed to bring together a wide range of affected groups in advancing health, equity and dignity with migrant farmworkers. The project was initiated jointly by Organization Name Removed, a non-profit organization that encompasses an coalition of member organizations from different sectors across the province, and researchers at University Name Removed that were part of a community-service learning (CSL) course. The research gathered ideas from key informants to advance an agricultural labour strategy among Ontario's food movements. In the following section we set the context by explaining the circumstances of migrant farm labour and sustainable food movements in Ontario. Next, we discuss our methodologies and our initial findings, which are organized into four thematic areas that propose key solution for advancing farmworker health equity. We conclude by discussing the potential implications of this research and ways it could be advanced. This study contributes to literature on (im)migrant farm labour policy as well as community-based participatory research. We illustrate how productive tensions inherent to community-university research partnerships can be harnessed to broaden conversations and alliances for advancing justice in the food system.

Migrant Farmworker Employment
In 1966, agricultural groups reporting labour shortages successfully lobbied the Canadian government to initiate a pilot migration program for temporary farm work. Today, most migrant farmworkers in Ontario come from Mexico or Commonwealth Caribbean countries and are hired through the Seasonal Agricultural Worker Program (SAWP) (McLaughlin & Hennebry, 2013). The SAWP involves bilateral agreements between sending and receiving countries and temporary work visas that last up to eight months at a time. A growing number of farmworkers, however, are hired from countries such as Guatemala, Peru, Thailand, the Philippines, and Indonesia that do not involve bilateral agreements. Farmworkers hired through these less regulated 'low-skill' streams may work in Canada on 48-month work permits for a maximum of four years, after which they are ineligible for four years (this has been called the '4-and-4 Rule') (Faraday, 2014).
Proponents of the program argue that Canada's Temporary Foreign worker Program (TFWP) benefits migrants and their families through remittances, prevents undocumented settlement in Canada, and provides a relief valve for sending-country governments facing the pressure of local poverty and unemployment (McLaughlin, 2010). In contrast to the unpopular U.S. H-2A program, however, Canada's agricultural TFWP is rated favourably among farmers who seek manually skilled, reliable and affordable farm labour (Binford, 2013;Smith-Nonini, 2013). With farm employers continuing to report labour shortages each year, the program has grown from 264 farmworkers in its pilot year (1966) to nearly 40,000 in 2012 (ESDC, 2014;Satzewich, 2007). While the TFWP is premised on addressing temporary labour and skills shortages (CIC, 2015), it is clear that circular migration schemes are an enduring feature of Canadian agricultural, labour and immigration policy. At the level of Canadian corporate and foreign policy, scholars have argued that the Canadian state is complicit in generating poverty in the Global South and thereby shaping farmworkers' migration projects (Walia, 2010;, as in the case of two million Mexican peasants whose livelihoods were undermined by the North American Free Trade Agreement (Otero, 2011).
Critics of Canada's TFWP point out that farmworkers are left to the arbitrary goodwill of employers, government agents and profit-seeking job recruiters with little recourse to ensure their well-being (Binford, 2013;Faraday, 2014). To be clear, our review of such critiques is not intended to vilify farmers, many of whom exemplify high standards of employee relationships, but rather to point out how the temporary farm labour arrangements create structural inequalities and vulnerabilities for farmworkers. For instance, farmworkers' temporary visas are 'tied' to an individual employer, which makes it very difficult to transfer employers when they encounter problematic work and/or living arrangements (McLaughlin, Hennebry, & Haines, 2014). This difficulty is compounded by farmworkers' living accommodations, which are generally on the same site where employers work and reside (McLaughlin, 2010). Employers and sendingcountry consulates have the capacity to repatriate workers without a grievance procedure for "non-compliance, refusal to work, or any other sufficient reason" (ESDC, 2015a). The only mechanisms for farmworkers to ensure their job security are to receive a positive end-of-season employer evaluation and/or to be requested by an employer to return the following year. These features of the TFWP make it difficult for farmworkers to refuse employer requests for long hours or high-risk work (Binford, 2009). While researchers have documented cases of migrant farmworkers who have worked seasonally in Canada for as many as three decades (Preibisch, 2012), migrants are denied access to permanent residency or citizenship and the numerous rights, entitlements, and social recognition associated with a more secure immigration status. In effect, they are both "precarious" (Faraday, 2014) and "permanently temporary" (Hennebry, 2012).
With 20,000 TFWP farmworkers hired in 2012, the province of Ontario is the top employer of migrant farmworkers (ESDC, 2014). Farm labour legislation in Ontario reflects the ideology that agriculture is an 'exceptional' industry because it is uniquely subject to natural variables like weather that farmers cannot control, because it meets the fundamental human need for food, and because relatively inexpensive food costs allow wages for all other workers to remain low (Barnetson, 2009;Tucker, 2006).
Proponents of agricultural exceptionalism, which is also prevalent in the United States, have consequently argued that standard labour laws should not apply to this industry.
While migrant farmworkers must be paid a minimum wage (ESDC, 2015b), they are excluded from legal minimum standards regarding maximum hours of work, overtime pay, periods of rest, eating periods, vacation and public holidays (Ministry of Labour, 2006;2011). Prior to 2006, farmworkers were excluded from the Occupational Health and Safety Act and are still prevented from joining unions.

