Local Charity

CARE recently made the daring move of rejecting federal money in their fight to feed the hungry. In fact, they turned down $180 million in order to first make themselves more efficient and second to help not just feed the poor in Africa, but to shore up their economies. The NYTimes reported this about a month ago in "A Better Way to Feed the Hungry" and I think this aspect of buying locally deserves some attention in light of an EatLocalChallenge. What's behind CARE's move?

Impoverished countries around the world typically get their food aid from donated food that comes from American farmers. In the case the NYTimes cites, the US government buys that food from farmers and donates them to overseas charities which then sell that food as a fundraising technique to run their programs. Three problems, only one of which that article emphasizes occur: first, since the US charities can sell the goods at subsidized prices local farmers cannot compete and thus loose the ability to keep themselves out of poverty; second, the environmental impact of such practices are huge, not just in the amount of carbon (etc) used to ship the food over there, but in the eradication of a local farming economy that can prevent erosion, droughts, etc.; and third, American farmers are paid to produce a single crop (or fewer crops), reducing our own sustainability and inflating prices artificially because farmers sell to the government what they can't sell to the public. I won't comment on this last issue because quite frankly I don't know anything about it.

I'll keep my comments on the second issue, the effect on local farming abroad, brief, too, because I know less about it. Last semester, however, I took a Postcolonialism course (the kind Vanishing Shakespeare would seriously disapprove of!) where we watched part of a documentary voiced over by Jamaica Kincaid based on her novel A Small Place. The video, Life + Debt included stories from Jamaican farmers who were forced to stop growing the crops best suited for their climate because they were being undersold by American imports and their struggles in going from a thriving farm to being unable to support their families because they couldn't farm. In one memorable scene, the wider effects of this policy were shown as milk farmers, who now lost a thriving local demand for their product, would milk their cows daily and then pour the milk onto the diary floor. While the video focuses on the role the IMF plays, part of the underlying issue is that American food is imported into the country.

But to turn to the first issue and how the principals of buying local apply. If we challenge ourselves to buy locally because of our own health (the freshness of our food), ethical standards (we can insure that organic and fair trade practices, which benefit both humans and animals are being followed...check out Horizon milk on Google if you're certain they always are) and environmental (less travel) then why do we not encourage charities to follow the same pattern? Heifer International (which I know I mention all the time -- it's my favorite charity!) has always made this a practice because they are interested not just in feeding the hungry, but in eradicating the conditions which produced it. So for CARE to take a similar track is an encouraging sign both for the environment and for a shift in the way charity is handled from giving people fish to giving them the tools to fish. The NYTimes article concludes by noting the criticism that CARE has faced from other aid groups who fear they will loose federal funding altogether if they challenge the funding. What this demonstrates is the power of the American food lobby that would prefer to make charity another market for American goods and in the process stifles American local growth as well. But that's a post (or comment) for someone who knows something about that topic!

The Economics of Local and Organic Foods

This post continues the trend of my other Eat Local Challenge posts in pushing against the edges of the movement to see what the problems are, in the hopes that it engages people (how's that for vague -- I could say "you," "dear readers" or all sorts of other congenial phrases) in a discussion on how we can act more ethically whether we engage in these practices on a wide or small scale. So today's post has three goals:

• to tell you about my own experience trying to buy local
• to consider how this example demonstrates the restrictions and limitations of buy local and organic movements at the current moment
• to point to some people who are helping to make ethicureanism economic-neutral.

