Tuesday and we went off to the Soil Association in Bristol. I’m sorry to harp on this, and I’m sure there are nice districts and pleasant activities on offer, but what a depressing place Bristol is! The high level of poverty and social dysfunction is evident. You can see it in the filthy streets, the homeless and the vestiges of violence. It made our little corner of south-east Queensland look like paradise. Which it is.
The Soil Association’s offices were a surprise – I had in mind small crowded cubicles and shared offices in a centuries old semi-detached, humming with activity; energy and passion oozing out of every crack in the wall.
Instead we found two floors in a state-of-the-art building (complete with fountain out the front); open-plan offices displaying a modest amount of organised activity, and slick corporate values in evidence – from the glass-walled conference room filled with suits and ties, to the microwave in the kitchenette, to the security cards required to be scanned on re-entry after a visit to the loo.
I met with Amanda Daniel, Dan Keech and Ken (didn’t get his last name) – all very concerned with carbon footprints and global warming, riding their bikes to work (“did we drive or catch the train into Bristol?”) and setting up salad-buying groups for the staff (presumably to eat with their microwaved tofu…). Their commitment was evident.
The Soil Association is doing great work under the ‘Making Local Food Work’ banner to promote CSAs and Farmers Markets, although we didn’t have time to talk about the latter. They are producing a range of ‘how to’ CSA booklets and on-line resources that will be invaluable around the world, although their charter is Britain-only. Amanda went on a travelling roadshow recently to inform and support communities that want to set up a CSA, specifically near Exeter.
It’s important to not forget that the Soil Association has been working in this field for many years – at least seven or eight – and the MLFW program is injecting some much-appreciated funding to broaden their audience.
Separately, there is some interesting work going on to rationalise farm audits by having one inspector simultaneously carry out an audit for two (or more?) accreditation agencies. This is never going to be simple and one of the challenges seems to be about whose standards are higher or more thorough. I wondered if this was more about saving money and expense for the regulatory bodies than necessarily saving time and energy for the farmer.
Another initiative is to encourage participation of small-scale producers in the development and refinement of standards (hallelujah), however, like all things corporate, getting small-scale producers involved is a challenge. These processes take such a long time and none I know operating a food production venture of this size could afford the time commitment.
Ken, meanwhile, is working on a project dear to his heart – to bring products from East Africa to Britain. I couldn’t help being confused and a little bemused by such a blatantly non-local initiative being supported by an organisation both historically and currently committed to promoting local food.
Ken’s argument – and it was a persuasive one – is that local food doesn’t necessarily have a smaller carbon footprint or foster local economy or provide product that is market-driven. And even the local food purists would agree that Fair Trade initiatives are worth supporting (the term is everywhere here) over the alternatives. In East Africa they are producing a range of food products that can’t be grown in Britain and some that can, but only seasonally. And then there are products that would compete directly with that offered by British producers.
Which brought me back to the hoary chestnut of why import them in the first place. I suspect (but don’t know this for sure) that Ken has some strong links with East Africa and, of course, Britain’s colonial and missionary past make it a logical region to target for this kind of feel good project.
Still, I felt uncomfortable talking about East African trade and Making Local Food Work over the same cup of coffee (which was probably African in origin). I wondered how the affected British producers, presumably many of who would be members of and accredited by the Soil Association, feel about their organisation channelling resources into such a venture.
The visit to the Soil Association made me think a lot about this whole issue of which criterion is more important – local, regional, small-scale, artisanal, good quality, socially just, environmentally sensitive, sustainable (I’m getting very tired of that word), cheap. On this last, one there’s not much point in promoting local food because it fosters a local economy if local customers can’t afford it. But then is it socially responsible to endorse access to imported and/or highly processed food, which may have little or no nutritional value, just because it is cheap?
Is it merely a luxury of the middle class to seek out foods that are nutrient-dense or locally produced or socially just – relegating price to much further down the purchasing criteria list – when others can’t afford the cheapest, most toxic food on their poverty-line social security income? Why rail against Tesco as the biggest competitor to small-scale food production when they are providing a valued service. Is it a case of, to quote Sally Fallon, ‘Natural Selection of the Wise’ or should that be ‘Natural Selection of the Privileged’?
I don’t believe there can be one answer for all communities.
I wonder if it would help me to reconcile everything we’ve seen so far if I think more in terms of choices about food being made locally (rather than the food itself necessarily being local) and the focus put on educating consumers – sorry, co-producers – about the consequences of those choices. If customers want a Tesco and can support one in their district, then maybe they should have one. And if they don’t, such as in Maleny, they don’t get one regardless.
De-centralisation of decision-making and control, that’s it. And that’s where the paradox lay. In the Soil Association, we have a massive organisation, largely centralised, creating and funding the implementation of national policies and standards. By necessity they assume a position of expertise – which is only relative – and authority on what is best for its members and the community at large: just like a government department. And yet they, too, fervently believe – in a leftist and trendy way – they have the best interests of the people at heart.
I would hope, though, that one day all people, regardless of their socio-economic status, are able to make their food choices from an informed position and not one borne of ignorance.
Recent Comments