What is L.I.F.E.?

 Locally integrated food economies (L.I.F.E.), or local food systems, have the power to enhance the economic and social vitality of Kentucky’s farms and urban areas. The basic idea is to create a system where people grow and eat food closer to home. Jennifer Wilkins of Cornell University provides a more scholarly definition, stating that they are systems in which food production, processing, distribution, and consumption are integrated to enhance the environmental, economic, social, and nutritional health of a particular geographic location. A locally integrated food economy allows Kentuckians to benefit from consuming most of their food from local farms, Kentucky farmers to make a living from their farms and provides opportunity for a new generation of farmers to prosper.

What are the Benefits of L.I.F.E.?

 Locally integrated food economies are inherently more sustainable than an exclusive reliance on global food systems, for a variety of reasons. First of all, LIFE supports more small and mid-sized, usually low-input, family-owned farms. A greater percentage of the food dollar stays within the community, increasing local wealth through the multiplier effect. Transportation costs and related environmental consequences are likely reduced. In general, locally grown food is fresher and more nutritious than food shipped from long distances. By their decentralization and regional focus, these systems are more responsive to local needs. Finally, with LIFE customers and farmers can come to know one another, creating mutually supportive relationships, and raising citizens’ awareness of the many dimensions of their food choices.

How Does L.I.F.E. Strengthen Kentucky’s Local Economies?

 LIFE enriches local economies in a number of ways. First, local production and marketing keep a greater percentage of the food dollar within the community and increase regional wealth through the multiplier effect. “The multiplier effect is defined as the relationship between some initial change in an economy and the succeeding economic activity that is generated as a result of that initial change.” In 1980, The Rodale Institute sponsored a report, the Kentucky Cornucopia report, which conservatively stated that the Kentucky employment multiplier for agricultural production is estimated at 1.3 and the multiplier for local food processing is 1.5, and these figures are still considered reasonable. Thus, 10 new farm jobs in Kentucky would generate three additional jobs in the farm service sector of the local economy, and 10 new local processing jobs would generate six additional jobs in the community. An income multiplier effect also applies to regional cash generation. According to these multipliers, every $1,000 increase in net farm income would generate an additional $930 of income in the community, creating a total of $1930 of new wealth. Using these multipliers, the Cornucopia report estimated that the high level of food imports in 1980 cost Kentucky 126,000 jobs. Current estimates find that if Kentucky were to raise its per farm average direct marketing sales to the national average, it would generate an additional farm-level income of $7.9 million and have an estimated statewide economic impact of $15.8 million.

A significant part of the multiplier effect is that local farm owners are generally more likely to spend their money on community goods and services. Anthropologist Walter Goldschmidt, in his groundbreaking study of two communities in California (one surrounded by small-scale family farms, another encircled by large corporate farms) found that, “in towns surrounded by family farms, the income circulated among local business establishments, generating jobs and community prosperity. Where family farms predominated, there were more local businesses…” Moreover, small farms actually have a greater total output than larger farms, meaning that when all goods produced on the farm are considered (not simply yield per single crop type), small farms produced more. Small organic farms also generally hire more people than large factory farms, thus creating more jobs. These farms commonly require between 20 percent and 100 percent more labor than a large conventional farm. Other economic benefits include greater support of community food retailers and distribution networks, including farmers’ markets and community supported agriculture projects, as well as the indirect economic benefit of increased biodiversity. Smaller farms tend to be far more ecologically varied than larger farms, thus the community gains the aesthetics and environmental services of this diversity; both of which translate to increased profits through tourism and the incalculable cost-savings from normal ecological functioning (i.e. filtering drinking water, reduction in soil erosion, pollination from bees, etc.).

Local food systems are vital components of local economies. Locally based economic development focuses on the particular assets and needs of a region. Like local food systems, local economies build wealth by circulating dollars within a community. Local economies also spur creativity and entrepreneurship by providing people with opportunities to use their skills and talents to establish vibrant businesses. Community-based economic systems are more receptive to the needs of the local people they serve, by having a real stake in the prosperity of the area. In addition, local economic infrastructure helps communities withstand fluctuations in the global economy. Cyclical economic downturns are buffered by strong regional business relationships. Part and parcel of local economies, LIFE generates viable and stable affluence that addresses the needs of ordinary people first.

Implementing L.I.F.E.

 Over the past twenty years, farmers and consumers have been working together across Kentucky to develop more localized food systems. Community Farm Alliance members have been tapping into these cooperative opportunities with great success. Although most of this activity has been in the fruit and vegetable sectors, many initiatives are also dealing with meat, dairy products, eggs, herbs, fish and grains.

