21 pages, Surging interest in urban agriculture has prompted cities across North America to adopt policies that give gardeners access to publicly owned land. However, if not carefully designed, these policies can exacerbate existing racial inequities. Drawing on theories of urban and environmental justice, we use a contextualized case comparison to explore the radical potential and practical constraints of garden land policies at two distinct institutions: the City of Minneapolis and the independently elected Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board. Based on participant observation, document review, and interviews with a range of policy actors, we argue that what appear to be minor, common-sense policy details systematically shape who benefits from the garden land policies, sometimes in surprising ways. Compared to the City, the Park Board goes substantially further in addressing racial equity. Furthermore, though both cases included public participation, we argue that the more intensive participation during the Park Board policy development process—particularly in determining the details—was pivotal in crafting a policy that reduced barriers to racial equity. The present study contributes to the growing scholarship on urban agriculture and environmental governance and offers concrete insights for actors working toward more just policies.
24 pages, Farmer-led research (FLR) is a process of inquiry wherein farmers use scientific methods to address their own on-farm curiosities and challenges in ways that are compatible with the scale and management style of their operations. With its flexible, adaptable, participatory, grassroots-oriented nature, FLR has typically been employed by farmers interested in ecological farming techniques and technologies, and evidence shows that it contributes to the adoption and improvement of ecological management practices across a range of contexts. Engagement in FLR initiatives has also been linked to positive social outcomes, including community-building, farmer empowerment, and enhanced capacity for leadership and collective action. In this paper, we present a case study of the Ecological Farmers Association of Ontario’s (EFAO) Farmer-Led Research Program (FLRP), which is currently one of relatively few FLR initiatives in North America. We draw on data from a participatory, mixed-methods research project. Our results highlight how the FLRP is enabling farmers to feel more knowledgeable, confident, motivated, and inspired to adopt and/or improve ecological practices on their farms, in part by supporting them in building robust social networks that align with their farming values and priorities.
11 pages, Private-sector dominance of plant breeding constitutes the present norm of organic seed genetics research, which has generated concerns in the organic farming community in this era of robust intellectual property protections. Intellectual property restrictions primarily in the form of certificates, patents, and contractual arrangements are blamed for stifling the innovation of organic seed varieties. To better understand the challenges small-scale and university-based breeders and researchers face in organic corn seed genetic development, this article provides an overview of intellectual property structures surrounding seed innovation and sharing. After describing the legal landscape in which organic corn seed research and development occurs, the article details research efforts exploring the veracity of claims that contractual arrangements (in the form of seed-sharing agreements between breeders and universities) stifle the innovation of organic varieties. In doing so, the article describes the search methodology utilized and highlights a critical barrier to research: the closely guarded nature of private contracts that parties are reluctant to reveal. While we were able to identify several data points that highlighted the importance of seed-sharing agreements as a part of the intellectual property regime controlling organics research and breeding, we were unable to obtain contracts or identify disputes over contractual language to further analyze. Such contractual language only becomes available upon consent and release by individual parties to the contract or by litigation that exposes the contractual language, both of which we attempted to explore and utilize. The article concludes with a discussion of why contractual arrangements in the context of organic corn seed development are an informative piece of the intellectual property puzzle worth exploring, as well as future points of research necessary to yield data substantiating the concerns of stakeholders in the organic seed industry.
18 pages, The donation of unharvested or unsold crops to rescue organizations has been promoted as a strategy to improve healthy food access for food insecure households while reducing production-level food loss and waste (FLW). In this study, we aimed to assess the motivations, barriers, and facilitators for crop donation as a FLW reduction strategy among Maryland farmers. We interviewed 18 Maryland-based food producers (nine frequent crop donors and nine infrequent, by self-report) in 2016 – 2017, soliciting their perspectives on crop donation motivators, process feasibility, and interventions aimed at increasing crop donation. The interviews were thematically coded. All respondents were aware of crop donation as an option, and most expressed interest in reducing FLW by diverting crop surpluses for human consumption. While financial barriers represented one aspect influencing donation decisions, respondents also cited convenience, process knowledge, and liability as key considerations. In contrast to frequent donors, many of whom considered donation a moral imperative, some infrequent donors questioned the expectation that they would donate crops without compensation. Both frequent and infrequent donors were aware of pro-donation tax incentives, and infrequent donors reported being unlikely to use them. This research demonstrates that crop donation motivations, barriers, and facilitators can be diverse. Given the existence of crop surpluses and their potential benefits as emergency food, our results suggest that multiple interventions and policies may contribute to incentivizing and facilitating crop donation (or enabling the purchase of surplus crops) rather than one-size-fits-all approaches. Our findings also highlight a need to prioritize crop recovery methods that enhance growers’ financial stability.
