Regionalism: a New England recipe for a resilient food system

Abstract

Regionalism is a framework for economic, policy, and program development that responds to regional characteristics, differences, and needs and encourages regional approaches and solutions. This paper suggests that acting regionally contributes to food system resilience. The author discusses attributes of regionalism and regional food systems and how they build capacity to withstand disruptions in the food system. Food system resilience entails reducing vulnerability to risks of disruption to the food supply and increasing capacity to withstand or adapt to such disruption. Regions are an effective scale to promote resilience through enhanced diversity, stability, and flexibility, appropriately scaled supply chains and infrastructure, and strong foundational relationships. These attributes are important to resilience in that they decrease dependence on “external” variables, such as long-distance transport of foods, and increase “internal” capacity to provide for the region and withstand natural and manmade disruptions. The region is a powerful scale to respond to disruption in that it addresses supply (volume and diversity) better than local; is more nimble and flexible than nationally and globally sourced food (even accounting for global supply chain “substitution”); and effectively fosters relationships, communication, and trust which are foundational for responding to change (disruption). This paper focuses on the New England region whose six states have a history of working together. It is also a region that exemplifies an area’s ability to respond to disruption based on real and felt interconnectedness of rural and urban interests. As such, it is an ideal learning laboratory for applying regional approaches to food system resilience, approaches that can be of use elsewhere both nationally and internationally. The paper describes several initiatives in New England that exemplify regional thinking applied to food systems and how such thinking can foster resilience. Initiatives focusing on regionally focused food supply chains, increased regional production, access to farmland, and food system public policies illustrate how the government, the civil society, and the private sector can collaborate to strengthen food resilience.

Appendices

This appendix was added to this article at the suggestion of the editor to provide additional information about food procurement policies. It was written by Regina Gregory (EcoTipping Points Project, Kailua, HI, USA) with information provided by Peter Allison and does not represent research or opinions of Kathryn Ruhf.

Appendix: Promoting local food purchases and sustainable food production through institutional food procurement policies.

This appendix was added to this article at the suggestion of the editor to provide additional information about food procurement policies. It was written by Regina Gregory (EcoTipping Points Project, Kailua, HI, USA) with information provided by Peter Allison and does not represent research or opinions of Kathryn Ruhf.

Farm to Institution New England (FINE) representatives in each New England state are available to support local and sustainable food procurement and promotion efforts (FINE 2013). The two main tools for institutions to support local food are laws and policies.

Procurement laws for state agencies

Thirty-seven states across the US already have some form of law or policy that requires or encourages a preference for local products in state procurement. There are two types of local procurement laws. One type of law sets up a preference for local food products. For instance, Massachusetts' local procurement law sets a preference that requires state agencies to purchase in-state food products if they are not more than 10 % more expensive than out-of-state food products. The second type of procurement law sets up a target for the amount of food that will be purchased from local producers. For example, Illinois' local procurement law sets a target that by 2020, 20 % of all food and food products purchased by state agencies and universities shall be local farm or food products (Harvard Food Law and Policy Clinic 2013).

In some parts of the country, such as in New England, it makes sense to encourage purchasing of regional as well as local food. States can set up procurement laws that incorporate regional food products into the preference or target, for instance in a tiered preference: in-state food products receive the highest preference, regional food products receive a lesser preference, and out-of-region food products receive no preference (Harvard Food Law and Policy Clinic 2013).

Procurement policies for institutions and food service management companies

Many institutions hire food service management companies (FSMCs) to run their food service operations, including food procurement.

There are over 200 FSMCs in the United States, but three dominate the field: Compass Group, Aramark and Sodexo. Together these three companies supply 47 % of food served in health care facilities; 21 % of food served at colleges and universities; and 11 % of food served in K-12 schools (FINE 2015a).

Local food advocates can work directly with FSMCs to enlist their support in leveraging the collective power of institutions to source from local farmers (FINE 2015a). Institutions can influence FSMCs with requests for proposals (RFPs) and contract language.