Sustainable Food Networks and Migrant Justice
Among the initiatives that aim to build more socially just and ecologically resilient food systems, efforts to address farmworker inequalities have faced an array of challenges.
Disproportionate whiteness and class privilege within many food initiatives tend to encourage activities that unduly benefit relatively privileged 'consumer-citizens', thereby reifying social inequalities (Bradley & Herrera, 2015;Gibb & Wittman, 2013;Ramírez, 2014;Turje, 2012). Consumer-citizens based in urban areas far outnumber rural food producers in food movements, and the social and geographic distance generates a lack of understanding about farmworkers' day-to-day realities. Scholars have cautioned that food movements' intense focus on promoting the social recognition of farmers can alienate farmworkers and normalize the ideology that agriculture should be exempt from basic labour standards (Author name(s) removed). Further, a narrow focus on developing 'alternative' food initiatives may sideline broader engagement with farmworkers embedded in the 'industrial' food system (Myers & Sbicca, 2015).
With the aim of improving conditions for farmworkers, several food movement initiatives have focused on labeling schemes to certify that food is produced under ethically sound labour conditions. These include the Coalition of Immokalee Workers' Fair Food Program (Asbed & Sellers, 2013), which involves partnerships with major food retailers and fast food chains, various U.S. 'domestic fair trade' labels overseen by third-party certifiers, and the Local Food Plus label in Canada (Friedmann, 2007). Further, Canada's student-led Meal Exchange draws on the success of the U.S. Real Food Calculator for ethical food procurement in post-secondary institutions, which includes an evaluation of fair labour practices. Critical food studies scholars, however, have critiqued such 'shopping for social change' strategies for entrenching the idea that social and environmental problems can and should be addressed through the buying power of consumer-citizens (Baumann, Engman, & Johnston, 2015;Johnston, 2008). Examining U.S. domestic fair trade schemes, Brown and Getz (2008a;2008b) point out that these certified labels let both government and industry off the hook by privatizing regulatory functions that should apply to all employers, and not merely to those who voluntarily choose to certify (see also Guthman 2007). Brown and Getz (2015) argue that certification and labeling should prompt, rather than replace, collective action and labour regulation. While endorsing such analyses, Alkon (2014) contends that within the current climate of neoliberalism, market-based strategies may also create spaces -however imperfect -for farmworkers to articulate the political changes they would like to see in the food system.
As distinct from market-focused food movement efforts, some Canadian food network organizations have recognized the need to address structural issues affecting farmworker health and equity. At the national level, for instance, the grassroots-driven People's Food Policy outlines a comprehensive vision for a Canada-wide food policy. It calls for "enforced legislation … to ensure that noncitizen workers on farms are fairly treated; given decent housing and wages; enjoy safe and humane working conditions; have access to health care and citizenship rights, all without reprisals" (People's Food Policy, 2011, p. 16). As a complement to food movement organizing at the national level through Food Secure Canada (an alliance-based, Pan-Canadian food network organization), provincial network organizations like Organization Name Removed focus on food and agriculture-related concerns that fall under regional and provincial jurisdiction (Author name(s) removed). Organization Name Removed operates as a member-based non-profit network organization that promotes healthy food and farming across diverse sectors, scales and places. Its web of relationships makes it accountable to a range of groups, including some that have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo (e.g., farmer commodity associations).
When it comes to advocating for healthier, more equitable farmworker livelihoods, network organizations like Organization Name Removed face both limitations and opportunities. Government authorities routinely contact members of Organization Name Removed's network to gather feedback on food and agriculture-related policy issues (Author name(s) removed). However, the organization's reputation among provincial policymakers as a reliable representative of diverse perspectives limits the extent to which it can endorse views that might be perceived as overly critical. Meaningfully advancing equity with migrant farmworkers would entail a radical restructuring of agriculture, labour and immigration over the long-term, but Organization Name Removed's charitable status limits the degree of political advocacy in which it can engage. Grassroots organizations preferring a more confrontational activist approach have thus critiqued Organization Name Removed for not taking a stronger stance on controversial issues. Network organizations like Organization Name Removed often face a tension between maintaining a broad network that acknowledges multiple perspectives and articulating a single common voice (Author name(s) removed). The advantage of Organization Name Removed's network-based, 'big tent' approach is that the organization is uniquely positioned to help convene collaborative action to scale-out existing community-based efforts and scale-up policy shifts. Whereas other grassroots and union movements might view polarization and fragmentation as necessary consequences of dismantling the status quo for farmworkers, Organization Name Removed's mandate is to take a systems-wide approach that involves a broad range of affected groups.

