Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development <p>The&nbsp;<strong><em>Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development</em><em>&nbsp;</em>(JAFSCD),</strong> ISSN 2152-0801, is an <strong>open access, international, peer-reviewed</strong> <strong>journal</strong> focused on the practice and applied research interests of agriculture and food systems development professionals. JAFSCD emphasizes best practices and tools related to the planning, community economic development, and ecological protection of local and regional agriculture and food systems, and works to bridge the interests of practitioners and academics. Articles are published online as they are approved, and are gathered into quarterly issues for indexing purposes. JAFSCD is an open access, online-only journal; all readers may download, share, or print any articles as long as proper attribution is given, in accordance with the Creative Commons <a title="CC BY 4.0" href="" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CC BY 4.0</a> license.</p> Thomas A. Lyson Center for Civic Agriculture and Food Systems, a project of the Center for Transformative Action en-US Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development 2152-0801 <p>The copyright to all content published in JAFSCD belongs to the author(s). It is licensed as <a title="Creative Commons BY 4.0 license" href="" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CC BY 4.0</a>. This license determines how you may reprint, copy, distribute, or otherwise share JAFSCD content.</p> Incentivizing the Reduction of Pollution at U.S. Dairies <p>This article examines the intricacies of environmental credit generation from concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO) farm systems. Livestock production generates large amounts of manure (solid and liquid waste) and consumes a high volume of water that producers must manage to control odors and reduce pollution. To mitigate environmental impacts such as nutrient releases and greenhouse gas emissions, anaerobic digesters (ADs) can be used in CAFOs to avoid certain nutrient releases and capture the methane (CH<sub>4</sub>) produced when manure is broken down anaero­bically. Policy incentives have increased the use of ADs to reduce waste volumes and produce biogas for energy or bioelectricity, but the overall digester adoption rate is still very low (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [U.S. EPA], 2010; 2014). To cover the higher cost of AD adoption relative to other forms of waste management, farmers may supplement the revenues they generate from the conventional outputs of a livestock operation (e.g., milk or meat) by selling credits into environmental markets. One question that arises is whether a single operation can sell into multiple credit mar­kets by “stacking” credits—that is, receiving multiple separate environmental payments to finance the conversion to AD technology. The issue is that the use of stacked credits introduces the possibility that some of the stacked credits might be for benefits that are “non-additional” in that they do not produce incremental pollution reductions and thus are suspect for use in off­setting a buyer’s pollution. This article describes the stacking problem and explores possible solu­tions, such as temporal constraints on credit issuance and discounting credits to account for additionality problems.</p> Tibor Vegh Brian Murray Copyright (c) 2020 The Authors 2020-01-27 2020-01-27 9 B 1 17 10.5304/jafscd.2020.092.010 The Political Economy of Food for Your Non-Foodie Friend in Under 120 Pages <p><em>First paragraph:</em></p> <p>Eric Holt-Giménez, former executive director of Food First, adds the themes of agriculture, food policy, and food justice to Polity Press’ Global Futures Series with <em>Can We Feed The World Without Destroying It?</em> Following previous publica­tions in this series, this is a brief (118 pages) yet comprehensive introduction to the political economy of food written by one of the foremost authorities on food justice. Readers start at the food system’s twisted capitalist roots and finish with hope in the transformative power of food-based social movements, food sovereignty, and agroecology. . . .</p> Aliza Tuttle Copyright (c) 2020 The Author 2020-01-27 2020-01-27 9 B 1 2 10.5304/jafscd.2020.092.018 Hemp: Can Cooperative-run Quotas Prevent Overproduction? <p><em>First paragraph:</em></p> <p>The legalization of hemp provides a new oppor­tunity for small farmers in the U.S., and com­ing on the heels of trade wars and depressed crop returns, the timing couldn’t be better. However, while hemp production could support a decent living for these small farmers, production opportu­nities such as this will draw interest from producers of all sizes, which may determine its profitability. Hemp, just like any other crop, can be produced on a massive scale. The industrial system stands at the ready with machines, inputs, land-grant agricul­tural research universities, transportation systems, markets, and capital to plant hemp on large acre­ages and then process, market, and deliver it to consumers. Once unleashed, the vast majority of the crop could be grown on large acreages under industrial management, mechanized, and with few people on the land. Organic hemp could be an­other option offered by the industrial model, but could be equally mechanized. Within five to 10 years, any current profit advantage of hemp to farmers could diminish to the low level of market returns offered by other industrial crops like corn or beans. . . .