Labor and alternative food networks: challenges for farmers and consumers

Abstract

Although alternative food networks (AFNs) have made strides in modeling socially just and environmentally sound agrifood system practices, the next step is to make these innovations available to more people, or to increase participation in AFNs. However, there are several barriers to expanding the impact of AFNs. The labor intensity of producing and consuming foods in AFNs is sometimes overlooked but poses a significant challenge to alternative agrifood systems’ long-term viability. This paper brings together two independently conducted empirical research studies, one focused on sustainable food production and one focused on food provisioning in the sphere of consumption. Farmers engaged in small-scale alternative food production are investing significantly more time in maintaining the health of their soils by practicing crop rotation, growing a greater diversity of crops and building organic matter with cover crops and compost. Because much of this work is unpaid, the added labor requirements pose an obstacle to the financial viability and social sustainability of alternative production methods. On the consumption side, the labor intensity of food provisioning for women engaged in AFNs, combined with other socio-demographic factors, at times, constrains AFN participation. By identifying the ways in which labor may limit the ability of AFNs to expand to a larger portion of the population, this paper helps shed light on ways of increasing the environmental, social and health benefits of AFNs.

A Multi-Actor Literature Review on Alternative and Sustainable Food Systems for the Promotion of Cereal Biodiversity

“…The positive discourse concentrates on three main areas: connectedness/embeddedness among producers and consumers [32,[35][36][37]; re-peasantization in which a new narrative of food sovereignty against the mainstream industrialized food provision is established [34]; and the role of engagement of civil society in civic agriculture movements working towards political and social activism [39]. The negative issues recorded are mainly related to the "danger of 'romanticizing' the alternative" [47,48,50], as well as to constraints in accessing alternative food products for consumers and the difficulties for producers in engaging in AFNs [51].…”

“…The role of consumers in building AFNs has been investigated through the concept of connectedness and embeddedness, but also in relation to their behaviour, preference, and motivation in purchasing alternative products. Besides the utilitarian reason for purchasing healthy food, it emerges that a strong concern for the environment influences consumer choice to buy locally grown food and have more control over their choice of food provenance and quality [58,59] but also reasons for not taking part in AFNs were highlighted, such as lack of convenience and cooking skills [51].…”

“…Competition within AFNs [50] and constraints in participating [51] have also been recorded in some experiences of American CSA. In the first case, perceived competition results negatively correlated with CSA farms' profitability, farmers' satisfaction as well as with strong farmers' relationships.…”

“…Finally, problematic issues related to consumers' participation to alternative food markets have been raised [51]. In particular, purchasing at FMs could represent a time-consuming issue since such types of consumption usually require a higher amount of time to be spent in reaching suitable markets, in identifying and buying desired products as well as in cooking them, all time-demanding activities that lead to prefer conventional ways of consumption.…”

Community Supported Agriculture Farmers’ Perceptions of Management Benefits and Drawbacks

“…These practices include utilizing low/no use of inputs, maintaining biodiversity, adopting traditional farming practices, reducing food miles, and increasing seasonal eating. The farmers' objective is to safeguard the environment (i.e., water, air, soil) by limiting the negative environmental impacts of food production, distribution, and consumption [20][21][22][23][24][25][26] Third, the CSA model emphasizes the social and community aspect of the consumer and producer relationship. The management implementation of this aspect may differ [1,5,25].…”