Methodology and Approach
Organization Name Removed and its members have discussed issues of food and farm labour in the past, yet there has been little capacity to move any significant initiatives forward. In 2014 a community-university partnership was developed with researchers at the University of Toronto through Planning for Change: Community Development in Action, a CSL course in the Department of Geography and Planning. Unlike most CSL experiences, Planning for Change is an eight-month, graduate level class that enables community partners to develop research projects in collaboration with the students and instructors (Author name(s) removed). Working together to design and implement the project, Author name(s) removed (a graduate student) led the research team that included Author name(s) removed (then Director of a non-profit organization) and Author name(s) removed (the course's co-instructor).
While researchers have rigorously explored the problem context of health equity and justice for migrant farmworkers, it has proved more difficult to identify constructive, actionable and feasible solutions with broad-based buy-in from relevant parties. The initial phase of this project involved gathering a wide range of ideas from affected groups on the question: how might Ontario's food movements advance existing efforts to promote health equity, dignified livelihoods and justice with migrant farmworkers? Most of the data for this phase came from eleven in-depth interviews with key informants engaged in migrant farmworker employment in Ontario. We collected additional data through reviews of academic literature and civil society reports, along with some participant observation. Interviews included people representing farmers and farm industry, public health, farmworker justice organizations, union labour, academia, and the provincial government. We sought to learn about the work of these organizations, their challenges, and their ideas for actionable ways Ontario's food system could become more equitable for farmers and farmworkers alike.

Key Solution Ideas
The key solution ideas that informants proposed for Ontario's food movements to collaborate in advancing farmworker health equity, livelihood quality and justice were organized into four broad thematic areas: a) health and safety; b) farmworker recruitment and mobility; c) community-building and social integration; and d) immigration policy.
In this section, we outline each of these.

a) Health and safety
Initiatives to advance farmworker health and safety are strongly grounded in the priorities voiced by farmworkers, along with a wealth of evidence on farmworker health and safety inequities in Ontario and accompanying proposals for policy solutions (e.g. McLaughlin, Hennebry, Cole, & Williams, 2014;Pysklywec, McLaughlin, Tew, & Haines, 2011).
Numerous collaborative farmworker health initiatives between academics, health practitioners and civil society groups have made headway in Ontario, as in the case of migrant farmworker health clinics that have been granted pilot funding by provincial health authorities. Furthermore, such initiatives present the advantage of appearing probusiness and relatively neutral in political terms. As one informant involved in a farmworker health equity project articulated, "Farm owners understand that a healthy workforce is a productive workforce. We should use this as an opportunity to bring farm owners/employers on board to champion this message" (Interview, 26/11/'14).
Some informants suggested food movements could advance farmworker health equity through advocacy for improved accessibility of rural health services targeted toward migrants, such as specialized clinics and mobile health units. Furthermore, one farm employer was adamant about changing immigration and employment insurance policies for migrants who become ill or injured: In the case of illness, don't repatriate them until they're fully treated. . . . If they get sick, they should stay until they are fully recovered and no longer require medical care. Because in Jamaica, they do not have free medical care, they have to pay for it. And since they are paying employment insurance premiums and not able to collect . . . either don't take it from them, or give them rights to it. You know, it's not right for them to pay into a system that they do not benefit from. Because if they are unable to work for two weeks, they're repatriated. They must be repatriated. We, as employers, don't even have a choice on that. (Interview, 29/10/'14) In addition, informants suggested establishing a standardized health and safety orientation and 'welcome package' (including migrants' health cards). While one informant indicated that Canada Border Services Agency could facilitate a workshop on migrants' health and safety rights immediately upon migrants' arrival in Canada, however, a third party organization like the Red Cross or Doctors Without Borders might be better placed to lead an orientation of this kind.
A further opportunity for advocacy concerns the provincial Employment Standards Act, which went up for review in 2015 for its relevance to newer and more precarious forms of work. This review coincides with a 2013 challenge from the provincial Ministry of Agriculture for the agri-food sector to double its annual growth rate and generate 120,000 jobs by 2020 (OMAFRA, 2015). When we inquired with a representative of the Ministry of Agriculture, however, it was unclear how the government might be ensuring or measuring the quality of these jobs. This potential inconsistency presents an opportunity to align government efforts to create more agri-food jobs with efforts to ensure those jobs are healthy, well-protected and provide liveable wages.