So Sunday I went to the grocery store to buy food for the meal we made for company. I mentioned I was planning to cook an all-local meal, but the first problem is that takes time. I need to know what's in season, then what recipes to cook with that stuff and then do the cooking. Oh, and know this in enough time to make it to the Farmer's Market on Saturday morning...Well, I decided to read for class and Nate decided to do work and compose. We're awful people. When I arrived at the store to get ingredients, however, I did pay careful attention to where things were coming from. Whole Foods has these cute little signs saying "Grown in Wisconsin" (which is albeit not entirely "local" as it's a huge state, but something) and I started paying close attention to them, even if I wasn't buying what they had. But inevitably what they were selling was more expensive: sometimes significantly so. Soap? Kiss My Face olive oil soap is $2.49 for a small bar while the Wisconsin soap of the same size (maybe smaller?) was $5-6. Produce wasn't so dramatic, but I couldn't find scallions (maybe I should do without them in the Winter?), wasn't eating broccoli and so forth. However, I bought local tomatoes and they were the cheapest option. So, I didn't meat my goal really at all but did have a chance to observe how impossibly difficult it would be to follow an all-local diet on : a limited budget or a busy schedule.

And that's my transition into the central topic of my post: these movements, as one article pointed out are economically skewed towards those who have money, or don't buy meat (i.e. off-setting the higher cost) or, like us, just make food a priority in the budget. (A big priority -- it's absurd really how much we spend.) And this assumes we always have time and energy to cook. (We didn't tonight.) But imagine someone on a limited budget, working 2 jobs to make a below-poverty level salary to support her two kids. How are these movements practical for her? Even if she could afford to shop at Whole Foods, she won't live near one (only in rich areas). But also, how does she hear about these movements? They are primarily internet-driven, which might be something she doesn't have access to (library visits are timed access to the internet and if you work two jobs, you're not going to have time to go to the library); her children won't encounter such messages in schools; and so forth.

Thus what are our solutions? I've found a few interesting sites (by no means all) that I've found while thinking about these issues:

• The Edible Schoolyard is a middle school that incorporates food entirely into its curriculum via lessons that encourage students to be outside, reflect on their connection with nature, garden (organically), cook (using what they make in their garden) and so forth. I think what I most love about this is how the school seems to be ethnically diverse, encourages a love for nature and beauty and really emphasizes -- and exemplifies -- responsible living. Teaching our students about such values should be foremost in our curriculum because it creates a safe, nurturing environment and removes the separation of us from the world about us. And they do it without compromising a solid education. In fact, many of their lessons are pretty creative and practical, which is something all education should adopt.
• The People's Grocery is a resource I just stumbled on and their mission statement looks really promising, though I've no idea how successful they actually are. I like the emphasis on educating and enabling lower-income people, not just guiding them to an organic, local diet, but further working to improve their economic situations through farming and local food distribution outlets. Thus, it uses the local food movement as a job creator!
• Tree Hugger reported on New Roots Urban Farm, a project that works to create sustainable communities in inner cities. Again, note the emphasis on not just changing diets, but lives. Here, too, the community building emphasis insures that residents won't find jobs elsewhere, leaving the urban area just as blighted, but provides resources so that residents can make a healthy life for themselves and build their own community. Their website reports they feed 100 people during the growing season...in 1/2 an acre!

In general, what I most like about these programs is the multiple ways in which they address such problems as poverty, poor diets, the environment, obesity, lack of fitness regimes while restoring dignity and rest to people who have been ignored by the wider world. Further, it reminds me of a post a college friend of mine made today entitled Righteous Indignation where she inveighs against the poverty in this country because it does not just marginalize people, but women in particular.

Charging Local Purchases

Nate and I ate at Bunky's Cafe last night. We both found it a decent meal, though walked out having spent $45 and not sure it was worth that much; I enjoyed the glass of wine, but the selection was a bit paltry (one Pinot Noir and it was Mirrassou, which cost $6 -- more than half the price of the bottle at Whole Foods!). At any rate, took a while but wasn't a bad experience. Two flyers on the table interested me, however: first one advertising 27 September as a "buy local" night in town (sponsored by REAP) where local restaurants are preparing meals made from only local ingredients. Looking through websites on this subject I found some are even working (ala what grocery stores are doing these days) to note prominently their local ingredients. Unfortunately, Bunkys didn't mention the sources of their ingredients, though they did seem to have an interest on the subject. The second flyer discussed high credit card fees for merchants, led us to question whether they even took credit cards and encouraged me do some research and thinking about credit cards themselves and their relationship to a local economy.

