The Opportunities in Maintaining Local Food

You’ve read quite a few articles recently, not just in this magazine but likely in consumer publications as well, about the rapidly expanding push for increased purchase and consumption of locally grown food. Just a couple of months ago, I wrote this column on the announcement of the word “locavore” as the New Oxford American Dictionary’s Word of the Year, and what it might mean for you. It seems like “local” is even surpassing “organic” as the key selling point for buyers who wear their environmental consciousness on their sleeves.

If your marketing segment is primarily considered local, this is just more good news for you, and should only help in boosting your sales in the coming years. Heck, even if you’re not local, you’re probably following (or you should be, at least) the local food movement and how it is driving concepts such as sustainability and food miles. The constant rise in gas and oil prices is also leaving some producers with essentially no choice but to consider their regional options.

Good News, Bad News

On the one hand, there are some programs being put in place that support this type of movement. In New York, for example, the State Department of Agriculture and Markets recently announced $1.15 million in funding for 51 agritourism projects. “Not only does agritourism allow our farmers to attract more customers and add value to existing commodities and services, it provides an essential educational component for the public,” said New York ag commissioner Patrick Hooker. “Many consumers today have never visited a farm, nor understand where their food comes from.” Agritourism helps bring the general public closer to agriculture, educates them on how fruits and vegetables are produced, and hopefully leads them to consider buying food from their local suppliers.

However, if you look closer, you can also see some forces in place that are certainly detrimental to local food sales. The New Jersey Department of Agriculture was at one point very close to getting the ax from the governor’s office, although thanks to loud voices of protest from the ag community, a last-minute reprieve looks likely. Meanwhile, state Extension offices are constantly falling under scrutiny, with the most recent example taking place within the University of Florida’s Institute of Food & Agricultural Sciences, a landmark research center.
Putting such programs at risk hurts all U.S. fruit and vegetable producers, but the effects are magnified for those small to midsize growers who rely on their local market. Extension personnel and state ag officials can be invaluable resources for growers looking to manage their costs. Cutting these programs also means less research into integrated pest management, sustainable agriculture, and similar endeavors.

What’s the worst news? Anything that threatens local food production means fruit suppliers may have to rely more on the international market — which is exactly the opposite of the principles behind the local food movement.

We all understand that today’s agriculture industry is now operating in a global setting, as well it should be. But in the eyes of consumers, there is certainly a place for local food production. In order to make this a viable option, we need to support the programs that support local producers. We can’t have political leaders praising the ideals of sustainability and “buying local,” then turning around and not thinking twice about slashing state and university ag programs. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.