Kentucky’s history of tobacco production has helped keep many of our farms small and family-operated. As tobacco quotas continue to decline, Kentucky farmers are searching for new opportunities to keep their families on the farm. Past efforts aimed at diversifying production have not always been successful due to the lack of a systematic and integrated approach to production, processing, marketing and distribution. Farmers lost money and became wary of “new” crops. But recent developments attributable to House Bill 611 have dramatically changed the situation. This legislation (HB 611) sets up a democratic, people driven process for spending the first phase of tobacco settlement monies. The money is divided among tobacco producing counties in Kentucky based upon their economic dependence on the crop.
Kentucky’s Long-Term Plan for Agriculture, with the distribution of Master Settlement Funds from the tobacco industry and House Bill 611 creates an unprecedented opportunity for our farmers to shift to more diverse enterprises with less risk than before. A concerted and thoughtful effort that places the needs of real people at the center is helping to revitalize Kentucky’s food and farm economy.

Distributing and marketing homegrown products are perhaps Kentucky’s biggest challenges with developing LIFE. Though many options exist, farmers are not always aware of all the alternatives, let alone the rewards and risks of each. Marketing plans must be tailored specifically to the needs and interests of each operation, as well as the feasibility of various options. No one remedy will meet all needs. The answers are as varied as the people and communities of the state. Nevertheless, cooperation and diversity are the themes that will interweave successful approaches.

Expanding Agricultural
Markets in Kentucky

Direct and alternative markets have grown rapidly since the late 1980s. Kentucky’s direct marketing sales per farm have expanded 16.3 percent since 1992. These marketing approaches include such things as local and regional farmers’ markets, roadside stands and agritourism, sales to institutional buyers (such as schools, conference centers, restaurants), community supported agriculture operations (CSAs), sales to retailers and internet marketing. This approach received official recognition when direct sales were included for the first time in the 1992 Census of Agriculture. National fruit and vegetable sales through direct marketing are now estimated to exceed $1 billion, with more than one million customers now shopping regularly at farmers’ markets. These marketing approaches are significant because they provide farmers with a greater share of their product value, and offer consumers a personal connection to fresh and wholesome homegrown food.

Consumer Attitudes and Desires

 Numerous surveys and other research provide evidence that consumers are beginning to change the way they think and feel about food. This research is being conducted by a diverse set of interests, from food corporations to universities and nonprofits interested in understanding alternative food systems. Food safety scares both abroad and in the U.S., environmental and health effects of industrial agriculture, as well as a desire to preserve family farms and obtain the freshest possible foods have all fed into this growing awareness of where food comes from, how it is produced, and who produces it.

Consumers are interested in buying locally produced food and will pay premiums, but they need more information about where they can make such purchases, and options must be readily available and convenient. More extensive survey work exploring the specific attitudes of Kentucky consumers toward locally produced food, especially those in urban areas, would be helpful to farmers and policymakers. Most importantly, we need to identify purchase barriers and the best ways of overcoming those sticking points.

Interrelationships

 From much of what we have written here, one could come away with the impression that global and local are mutually exclusive concepts, with no common ground between them. Though Community Farm Alliance fully believes that the establishment of more localized economies is dramatically important, we also recognize the interconnectedness that we, as a “global community,” have come to share. We do not advocate isolationism. What we do advocate is self-reliance. Self-reliance implies the reduction of dependence on other places, but does not deny the desirability nor necessity of external trade relationships. There are various instances in which outside trade is more advantageous than treating communities as hermetically sealed units with nothing coming into or flowing out of their borders. However, in general, greater self-reliance creates stronger communities. The challenge ahead is to carefully balance the need for self-reliance with the benefits of external relationships. A closing quote from the authors of “Coming into the Foodshed” appropriately encapsulates this report’s underlying inspiration.

Ultimately, what sustainability requires of us is change in global society as a whole. We need the recovery and reconstitution of community generally, not simply in relation to food. But, though we may be able to think like mountains, we must act as human beings. To begin the global task to which we are called, we need some particular place to begin, we need some particular place to stand, some particular place in which to initiate the small, reformist changes that we can only hope may some day become radically transformative. We start with food. Given the centrality of food in our lives and its capacity to connect us materially and spiritually to each other and to the earth, we believe it’s a good place to start.

Bringing Kentucky’s Food and Farm Economy Home

The Community Farm Alliance has just completed a research report that explores in-depth the possibilities for creating L.I.F.E in Kentucky. This document, Bringing Kentucky’s Food and Farm Economy Home, provides information on the “state of the state” of Kentucky's food system. The report begins with an insightful Forward by Wendell Berry on the history of tobacco production. The body of the document compares available 1980 data with 2001/2002 information, highlighting trends toward concentration and farm loss. In addition, the report emphasizes the great opportunity that Kentucky now has to transition out of tobacco production and into a new locally based food and farm economy.

Access the full report: http://www.foodroutes.org/doclib/cfa_kentucky.pdf.