Alternative food systems have garnered increasing interest and an immense following in communities across the Unites States in the last several years. Organic, local, and farm-fresh, have all become buzzwords in trendy circles of people who scoff at large corporations and grocery chains. ‘Food deserts’ and low-income communities are battered with efforts to increase food education and incorporate community and school gardens into their routines. Julie Guthman, from the University of California at Santa Cruz, sees alternative food movements as not just a food justice issue, but also major racial issue. The idea of alternative food as a major racial issue is important to acknowledge as being prevalent in most, if not all, cities in America.
Growing up in Portland, Oregon, food is large part of the city culture, especially the importance of local and fresh foods – at least in my experience. However, Portland has a long-standing history of segregation and gentrification. And, to me, it seems that the racial side of alternative food issues and gentrification go hand-in-hand. It is important to address them both, and not just one. Food can be the very thing that brings people together, or divides them right back apart. As Guthman explains, white people have a tendency to go into a predominantly black neighborhood, add a community garden, or start up a farmers market, and expect the existing community to just want those things and be involved with them. She observes that most of the people taking advantage of new community food resources are whites or upper-middle class blacks from other areas, not the people that they were originally targeting. As a result, the farmers do not profit, and the markets shut down. Guthman calls this phenomenon “the effect of white desire to enroll black people in a particular set of food practices” (Guthman, 2008). White people are bringing so called “solutions” to a problem that the community doesn’t identify themselves, without asking what they want, or if they even want a solution in the first place.
Wanting to help communities become more healthy and sustainable in their food practices is a positive goal and overall a mission that helps many people for many generations. However, those that are interested in going into communities where this is not a major priority must take a careful approach. Being able to make alternative food decisions in terms of local and organic foods, as they stand right now, is a privilege. Current markets hardly allow for comparable prices between conventional and organic foods, nor are they accessible in all places. Not every solution will be practical for all communities. The approach must change. And the base of every approach has to begin with community outreach and education. Connecting with a community before trying to change it will dissipate anger or resentment that might exist when outsiders come into a space.
Guthman’s students go into communities and work with programs and people to encourage better food practices. By providing an education basis, and working with existing structures and the opinions of the people, they are able to implement successful tools to guide the communities.
I agree with what you said about ” Food can be the very thing that brings people together, or divides them right back apart.” It was interesting to think about it that way and this article by Guthman really did make me think about how people don’t care to eat organic foods and that others that do eat organics should not make people feel like they need to do the same. Organics are way too expensive and its unrealistic to think that everyone can have fair access to them.
I agree that there was a major racial issue, and today it still stand out strongly. Many of the ethnic groups have lost most of their culture or history in relations to the farming techniques or oppressed by the economic structures ad racial segregation. So what can be the “solutions” that could benefit the individuals in the intended area? What about those community that was already destroyed from the settlements that migrated to that area? we already lost so much knowledge from all the loss of ecology and understanding, by introducing education and growth farming just create another issue?
I agree with the part of your conclusion that states a necessity to work with “existing structures and the opinions of the people..”
I think more recently academic groups are receiving training in areas like community-based participatory research and are also considering some fundamental ideas on being an ally. However, the “solutions” presented can be corrupted by their very source and context. Guntham used the word “missionary” to describe some of the practices, which in this context carries a very negative connotation, a “white-man’s burden” kind of connection.
Lastly, I would be careful with the language of your conclusion, or maybe elucidate the meaning in phrases like “…providing an education basis” and “implement successful tools to guide communities,” which can carry with them some of the very undertones Guntham criticizes.