Great conversations and ultimately the nurturing of behavioural change, starts with questions. The old models of information transfer in which the authoritative voice dictates direction, are quickly being replaced by those of curious dialogue.
In the field of agriculture, there are a plethora of unanswered questions – and yet we tend to lean on those fenceposts that look familiar and still be appear to holding the wires or boards in place. Unseen is the instability below the ground. Don’t get me wrong, there is a lot of wisdom absorbed over a life time – even by a fence post – but that knowledge is more transferable through a dialogue as opposed to direction. Creative discussion does not come from an attempted repair – but from reframing the question. Just as societies cannot be taken apart to be fixed nor can strategic direction move ahead by applying the brakes or by looking back.
In this first part of a series we will consider relevant questions to the digital divide, land use and societal structure.
The Infrastructure and Technology Gap
When I was in the throws of my graduate work on food systems leadership, one surprising detail kept popping up and that was the lack of infrastructure and digitization in agriculture beyond the farm. One could argue that farms may now be more technically advanced than the marketing systems in which their products will travel. This gap leads to a higher commodity basis and slippage in traceability, identity preservation and food security. Our product quality and points of differentiation are currently lost to bulk handling systems and non-competitive pricing. When will inadequate infrastructure and a non-competitive environment stop being the norm?
Switching our mindset is critical here. Rather than be the recipients in technology transfer models, farmers should be plowing the path through technology uptake models where they are part of the dialogue and are insisting on the same level of technology through the marketing and manufacturing process. New tech is exciting but it might not be what is needed when it is someone else who is providing the technical solution without asking the questions on how we, as farmers, integrate, adapt to or utilize the technology or how that technology will serve us through the supply or value chain.
The global infrastructure is antiquated and needs serious upgrading to accommodate the needs of a growing population and a discerning customer. Technical innovation should come from the ground up and be reflective of uptake models so that the complexity of product identification can be in play from seed to cellophane.
Land Use Lamentations
Food is the foundation of civilization and owners of food production land are quite willing to stand their own ground when it comes to land use. However, there are stronger forces that allow for food production land to be bought and utilized for other purposes. When this happens, there is not only displacement of people and purpose, but of a food source. As much as we strive to drive the bus on local food, the system allows for the principal ingredient – land – to be distributed outside of the mandate of feeding ourselves and our community. This creates a co-dependency which is lucrative for developers, food importers and distribution systems but has no direct benefit for the consumer or the farmer.
How do encourage the protection of food production land? Do we need ordinances allowing for food use of idle land, protected land bank registries, or assistance for ecological and waste management and for geographical areas to evaluate their current status based on their environment and resources available to them?
There is no doubt that the shift from nationalization to globalization in the food space has led to apathy in land use regulation. Food, it is believed, can come from anywhere – regardless of the cost to the local community and those the land could serve. Communities and municipalities lack the infrastructure and often the vision, to encourage regional food and food processing growth. The result is land use policy that does not reflect the value in protecting food production land.
Social Structure
Perhaps the foundational question that we need to be asking is: What social structure do we need in place to support agriculture? If we are seeking behavioral change from consumer through to governing bodies, then what framework do we need to build so there is a societal appreciation or even reverence of food and food production lands?
A friend of mine put this question to me and I thought that rather than discuss societal expectations and how they differ from our food production realities, we need to take a broader, richer tactic and think about complex societal structures and how it is that we will nurture creative change.
Currently lacking is not so much the societal will – for society is often grounded in values and food is a social conduit. Absent is the varied levels of political will to look at all parts of the whole and question the current status quo. Admittedly, the process of stepping back from all we know and asking the tough questions takes a lot of courage for this is undoubtedly a difficult navigation within the boundaries of what is a failed modernized global economy.
Yet, Society can pivot and become the strongest threads in the agricultural fabric if we give them reason. Telling our story is only a part of the transformation. Our communities will not know the possible, nor can they formulate for a greater good until questions are asked – and answered.
Copyright @BrendaSchoepp (20