b) Farmworker recruitment and mobility
A second critical area for advocacy raised by informants involves farmworkers' inability to leave abusive or otherwise undesirable employment arrangements without risking unemployment, deportation and the loss of future job opportunities in Canada. For instance, one farmer proposed that farmworkers should have the option of switching farm employers and the option of selecting particular farms where they would like to work: "While they are not legally prohibited from requesting work on a different farm, the system is set up in such a way that it almost negates that right." (Interview,29/10/'14).
This aligns with calls from migrant advocacy organizations for farmworkers to be granted open-sector visas rather than visas that are tied to specific employers.
A related suggestion for advocacy pertains to newer and increasingly popular streams of the TFWP, which leave farmworkers more vulnerable to debt and extortion by private recruiters who charge a fee for arranging a job placement. In the case of the SAWP, consulates or liaisons are theoretically responsible for mediating worker-employer conflicts, helping farmworkers access their rights and benefits, assisting with transfers to another job, and arranging workers' repatriation. Without a bilateral agreement between sending and receiving countries, farmworkers hired under non-SAWP streams of the TFWP do not have consulates or liaisons. To this end, Ontario could adopt legislation similar to Manitoba's Worker Recruitment and Protection Act, which proactively prevents extortion by recruiters (Faraday, 2014).

c) Community-building and social integration
Suggestions to advance community building among farmworkers and resident communities bear affinity with many of the activities in which Ontario's food movements are already engaged. These include network building, establishing co-ops and community gardens, and promoting the social recognition of local producers. Existing efforts to strengthen linkages between urban food movement efforts and rural farmworkers include Director-Producer Min Sook Lee's (2012) documentary about a migrant farmworker meeting with homeless youth who grow their own food in Toronto community garden.
In order to promote inclusivity in some of the Ontario towns that have been marked by conflict between farmworkers and year-round residents, one informant suggested strategies to highlight farmworkers' vital economic contributions to rural communities.
For instance, this might involve mayors of rural towns hanging a welcoming banner each season or profiling farmworkers in local agri-food and tourism marketing materials. In addition, a farmer-friendly organization like Organization Name Removed could build relationships with municipal agricultural county committees to increase their awareness of existing resources for farmworker employees, such as rural health-related resources of which many employers may be unaware. A migrant activist noted that some farmworkers bring seeds and seek spaces to grow some of their own culturally relevant food while in Canada. She commented, "In many of the regions where migrant workers work… there's all of these community tensions between migrants and non-migrants, and animosity between the two groups. So how about a community garden? Could that bring people

d) Immigration policy
Several informants, including a farm employer, migrant justice groups and a union leader, cited that migrant farmworkers should have the option of becoming permanent residents or citizens (e.g. having the option of applying for permanent residency, or receiving permanent resident status on arrival along with the regularization of status for all current migrants in Canada). The national coordinator of the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union noted that in provinces outside of Ontario and in industries other than agriculture, the UFCW has successfully negotiated a mandatory stipulation in workers' collective agreement for employers to nominate migrants for permanent residency through the Provincial Nominee Program (PNP). However, as noted earlier, current legislation in Ontario does not permit any farmworkers -whether migrants or permanent residents/citizens -to join a union. Some informants argued that farmworkers should have this option.
In addition, some informants called for an end to the aforementioned '4-and-4 Rule.' An unexpected finding was that farm commodity organizations like Mushrooms Canada, which represents farmers who depend on year-round employees, were also protesting the 4-and-4-Rule and calling for migrants to have access to permanent residency.

