alternative ag draft

Multicultural

Approaches to

Empowerment and

Community

2016

Abby Cox

People, Agriculture, and the EnvironmentWilliam Moseley

Alternative Agriculture Paper6 May 2016

While CSAs do provide incredible benefits of educational-awareness of wider political and environmental issues, they only reach a population that is largely white, upper class, and already environmentally-aware and health conscious. Furthermore, existing CSA members and farmers should ask how they can expand their access to minoritized racial and lower-income groups. The expansion of CSAs to cater to minoritized groups is important because of the fact that if CSAs are going to be a viable alternative against existing food systems, then CSAs must be accessible to all intersectional groups of class, race, and gender.

Multicultural Approaches to Empowerment and Community 1

Introduction

As the moment of crisis for modern cybernetic capitalism and its global system edges

closes, alternatives to existing paradigms must emerge and develop. According to Cox and

Holloway, alternative food networks (AFN) link producers and consumers in comparison to

“conventional food supply systems” (204). CSAs as an alternative for communities have many

benefits including: capacity-building, ecological sustainability, community empowerment, as

well as an implicit “localness” against existing transnational food systems. While CSAs are

perceived as a viable alternative, only select groups within society have true, uninhabited access

to CSAs considering issues of transportation, affordability, and education.

While CSAs do provide incredible benefits of educational-awareness of wider political

and environmental issues, they only reach a population that is largely white, upper class, and

already environmentally-aware and health conscious. Furthermore, existing CSA members and

farmers should ask how they can expand their access to minoritized racial and lower-income

groups. The expansion of CSAs to cater to minoritized groups is important because of the fact

that if CSAs are going to be a viable alternative against existing food systems, then CSAs must

be accessible to all intersectional groups of class, race, and gender.

Roadmap

In order to examine how CSAs can better cater to minoritized groups, I will answer the

sub-research question of how conventional CSAs view various forms of education and multi-

culturalism through a review of scholarly literature. Education represents how CSAs market

themselves to possible new members as well as inform existing members and non-members on

sustainable agriculture and broader environmental issues. Considering knowledge is a means to


elevate a groups’ social capital, education is influential in how CSAs and minority groups

interact in information-sharing. The second sub-research question is how existing CSAs and food

organizations are using concepts and various forms of education in order to accommodate and

encourage multiple cultural identities within the alternative food movement (206). In the

following paper, I argue that existing, scholarly views of education in CSAs ignore and limit

education, especially in terms of the multicultural approach and catering to minoritized groups.

Instead CSAs can utilize three lessons from other food and cultural organizations: physical,

community spaces, empowerment through education, and community collaborations and

partnerships.

Methods

By answering the two sub-research questions about cultural education and CSAs, I first

conducted a literary analysis, examining conventional articles regarding how CSAs view and

utilize education towards members and non-members. Secondly, I compared literature that

promotes a multicultural approach to education in the food movement. My last method of

research was an analysis of case studies of existing food and community organizations in the

Twin Cities and how they utilize multicultural approaches to aid lower-income groups and

communities of color.

Literature Review of Education within CSAs

A majority of the existing literature claims that an educational relationship between the

“producer and consumer” stimulates positive broader action and raises overall awareness of these

communities. However, a large majority of the literature lacks the appropriate scholarship on


exactly how existing CSAs expand their consumer base to various cultural and ethnic groups and

how the cater to those differentiations

In “Common Ground? Motivations for participation in a community-supported

agriculture” Rosie Cox argues that members of the CSA understand, engage, and participate in

wider political positions due to the knowledge-sharing as a source of information about food and

awareness of environmental, ethical issues. Through a series of interviews, Cox and Holloway

discovered that the motivations for consumers to join CSAs evolved to gain more “food

knowledge” through various scales. One interviewee demonstrations motivations as “knowing

where [food] comes from definitely, the reduction of food miles…There are a lot of people not

aware of the externalities…how you then combat the supermarket is another issue” (212). In

terms of education, Cox and Holloway describe the CSA as a site of exchange of information

dually between producer and consumer, yet purely for the benefit of the consumers. While Cox

and Holloway describe knowledge-sharing in CSAs as a process of broader social change, their

perspective is limited for what education means in the directional flow of information, meaning

education can only benefit the consumers. Lastly, through their discussion, it is evident that there

is a lack of discourse of education in terms of culture; the authors restrict their rhetoric strictly in

terms of “producer/consumer” and “farmer/member,” lacking any resource for certain cultural

and ethnic groups to enter the conversation.