Credit cards are things I use without thinking. (Don't worry, I pay the bill off every month!) While I'm fully aware of how easy it is to get into debt with a card, I've been a responsible user of them for a few years now. Course much of this is sheer luck: I had a decent paying job, cut expenses dramatically and currently share expenses (note the generous view of how much money my graduate salary brings into the household budget!!!). But I rigorously use my credit card because it gives me points and I love the $100 gift cards I get a few times a year. Enter Bunky's last night and their flyer which indicated that local businesses pay heavy credit card fees, money which goes outside of the community and then transitioned into how they gladly accept cash and checks and support the local Atwood community.

I've thought before about the rhetoric of local money staying in the community and have yet to have a full understanding of this concept; I get that when people spend their money locally instead of buying from Amazon, etc. then the local community thrives and can develop new businesses, owners and workers can spend more money, etc. What I'm not completely sure about is to what extent local growth is stymied by sending money out of the community as we don't merely live in our local community. A strong local community inside a weaker national economy is only going to eventually find itself in trouble. So I don't really have an issue with some money going out of my community. I realize that even a national merchant (Whole Foods, J. Crew, etc) has to spend enormous amounts of money in the local community and has as much interest in strong local communities as a locally-owned business. After all, national businesses still hire local workers and often invest in the local community (like Target). The major difference is merchandise, but for that I think changing one's shopping habits -- new clothes or used? -- is of more interest than the source of the business; after all, does it matter more if I go to Century House (a local furniture shop) where all the furniture is imported from Denmark or Rooms To Go, where who knows where the furniture comes from?

I think I'm mainly skeptical about the concept because extra local income doesn't go to the community, but to the owners. While they may spend some money locally, they also might save it, invest it and so forth. The major difference I really see between local and national corporations (as they function within the local community) is that the former have more flexibility in their giving and a more immediate need of their worker's and community's conditions. And national stores are not going to be likely to sell neat local merchandise (as Epoch, a local vintage store does -- they include neat headbands, etc. by a local artist -- who buys her material from an internet site!); and as the local movement gains steam (which is often coupled with encouraging individuality and local styles) I think we will see more flexibility for local managers of nationally owned stores to cater to their clientele. In short, I feel that the basic outlay of any business is local and the profit that is left either goes to a corporation or an individual; while I prefer the latter, I'm not sure I like the rhetoric that suggests the local business' profit equals community profit because it still is something that entirely depends on the owner and the owner's philosophies! I think in short it establishes the appearance of differences that are incidental and in the end only enrich the community after the owner has been paid. If anyone knows more about the economics of local versus national I'd be happy to hear about them! Update: I first raised similar questions from a different perspective in my post Is Fair Trade Fair? and think that Fair Trade might be another term that we feel "warm and fuzzy" about, but which has implications we're not aware of and might affect our views of if we were.

So I came home to do some research because I was still concerned about the implication the flyer made that local businesses were more stringently charged by credit cards (Nate suggested this must mean larger businesses get a volume discount). And everything I saw about credit card fees suggests that there is no distinction between the size of a business in a credit card issuer's world! Forbes included this guide to fees if you're interested. The flat fee ranges from 2-3% and then there's a quarter tacked on for each charge; there is always a monthly minimum (the business needs to take in more than $1500 of card sales to avoid this) and most seem to be waiving annual fees because of competition. Thus, $1.15 of my bill last night went to the credit card company while $43.85 went to the local business which then had its own outlays: food costs, worker costs, etc. Apparently, credit card fees are the third largest overhead expense (after rent and worker costs) in the industry, but I'm still not sure that I feel the community is being unduly harmed by it. In fact, I suspect that my glass of wine sent about $1 out of the community as well!