FINE’s Contracted Food Service Action Project aims to increase the understanding of how FSMCs work. Publications include a report on barriers and opportunities for local food procurement by FSMCs in New England (FINE 2015a), and a guide to leveraging contracts for local food procurement for institutions that work with FSMCs (FINE 2015b). A separate FINE document (Massachusetts Farm to School n.d.) compiles samples of local food contract language from institutions around the country.

FINE also published a toolkit for institutional purchasers sourcing local food (FINE 2013). It includes contract negotiation tips and a directory of New England produce vendors known to source local and regionally grown foods. Its advice on how to “use your contract to your advantage” includes:

• Include “preferential purchasing of locally grown, sustainably-produced foods” language in your bid specifications or contract language.

• Require that “local” foods be identified by source or origin, such as farm name, state, zip code or region where food was grown/produced.

• Clearly define the terms “local” and “sustainable” to represent what your organization values. For value added product, define whether the ingredients and/or the processing needs to be “local”. Include this criteria in your bid specifications or contract language.

• Food identified as “sustainable” should carry one or more of the certifications or label claims listed on the following website: www.noharm.org/lib/downloads/food/EcoLabels_Matrix.pdf (see Table 1) or other label/certification that has transparent and meaningful standards and independent verification processes.

  Table 1 Sustainability certifications and label claims

• Require an accounting of locally grown foods that are sold to you within a designated time frame (e.g., month, quarter). Request this information by product, by weight, in dollars, or both, so that you can set goals for the amount of locally grown foods purchased/served.

• Produce distributors may have the ability to negotiate the purchase and pricing of specific products for you in advance of the season with your commitment to purchase. If your institution is willing to make the commitment, your vendor may arrange for farmers to grow specific crops for you. For example: you may guarantee to a distributor that you will purchase “x” pounds of cucumbers each week. With that knowledge, a grower may dedicate a certain number of cucumber plants to grow and harvest for your institution, ensuring a supply to you at an agreed upon price. Be sure any contract language provides for weather related interruptions in supply and notes acceptable substitution for necessary products.

Health Care Without Harm and the Real Food Challenge are two organizations that have asked institutions to adopt pledges or commitments to procure food that meets their criteria for local and sustainable.

The Real Food Challenge, which “unites students for just and sustainable food,” uses a similar list for defining ecologically sound food. It also considers local and community based, fair, and humane as procurement criteria (Real Food Challenge 2014). Colleges and universities are asked to sign a campus commitment to the goal of at least 20 % real food by the year 2020. The project created a “campus commitment” toolbox for students and a downloadable real food calculator for institutions of higher education. So far 180 universities around the country have signed up to use the calculator.

FINE and its partners have generated some impressive commitments from institutions, including:

• Healthcare Partners: 68 facilities have signed the Healthy Food in Health Care Pledge, and 95 have joined the Healthier Hospitals Initiative Food Challenge

• College Partners: 9 colleges have signed the Real Food Challenge Pledge and 68 are members of American Association of Sustainability in Higher Education

• K-12 Schools: 44 % of schools in the region participating in the USDA Farm to School census are engaged in farm to school activities, representing 23.5 million students and investing $385.8 million food dollars (Peter Allison, pers. Comm.)

FSMCs are beginning to recognize that there is significant momentum behind the local food movement. They realize that client and customer demand for these products is growing and that it is to their competitive advantage to provide local food options to their clients (FINE 2015a). In Vermont, Sodexo even made a commitment to developing a Vermont First brand. The company has agreed to:

• Develop a plan to meet the production needs of Vermont farmers and enable businesses to buy local. This includes market analysis, technical assistance around production, processing and marketing.

• Form a steering committee of Vermont stakeholders to discuss issues of procurement, marketing and customer demand.

• Develop a formal commitment and investment that supports the production and purchase of local food.

• Hire a local food coordinator to broker relationships with growers wanting to meet the institutional market demand and track progress and growth in local food procurement.

• Sponsor an annual summit meeting and two working group sessions around “scaling up” local food production and procurement.