Continuing this trend, in “Community resilience and contemporary agri-ecological

systems” Christine A. King attempts to negotiate this dual flow of information by reflecting on

how farmers and CSA management should reflect the culture of the community (2). While King

briefly emphasizes the importance of the farmers to adjust and learn from the community it

surrounds, she still favors the learning relationship to increase the “consumer’s awareness” about


food choices and production. While the development of these AFNs do connect people across

cultural lines, both articles have failed how to address and recognize these cultural differences

and how CSAs cannot just accommodate, but also promote and celebrate these communities

through the use of these food systems.

Similarly Timothy Donahue in his article “Community-supported agriculture

opportunities for environmental education” highlights that CSAs are a means for the highest of

quality of food to reach certain populations, while creating a new culture based on “healthy

earth, social, and economic relations” (25). Reflecting similar rhetoric of partnerships and

interactions between producers and consumers, Donahue reveals the importance of the

transcendence of intersectionality of race and ethnicity for a new “foodie” culture. In the

Community Farm information flyer, a CSA is described as the “mutual cooperation” between

farmers and consumers through increased awareness of environmental issues, availability of

educational workshops, nature and science studies, and participation for policy changes (8).

I will use the following framework by Rachel Slocum to shift the focus and introduce the

idea that farmers and CSA’s must introduce a dual flow of exchange of information in order to

change not only the behavior of consumers, but farmers’ production of culturally appropriate

informational material as well as crop resources in order to increase food security and access to

CSAs to various cultural groups through educational empowerment.

Through the alternative framework of Rachel Slocum in “Anti-Racist practice and the

Work of Community Food Organizations,’ claims that the progress and change of alternative

food systems are undermined due to a systematic failure to confront practices of white privilege

(327). Through an analysis of a local food organization, Slocum asserts that there is a “loss of

food knowledge” within the alternative food movement. A member of a food organization claims


“the biggest problem is some ethnic groups don’t have any ‘culturally appropriate’ foods that are

healthy” (341). In response, Slocum highlights an email from another member, which claims:

“first colonialism introduced these communities to unhealthy food, while indigenous farming

was eliminated by imperialism.” Secondly Slocum highlights the incredible injustices due to

neoliberal economics in minoritized communities:

how violently changing a culture from a land-based self-sustainable model to corporate dependency through force and economics is an undertone that is conveniently omitted, yet iit is encouraged that African-American and Latino communities embrace a land-based self-sustainable model as if it were never a pre-existing reality…Missionary Complex is unfolding-the ideal that there is not innate Wisdom within the culture, that is must all come from outside-THROUGH EDUCATION no less.

Essentially, Slocum’s argument reveals the emphasis of ways in “which people sidestep

engagement with their own privilege and organizations to fail to confront their role in

institutionalized racism (335). In order to change this systematic limitation even within

alternative food movements, according to Slocum, anti-racist practices begin with establishing

relationships with communities, reflecting those needs with food organizations and CSAs, and

responding to community interests within that communal organization.

Case Studies: How are pre-existing culture-specific groups, food organizations, CSAs

accommodating minoritized groups through education?

While it is important to recognize that minoritized groups such as Native Americans,

Hmong, Latino, African-American, and African communities cannot be reduced to essentialism

in regards to their needs in terms of food security, the following case study analysis aims to

reexamine the social relationships and hierarchical approach to education to a multicultural

approach. Through the following case studies, I aim to highlight patterns of multicultural

approaches to education in the CSA and food movements. The second question that I looked at


culture-specific groups and other food organizations already using education in different ways to

cater to minority groups? I did this by analyzing their rhetoric towards education and culture and

the programs they've promoted: Stone's Throw Farm, Hmong American Farmers Association,

Women's Environmental Institute, Gardening Matters, the Ron Finely Project.

Lessons

Many community-supported agricultural farms such as Stone’s Throw Urban Farm as

well as the Amador Hill at the Women’s Environmental institute describe their CSA farm as a

psychical space in which community gathering and building occur. By describing their CSA as a

farm for “ecological sustainability, community empowerment, and financial viability” and an

“educational center,” these organizations’ philosophies promote these physical spaces as a

tangible space to envision diverse and sustainable food systems. In comparison to the traditional

farm model of the CSA which produces food, organizations such as Gardening Matters represent

community members as not only “shareholders” but empower communities to grow their own

food. Groups such as Hmong farmers at HAFA, address challenges of access to affordable areas,

equipment, and capacity training through “communitarian values” manifested within CSAs and

community spaces. By shifting the CSA into an actual community hub where people learn about

nutrition and cultures, plant, and work together, education becomes a more dual-flow

interactions and the CSA begins to reflect the community around it.