What do others think about this rhetoric (which is not confined to Bunkys, though they explained it the most fully I've seen)? While we're considering the local and national impact -- and distancing -- of our eating habits, should we also consider the way we pay? What are our priorities in purchasing and what are our responsibilities?

Why I had Turkey Soup Today, or Tales From a Non-Vegetarian

Before I started dating Nate, vegetarians were not people I regularly came in contact with. In fact, I don't think I knew any in college (from the South) or really encountered them outside of my summer job at CTY. My sole personal experiences were musing idly/ideally as a child whether it was ok to eat an egg b/c what about the baby chicken inside (no one explained to me either about unfertilized eggs or that this question extended beyond just that food item) and giving up meat at times for Lent. (Which wasn't in force on St. Patrick's Day b/c we always eat corned beef and cabbage for the holiday or on Sundays because if you count the 40 days don't include feast days, which Sundays are.) My last experience giving up meat for Lent was in college, hard because everyone else was eating yummy food and the college options for non-vegetarians were next to nothing. In fact, I felt so run down that semester that I vowed never to give up meat for Lent again. So I met Nate and thought, "crazy person who doesn't get enough nutrients."

But I also started really thinking about the path of food from the animal to the plate...three times a day. My concern wasn't so much that I ate meat, but that I did not consider a meal complete if it did not have meat in it. (again, from the South) For me a mouth-watering meal is: side of meat (salmon loaf, salisbury steak, etc) with two vegetable sides and possibly a salad or chili or spaghetti (with meat) and so forth. Breakfast ought to be bacon and eggs and so forth, though that is optimistic. Lunch is leftovers from the day before. So watching Nate not eating any meat or dairy products at all made me realize mostly that meals (yummy meals in fact) can be made (easily) without relying on meat and still be entirely balanced -- and not run me down into the ground. And realizing the strain this constantly eating meat places on our bodies, our environment and our budget only reinforced my observation that meat is a dominant part of our food ritual and one that ought to be more thoughtfully considered.

So instead of becoming a vegetarian or vegan, neither of which really seemed to be necessary to me, I have turned to evaluating the nature of the food I eat. I prefer to eat organic meat, but since I don't buy meat anymore (and started this before Nate & I moved in together) this rarely happens; unfortunately, most restaurants have yet to find that the benefits of organic outweigh the significant cost increases. Instead, I've tried to be more conscious of the non-vegetarian options on a menu and sometimes even order them! I've discovered that in the end when I eat less meat I feel better: more alert, less sluggish (unless I'm low on protein that day) and calmer. On the other hand, I do enjoy eating some meat (corned beef on St. Patrick's Day, fish and so forth) and at times just want to order something on the menu without mulling the ethical and otherwise values of it. So I do. But I'm glad that I've started noticing the impact of my eating habits and am acting on it, even if I'm not willing to take the full step into non-omnivore status.

And this is what I think the vegetarian/vegan community can offer all of us: the awareness that we can supplement and enrich our diet with plant-only meals; the comprehension that it's not just that we eat meat, but that we eat a lot of meat that causes many problems and, finally, the encouragement to demand that animals be treated ethically even if we choose to eat them at the end of the day. 

If you're interested, I'd highly recommend going a week without meat, just to become aware of the significant hold it has on our psychological concepts of a meal and being full. You probably won't become a vegetarian, but might begin adding more vegetarian options to your diet and that matters, too!

Great resources for Vegetarian/Vegan cooking

• Vegetarian Times We have found so many yummy meals from here since subscribing about 5 months ago that I think it's the best resource out there! Our current favorites include mushrooms over white beans, poppy seed strawberry shortcake and so forth.


• The New Moosewood Cookbook There are a million permutations of Moosewood, all of them wonderful, but this one happens to have Samosas in them. If you leave out the coriander, I can even partake!