The Spaces and Constraints of Working Under a 'Big Tent'
The four thematic areas of 'key solution ideas' represent preliminary findings that require additional research to assess their feasibility among food movements and possibilities of implementation. Further research is also required to assess how this study might build on the success of other related farmworker justice and health equity initiatives (e.g. Author name(s) removed). For instance, a notable area of potential advocacy that was not raised in our interviews might involve confronting the power of major food purchasers to shape working conditions and wages downstream. Initiatives such as the Coalition of Immokalee Workers in Florida have made important headway in harnessing the power of major food retailers and fast food institutions to ensure better wages for farmworkers, farmworker-driven monitoring and enforcement of workplace conditions, and zero tolerance for modern-day slavery (Asbed & Sellers, 2013). Through additional workshops, webinars and conferences, subsequent phases of this ongoing project have been focused on collaboratively prioritizing particular solution areas and identifying actors who are committed to actively advancing them.
To that end, Organization Name Removed's 'big tent' mandate to encourage collaboration across a wide range of affected network groups presents notable tensions.
Organization Name Removed's reputation for representing moderate, balanced perspectives has enabled it to build strategic rapport with prominent government and industry actors. In some cases, this can generate pressure to de-emphasize solution ideas for farmworker health and justice that might appear unfeasible in the eyes of certain groups or overly polarizing, such as the proposal that farmworkers should have the option of unionizing in Ontario or receive landed citizenship status upon arrival in Canada.
Within the climate of 'advocacy chill' in Canada (Evans & Shields, 2014), Organization Name Removed also faces restrictions around the kind and extent of political advocacy in which it can engage.
More specifically, Organization Name Removed faces internal pressure to prioritize the interests and associated funding grants for its paid membership, which includes many farmers and farming organizations but does not yet include farmworker groups. While the economic viability of Ontario farmers and local food availability undoubtedly depends on hired farmworkers, some members of Organization Name Removed nonetheless perceive farmworker-related initiatives as organizational 'mission creep.' A commitment to championing local farmers can, on occasion, clash with efforts to simultaneously support farmworkers. For example, farm employers might view campaigns to increase farmworker minimum wage, overtime and vacation as exacerbating an existing 'costprice-squeeze' (Barnetson, 2009). That is, farm operators may face rising costs with diminishing returns, and minimizing labour costs and/or eliminating farm jobs through labour-saving technologies becomes one of the key strategies for remaining viable. In the words of one interview informant from a farming organization, "If you're a farm employer and you're not trying to figure out how to kill a job, you might be in trouble." Furthermore, in discussing features of Canada's temporary farmworker migration scheme that make workers systemically vulnerable (e.g. the arbitrary power employers hold over farmworkers' on-site living accommodations), farm operators may interpret systemic critiques as unfounded personal attacks or overgeneralized slander.
Such conflicts reflect, in large measure, dominant systems of private property and racial/citizenship privilege that disproportionately advantage farm employers with Canadian citizenship or permanent residency. We contend, however, that food movements can play an important role in supporting efforts such as those described by interview informants, including pay equity policies within small enterprises or cooperatively owned farming ventures. However modest, such projects would help to give substance to possibilities for food production beyond a zero-sum system of capitalist power and profit that sets farmers and farmworkers against one another.
While working toward a food system that fundamentally supports equal access to the material and social resources for all people to thrive, it is critical not to paint over differences of power across affected groups. Amidst this necessarily messy interim process, network-based food organizations might play a strategic function in identifying and mediating the advancement of common ground across sectors, scales and places. As suggested by one of our informants, provincial food network organizations like Organization Name Removed might help to raise awareness among farm employers of existing migrant farmworker health resources in rural areas and build support for additional resources. Public health has been a major area of focus among community food security initiatives and networks across North America (Seed, Lang, Caraher, & Ostry, 2013). As such, there is considerable scope for health-focused food networks to support existing migrant farmworker health projects, particularly given the pro-business basis and relative political neutrality of such initiatives. Because it does not require participants to adopt an identical political analysis of their shared problems in the food system, in its ideal form, operating as a broad-based network can allow for relationships of trust and opportunistic coalition building where they might not otherwise have occurred.
Still, reformist approaches that merely seek to ameliorate the harsher edges of the status quo present a risk of reifying systems of food production, political economy and immigration that are fundamentally inequitable and environmentally destructive. Food networks at large have often struggled to shift from reformist initiatives to transformative movements that can generate systemic change to ensure the benefits and harms of the food system are spread more evenly across society and ecologies (Holt-Giménez & Shattuck, 2011). Staying attuned to strategic political moments in which affected groups who might differ in ideology but share similar values or goals can lend itself to enduring, transformative social change. For instance, our finding that some farm commodity groups are advocating for access to citizenship for farmworkers may present possibilities, however tenuous, for collaboration with migrant justice groups advocating for landed status on arrival and regularization of status. Building on calls for migrant citizenship rights in the People's Food Policy and farmworker justice workshops at Food Secure Canada's previous bi-annual Assemblies, food network organizations across Canada might continue to convene spaces for national or even transnational discussion and action with groups implicated in farm employment.