Once these physical spaces are established as communal, education must be achieved

through “empowerment” versus “awareness.” Awareness is the ability of the CSA to market

itself to other possible members and the knowledge about wider environmental issues; in

comparison, empowerment is the ability for CSA and members to educate and practice


sustainable agriculture to tangibly shift community growing. Many organizations approach

knowledge-sharing through various methods in order to cater to various groups in different ways.

For example, the Women’s Environmental Institute has educational programs such as Growing

Power ROTC, Down to Earth, Folk Art School, Organic Farm School, Folk Art School. These

educational programs aim to educate members and farmers on issues such as composing,

aquaponics, winter climate culture, as well as management, business plans, and land access. In

addition, education is multi-lingual, online, in workshops, start-up material and through cultural

means such as storytelling and writing in the WEI’s Folk Art School. Educating members to

grow sustainable food themselves seems contradictory to CSAs, but many organizations such as

the WEI, Hmong American Farmers Association claim that members are motived to maintain

relationships because of the feeling of community and access to education; in other words, the

CSAs are not just selling fresh produce, but a providing an educational service for the

community.

The final lesson is that community partnerships must reflect the needs of the community,

and secondly increase the resources shared between partners. CSA farms in the Twin Cities such

as Stone’s Throw farm describe their CSA as a larger part of a food network. One of the main

components of Gardening Matters as a community development organization is Food Hubs,

which are “networks [which] provide home and community gardeners the support to grow…their

own produce by offering supplies, educational opportunities, and community connections.”

Through collaboration, social capital is built for these communities, redefining their access to

resources and food. Cultural organizations such as the Hmong American Farmers Association

have partnerships with other community organizations such as the Waite House and Latino

Economic Development Center in the Twin Cities to truly produce an alternative network. These


networks and collaborations ensure the CSA reflects the needs of the community, allows

traditionally marginalized groups to gain more resources and information, and lastly ensures that

there is a dual-way flow of information between CSAs, community organizations, and members.

Conclusion

Community-supported agriculture is championed as a viable alternative to what Michael

Pollan claims is the “Industrial Organic” as well as conventional “Supermarket Pastoral”

systems. Although CSAs promote an image of healthy and environmentally-friendly, there are

some systematic barriers to certain groups for access to CSA farms. One of those challenges is

the ontological singularity of education and culture even within a seemingly open, alternative

system. Through a literary analysis, both the utilization of education and view of culture is either

highly restricted or non-existent. Many scholars view information exchange and knowledge-

sharing strictly as one-directional and singular from the “farmer” to the “consumer.” Through

Rachel Slocum’s argument, it is evident that there are other forms of racism within the

alternative food movement that needs to be addressed.

In examining various cultural and food organizations through the Twin Cities area, there

are three lessons for future CSAs: establish CSAs as physical, community gathering hub and

space for communal use, empowerment through direct education in various forms, and lastly,

community partnerships with other cultural organizations to reflect the needs of the community

in the CSA. With these lessons to keep in mind, CSAs can be more inclusive in their applications

and use of education and multicultural approaches.


Bibliography

Cox, Rosie, & Lewis Holloway, Laura Venn, Liz Dowler, Moya Kneafsey. (2008)

“Common ground? Motivations for participation in a community-supported agricultural

scheme.” Local Environment 13.3. received from http://www.standfonline.com.

Donahue, Timothy P. (1994) “Community-Supported Agriculture: opportunities for

environmental education.” The Journal of Environmental Education 25.2. received from

http://www.tandfonline.com.

Educational Programs. Retrieved from http://www.w-e-i.org/about-us/.

Food Justice. Retrieved from https://www.gardeningmatters.org/policy-advocacy/food-

justice.

King, Christine A. (2008). “Community resilience and contemporary agri-ecological

systems: reconnecting people and food, and people with people.” Systems Research and

Behavioral Science 25.1. received from

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sres.854/abstract.

Sign up for our CSA. Retrieved from http://stonesthrowurbanfarm.com/.

Slocum, Rachel. (2006). “Anti-Racist Practice and the work of community food

organizations.” Antipode: radical journal of geography 38. 2. Received from

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/.

The HAFA Farm. Retrieved from http://www.hmongfarmers.com/hafa-farm/.

alternative ag draft

Documents