• The Soy Alternative While not actually a vegetarian cookbook, it includes many vegetarian recipes. My favorite is the tempeh lasagna, which uses tempeh instead of pasta giving the meal a slightly nutty flavor and adding tons of nutrients over regular pasta. Oh, and it's out-of-print so usually runs about $2 used (click on the Amazon link above for more info).


• The Best - Ever Vegetarian Cookbook Ok, so that's hyping things a bit, but it has a number of quick, easy meals that taste yummy. I like the chickpea and spinach soup and in fact make many of their soups regularly. I don't tend to like exactly how the recipe develops so adapt a bit and make even better.


• The Complete Vegan Cookbook The cover alone is inspirational (glistening, fresh vegetables of all varieties in a stone bowl), but the recipes are also yummy. I appreciate the variety and inclusion of both morning meals (that don't revolve around eggs or meat-substitute products) and are fast and easy: great pancake recipes and a no bake oatmeal that's out of this world (cooks overnight with hot water)! Also includes a number of sandwich ideas which are the hardest thing to replace in a vegetarian or vegan diet.

So why did I have turkey soup today? Because I've been dreaming about it lately -- probably because it just turned chilly here (down to 38 tonight) and I don't mind eating meat occasionally. Though, I will note I've cut down significantly on my red meat consumption as chickens (despite my childhood concern for them) seem less harmful overall.

September: Eat Local Month

September is the month we're all struggling to settle our schedules and now the Eat Local Challenge wants us to do more: change our eating habits. Perhaps, though, our awareness of new beginnings is an ideal time to begin to consider the impact of our food on our lives and us on our food. The winter is fast approaching and it can become easy here in Wisconsin to discover that the fresh food shrinks to nothing; the farmer's market begins to teem with cheeses, breads and crafts instead of the usual bounteous produce, flowers, herbs and so forth. I tend to maintain my same eating habits (and rotation of easy meals) and just replace local produce with whatever is at the grocery store. Thus eating locally has a great appeal. On the other hand this project is a major time commitment -- I haven't time to make a grocery list, much less one that considers only stuff from within a "local" area. I do, however, think that this is a very worthwhile trend that deserves a great deal of attention. In fact, here's 10 Reasons to Eat Local.

While I'm moderating movements that are all-or-nothing (you can see my post on "Environmentalism vs. Consumptionism vs. Me" for more details), I also want to continue living my life with more awareness about how I impact (negatively) the world around me. In short, any change that we do for the better furthers us along to making those decisions that propel us to further change. When I started dating Nate, I never thought about my own consumption of meat, but now think about the food chain each time I decide to cook or order food; while I still eat meat, I eat much less. I haven't actually written about vegetarianism and my thoughts on why I eat less meat so I'll make that post one of this month's blogging.

I wonder what overall effect this movement has on the food supply if it becomes more dispersed. While "buy local" movements are crucial to developing communities, we live in such a globalized economy (and have destroyed many local communities abroad) that we need to consider both sides of the equation: to what extent will we decimate communities whose local industries we've eliminated and how can we transition to a more primarily local environment while participating (responsibly) in a global climate? I don't think a month of thinking about eating locally will answer that question!

THE PLAN

• Focus on adding some local produce to my meals
• Draft meals that take advantage of multiple combinations so there's less waste (Nate & I both tend to overcook for just us and then decide we've eaten that soup for 3 days and the last bowl can go down the drain)
• Blog about food issues (including that promised vegetarian post!)
• Make the two-three meals we're having company from local ingredients.

So, look here for my musings, discoveries and slow steps towards incorporating locally grown food into a life that is overfilled with my second year of graduate school!

Speaking of graduate school, here's my crazy schedule: taking two English graduate classes (Medieval and Early Modern -- both revolving around politics and religion), an undergraduate art history course (covering exactly what I want to do with my career!) and teaching four sections of English 162: Shakespeare (which is one section more than the usual load). I designed the Shakespeare site myself and while it needs a ton of work, I'm pleased with the general architecture that I've established.