Commentary
The ‘Go-Local’ Movement: How will your
co-op be affected? What is your role?
By Randall E. Torgerson
Editor’s note: Dr. Torgerson is the former administrator of USDA’s
Agricultural Cooperative Service, now the Cooperative Programs of
USDA Rural Development. He lives in Alexandria, Va.
ichael Pollan, a University of California-
Berkley journalism professor, recently wrote
an open letter to the incoming secretary of
agriculture, in which he suggests a need to reorient
our agricultural production and
distribution systems. In the letter, published
in the New York Times Magazine, Pollan sees a need to
emphasize policies that encourage producing and buying
locally produced food. This approach — embracing a
polyculture system of producing food, rather than the present
monoculture of subsidized commodity crops — is sparking
much discussion.
Instead of the present heavy reliance upon fossil fuels, it
foresees smaller farms, more use of organic and/or other
“greener” production methods and development of local
markets for fresh food. It is viewed as a policy alternative to
continued price supports which go to ever-larger, industrialtype
farms (a number of which do not support cooperatives).
It also envisions saving energy by lowering transportation
costs, improving stewardship of the environment through use
of best-conservation practices and promoting consumption of
fresher, quality foods that enhance the health and well-being
of the public.
Impact on ag cooperatives
Cooperative leaders need to ask themselves how this
approach influences their operations. More specifically, will
cooperatives have a role to play if such an approach gains
traction, including policy support from Congress and the new
Obama administration?
The concept isn’t totally new. In fact, statistics from the
recently released 2007 Census of Agriculture reflect a 4-
percent increase in the number of U.S. farms since 2002.
Many of these farms were created by subdividing larger
parcels near suburban areas as some people have sought the
benefits of a more rural lifestyle. Data show that these new
farms tend to have more diversified production, fewer acres,
lower sales and younger operators who, in some cases, also
work off the farm. The latest census figures show a
continuation in the trend toward more small and very large
farms, but fewer mid-size farm operations.
The census report also demonstrates that the concentration
of agricultural production has increased during the past five
years. In 2007, just 125,000 farms were responsible for 75
percent of the value of U.S. agricultural production, compared
to 144,000 farms in 2002 for the same share. This structural
shift has consequences for cooperatively owned businesses,
which must continue to adapt to the makeup of production
agriculture.
Direct marketing emphasized
The growth in smaller farming operations has been
accompanied by emphasis on direct marketing to local
communities and establishment of farmers markets. USDA
has been active in promoting and supporting direct marketing
through the Extension Service and grants funded by USDA’s
Agricultural Marketing Service. This effort has come at the
expense of diminished resources devoted to encouraging
cooperative marketing.
Growth in community-supported agriculture (CSA) has
also expanded. By joining a CSA (many of which are either
organized as cooperatives or at least operate on cooperative
principles), a consumer pays a fixed rate at the beginning of
the growing season in return for being supplied with fresh
fruits and vegetables all season. Much, but not all, of the
production meeting these needs is provided by local farmers,
often producing on a relatively small scale. Historically, these
small but intensively farmed operations have been known as
truck farms.
Paralleling the growth in this approach — and often
encouraging it — has been buying clubs of like-minded
consumers who have organized natural food store
cooperatives to help meet growing demand for organic and
natural foods. These foods are produced without use of
hormones, pesticides and artificial fertilizers (in the case of
organic foods) to support what is deemed a sustainable
environment.
In response to this development, USDA has adopted
organic food standards. The rise in popularity of organic
foods has reached national food chains and bulk discount
stores where organically labeled foods can found on many
store aisles. Some have predicted that the current economic
downturn could deal a setback to the growth of the organic
food movement, but the overall trend still appears to be on
the ascent.
Co-op business model fits demand
Application of the cooperative business model can, and
does, fit both ends of this spectrum. Linkages between farmer
co-ops and consumers who want more local food are growing,
providing a cultural connection with agriculture that is often
missing in today’s mass-consumption society.
Producers often organize to pool their produce and
transport it to markets. In this way they can ensure supplies to
customers on a regular basis and avoid glitches from weather,
disease or harvesting problems. In many instances, produce
that exceeds the demand of the fresh market, or which does
not meet required grade standards, can be cooperatively
processed or otherwise channeled to a secondary market.
While some producers choose to market individually at
roadside stands, most do not enjoy a strategic location nor
want the responsibility of maintaining such an outlet. For
them, the cooperative method of supplying local markets,
restaurants and stores is more viable.
Consumers have often been the initiators of buying direct
from local farms. Variations of this “farmer-consumer
connection” range from local purchasing groups that handle
distribution to members on a voluntary basis, to the more
formalized agreements of CSAs. In many cases, natural food
cooperatives have initiated outreach to local farmers to
achieve committed supply relationships. In some cases,
attempts have been made to make producers and consumers
members of the same cooperative, thereby internalizing
supply arrangements and transactions.
Do these collaborations between local growers and
consumers doom the role of local farm supply cooperatives or
existing marketing cooperatives? Certainly not. But they do
afford an opportunity for exploring support, and perhaps even
establishing new linkages not previously considered.
Helping family farms prosper
An even broader issue concerning the future economic
organization of American agriculture is at play here. Farmers
have organized cooperatives to gain access to markets that are
often geographically distant.
Through marketing and processing, they reach store
shelves coast to coast and even internationally. Witness the
strong reach of cooperative brands such as Florida’s Natural,
Cabot, Land O’Lakes, Sunkist, Sun Maid, Blue Diamond,
Ocean Spray, Tree Top and Welch’s among others in national
and foreign markets. These brands are the envy of the
marketing world and are a testament to the soundness of the
cooperative method of marketing on a national and worldwide
basis. They have built a strategic market presence that keeps
member-growers in business by building consumer
recognition and purchases of their quality products. Farmermembers,
small and large, are the benefactors.
Similarly, farm supply, credit, electric and telephone/
communication cooperatives continue to provide members
with inputs used for production, and these co-ops often have a
local presence in their members’ communities. Again, farm
operators, small and large, benefit from such ownership and
supply availability.
The concept that is advocated in the “go-local” policy is
one of providing a role and opportunity for smaller scale
farming operations to prosper in a marketplace that has
become dominated by a monoculture production system that
is heavily reliant on fossil fuels and the dictates of national and
global mass marketing systems.
This policy envisions the survival of family-run farming
operations by once again marrying sunlight, crop plants and
animals on the farm. In his New York Times article, Pollan
quotes Wendell Berry’s elegant solution:
“Sunlight nourishes the grasses and grains, the plants nourish
the animals, the animals then nourish the soil, which in turn
nourishes the next season’s grasses and grains. Animals on pasture
can also harvest their own feed and dispose of their own waste — all
without our help or fossil fuel.”
In arguing for a “re-solarization” of the food system by
“going local,” the approach is built upon a “reregionalization”
of the food system, in which food is
consumed closer to where it is grown. In the process, the rural
country is revitalized and generates new “green jobs” and
rebuilds America’s food culture.
This vision, if it appears as romanticism for a bygone
structure of farming, is exactly what constituted the
membership of local and regional farmer cooperatives for
more than 80 years and especially in the last half of the 20th
Century. What is significant about this movement is that it is
supported by an electorate that is deeply concerned about the
health of the environment and their children, and is led by
consumers as much as by agriculturalists.
The ideas proffered by Pollan and others are worth a look
by cooperative leaders who wish to engage advocates and
further discuss policy parameters. There is a great deal of food
for thought here that should cause critical reflection about our
present food system and how it can be improved.