</p> Chad Hellwinckel Copyright (c) 2020 The Author 2020-01-22 2020-01-22 9 B 1 3 10.5304/jafscd.2020.092.016 Counting Local Food Consumption <p>As interest in local food systems as a community development tool increases, scholars and practi­tioners are looking for methods to count progress toward benchmarks. This paper reports on efforts to count local food consumption as part of a statewide strategic plan for food systems develop­ment in Vermont. It provides longitudinal data from three waves of counting (2011, 2014, and 2017), finding increases over time due to both increased consumption and improved counting methods. The paper reflects on successes and challenges over the study period, focusing on data availability, key assumptions, and limitations. It concludes with future directions of inquiry into measuring food relocalization efforts.</p> David Conner Florence Becot Ellen Kahler Jake Claro Annie Harlow Copyright (c) 2020 The Authors 2020-01-20 2020-01-20 9 B 1 14 10.5304/jafscd.2020.092.007 Measuring the Importance of Local Food in the Chicago Foodshed <p>The study is motivated by the need to develop cost-effective tools to estimate the value and size of local food systems. Organizations in need of such evaluations often cannot afford the large price tag for the type of in-depth analysis they desire, and thus alternative, cost-effective methods are the next best choice. We use a recent evaluation of the Chicago foodshed to demonstrate one such cost-effective tool. Expansion of local sales constitutes import substitution, where local foods supplant existing imports. The proposed input-output (I/O) modeling method combines a “follow the money” approach with one that isolates total contributions of the local food systems, and uses an alternative definition of local foods. The approach modifies the underlying IMPLAN data and uses secondary data to account for other changes. The method is applied to a multicounty region comprising four states; the method’s limitations are also discussed.</p> Steven Miller John Mann Copyright (c) 2020 The Authors 2020-01-20 2020-01-20 9 B 1 22 10.5304/jafscd.2020.092.008 How Well Is Urban Agriculture Growing in the Southern United States? <p>In this study, we evaluate urban agriculture trends in 55 cities in the Southern United States. Our research is important for three reasons. First, as the geographic scope of urban agriculture research is limited mostly to Northeast and West Coast cities, we focus on the South, the fastest-growing U.S. Census region. Second, despite rapid growth, this region has also experienced the highest rate of poverty and food insecurity. Third, we surveyed urban planners who regulate and monitor urban agriculture sites, develop urban agriculture policies and programs, and advise local decision-makers. The study documents Southern urban agriculture changes between 2000 and 2010. It also considers types of projects, implementation barriers, and strategies used to promote urban agriculture. A survey questionnaire was mailed to planning offi­cials in 153 Southern cities; 55 cities responded. Among respondents, 87% reported the existence of urban agriculture in their jurisdiction. Most Southern cities reporting urban agriculture experi­enced urban agriculture growth (69%), 21% reported decline, and 10% did not report a change. The most common projects included neighbor­hood gardens, school gardens, and community supported and entrepreneurial agriculture. Irrespec­tive of urban agriculture growth or decline, the responding cities relied on the same types of regul­atory and policy approaches. Only cities reporting growth in urban agriculture implemented programs to promote urban agricul­ture, including land acqui­sition, trusts, and inter­jurisdictional coordination. Land conversion and lack of economic sustaina­bility were cited as main barriers to urban agricul­ture. The findings suggest the need to further explore the impact of external factors on the effec­tiveness of urban agriculture regulations, policies and programs, and solutions to urban agriculture barriers.</p> Russell Fricano Carla Davis Copyright (c) 2020 The Authors 2020-01-07 2020-01-07 9 B 1 23 10.5304/jafscd.2020.092.001 The Motivations and Needs of Rural, Low-Income Household Food Gardeners <p>In local food systems research and practice, little attention has been given to the motivations and behaviors of low-income household gardeners as food provisioners. In this paper, we examine the motivations, barriers, and practices of food gardening among low- income rural U.S. residents with the goal of informing policies and programs that might support these food provisioning activi­ties. This work draws from ethnographic inquiry, including surveys, interviews, and garden visits with households in rural, Western Pennsylvania. Over half of those surveyed (<em>n</em>=124) grow some of their own food, with higher rates of gardening among higher-income households. Low-income gardeners are most motivated by three things; (1) a desire to save money, (2) pleasure from the practice of gar­dening and time spent outside, and (3) a connec­tion to spiritual practice. For the low-income gardeners we interviewed, gardening creates and reinforces social connections and cultural traditions. For many, gardening is also a political act: a way to guard against an uncertain future and resist a centralized food system. The findings from this study suggest that local food systems programs and policies might better support low-income food-provisioning households by acknowledging and respecting the knowledge and skills held by these individuals, recognizing and supporting the social and cultural role of gardening, and providing structural support around the space and time con­cerns identified by survey respondents as major barriers to gardening.