Community-University Partnerships on a Polarizing Research Issue
Community-based research partnerships offer benefits to both researchers and community partners. From the perspective of Organization Name Removed, this partnership offered increased capacity to conduct relevant and applicable research on an often under-resourced and controversial subject area. Working with a university-based researcher offered the community partner an opportunity for a rich engagement with less recognized food movement actors, greater traction and awareness among member organizations on an underrepresented yet important issue to the alliance. It also provided a better understanding of the barriers and opportunities presented by possible solutions on which to focus advocacy efforts. By working with a university-based researcher, Organization Name Removed was able to approach a somewhat polarizing issue through a buffer of academic curiosity. Misunderstandings or potentially damaging characterizations could, in theory, be attributed to the researcher or academic institution as opposed to being directly associated with the community partner. The arms-length position of the researcher also offered the freedom to ask more critical questions of members of the alliance that the community partner might not.
The researchers benefited greatly from the reputation, connections, contacts and reach of a network organization such as Organization Name Removed. In many cases, where causes and interests align, the researchers also offered a wealth of information, theoretical framing and contacts. In this study, both the graduate student and the instructor had a focus on equity and labour in agriculture and brought their experience, skills and knowledge to the project. Community-based research partnerships appear best suited when research interests align closely with organizational mandates and the researcher is committed to collaborative communication.
As a corollary to these benefits, there is a risk of associating specific research findings to the messaging of a community partner. Organization Name Removed is accountable to its membership and mandate. As an organization, it has a specific brand or voice that it seeks to present in order to maintain credibility and often fundability. Academic research, on the other hand, is built on a principle of documentation and rigour that aims to disclose findings that are inclusive and complete. These factors combined can lead to a tension between what community partners are willing to publish and/or adopt and what academics offer as "data." It can also put some relationships cultivated by the community partner at risk if the critical questions and views of the researcher become conflated with those of the organization. Researchers may feel controlled or censored by the organization and there may be a conflict of approaches.
However, as in this study, a mutual respect for knowledge and approach and a consistent commitment of the researcher to communication can create a stronger, more insightful and potentially more applicable research outcome for both the community partner and the research institution.

Conclusion
As one node in the network of efforts to address social injustices and environmental crises in the food system, community-university partnerships offer unique strengths in approaching the equity challenges of farm labour regimes. Projects involving academics that have the time, resources, and skills to conduct research working in collaboration with organizational actors with grounded experience and have established relationships offers a powerful opportunity to impact attitudes, programs and policies. In this study, a notable limitation in terms of transformative potential has been the lack of involvement of migrant farmworkers themselves 2 . We contend that in order to meaningfully reverse the conditions that make farmworkers disproportionately vulnerable to social and economic inequalities and poor health, farmworkers must have the opportunity to participate in authoring such changes. At present, migrant farmworkers' deportability and job precariousness make participation tremendously difficult. Diverse coalitions committed to advancing justice and economic viability in the food system can, however, help to create political spaces for farmworkers to participate in decisions affecting their lives. As part of this ongoing project, we intend to create additional spaces for farmworker participation in identifying priorities and taking collaborative action toward a shared vision for a food system that better enables everyone to thrive.