</p> Kate Darby Taylor Hinton Joaquin Torre Copyright (c) 2020 The Authors 2020-01-07 2020-01-07 9 B 1 15 10.5304/jafscd.2020.092.002 Integrated Food Systems Governance <p>Community-based efforts to transform food sys­tems involve a diverse range of actors and increas­ingly attempt to focus on public engagement in policymaking processes. These initiatives often emphasize opportunities for more participatory forms of engagement rooted in systems thinking, which recognizes the interconnections between environmental, social, and economic injustices. Similarly, food systems scholars are increasingly engaged in participatory action projects seeking to make productive linkages between academic research, policymakers, and community organiza­tions in search of tangible food systems change. This collective essay, based on a roundtable discus­sion at the 2018 annual meeting of the American Association of Geographers (AAG) in New Orleans, describes integrated food governance pro­cesses currently underway—particularly those engaging anchoring institutions from civil society, government, and academia—to demonstrate both the promise and the challenges of networked gov­ernance efforts in pursuing more equitable food systems. In particular, we focus on how differing anchor institutions engage in translocal govern­ance, coalition building, and adaptation. This research contributes to literature and practice on food systems governance, systems thinking, and anchoring institutions by proposing an analytical framework and providing a series of case studies of integrated governance initiatives for pursuing social and ecological justice in food systems.</p> Colleen Hammelman Charles Levkoe Julian Agyeman Sanjay Kharod Ana Moragues Faus Elisa Munoz Jose Oliva Amanda Wilson Copyright (c) 2020 The Authors 2020-01-07 2020-01-07 9 B 1 16 10.5304/jafscd.2020.092.003 In This Issue: Indigenous Food Sovereignty in North America <p><em>First paragraphs:</em></p> <p>This special issue draws attention to the roles and responsibili¬ties of knowledge producers, knowledge keepers, and food systems actors in managing and enhancing access to culturally appropriate food pro-duced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods in Indigenous communities in North America. Our sponsor for this issue is the Swette Center for Sustainable Food Systems at Arizona State University. With Executive Director Dr. Kathleen Merrigan (former U.S. Department of Agriculture deputy secretary and chief operating officer), the Swette Center has a global mission to create and disseminate knowledge about food systems that drives economic productivity and social progress.</p> <p>In our call for papers, we sought empirical, theoretical, or pedagogical contributions from academics and practitioners that inform Indigenous food sovereignty policy and practice. We encouraged manuscripts docu­menting interagency and/or nation-to-nation collaboration, as well as collaboration among public, nonprofit, and private enterprises, and scholar/practitioner co-partners. We hoped for submissions that closely examined processes as well as those that interrogated failed or struggling programs or policies.</p> <p>In the end, our call yielded 13 peer-reviewed papers, four in-depth commentaries, and three <em>Voices From the Grassroots</em> essays, covering a range of themes from ongoing struggles with vestiges of North America’s colonial history to powerful stories of reclaiming food sovereignty through reinvigorating or rediscovering traditional and sacred foods and foodways. We’re pleased to share this range of projects and perspectives with you, our readers. Along the way, we are not only introduced to remarkable people and projects, but also to a variety of Indigenous research methodologies borne out of collaborations between Indigenous and non-Indigenous scholars, activists, and university staff. . . .</p> Duncan Hilchey Copyright (c) 2019 The Author 2019-12-21 2019-12-21 9 B 1 4 10.5304/jafscd.2019.09B.023 Kaˀtshatstʌ́sla: "Strength of Belief and Vision as a People"—Oneida Resilience and Corn <p>The collective nations of the Haudenosaunee are governed by their shared ancestral knowledge of creation. This storied knowledge tells of an intellec­tual relationship with corn that has been cultivated by the Haudenosaunee through generations and represents core values that are built into commu­nity resilience, for the benefit of future generations. The Oneida, members of the Haudenosaunee Con­federacy, have been committed to this relationship since the beginning of time. The Oneida Nation of Wisconsin has been shaping resilience in the con­text of struggle, to work toward sovereign com­munity food systems. This particular Oneida community has been geographically divided from all other Haudenosaunee nations, and even from its members own Oneida kin, for nearly 200 years; however, this community was able to re-establish its relationship with corn after years of disconnect. Oneida Nation community-driven projects in Wisconsin have reshaped and enhanced the con­nection to corn, which places them at the forefront of the Indigenous food sovereignty movement.</p> Lois Stevens Joseph Brewer Copyright (c) 2019 The Authors 2019-12-20 2019-12-20 9 B 225 238 10.5304/jafscd.2019.09B.015