Fall, 1990 (v3n1)
Editor's Note:
SAREP funded the Ventura
County Food Safety/Agricultural Sustainability Policy Project in February
1990 to continue its networking system of representatives of often opposed
points of view (producers, consumers, retailers, environmentalists). The
project will document the group's work as a model of the integration of
sustainable agriculture with food safety policy. Member Larry Yee,
UC Cooperative Extension director, Ventura County, writes about the
Ventura County Food Safety Study Group's purpose.
Food safety is one of the
most vexing issues facing agriculture today. A variety of constituencies
and interests are involved, each with a different viewpoint on the tough
questions that have been raised, and each equally passionate about its
position. What's interesting is that everyone seems to agree on what we
want - good health, safe food, a protected environment, economic viability,
and social justice. But when you start to talk about priorities, time
frames, a definition of "what is safe," who and what to protect,
"hackles" go up, the positions become entrenched, and the swords
start to rattle and clash. Then the media jumps in and whips up public
hysteria.
There's hardly a more exciting
public policy arena today. In food safety and other complex and critical
issues, the University can and should play an important role. In the past,
applied research and extension education have been the primary functions
of Cooperative Extension. Now, the difficult role of facilitation is of
equal, if not more, importance.
With a small grant from the
UC Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program, the Ventura
County Food Safety Study Group was funded for one year to establish an
effective process for addressing food safety concerns and problem resolution.
The assumption underlying this process is that food safety and sustainable
agriculture are inextricably linked. They should be considered together
in the policy arena. The Ventura County effort to address these issues
is unique in that all of the special interest groups are a part of the
process. Our hope is that this coalition-building will improve the development
of a more sustainable agriculture.
Imagine a group meeting in which representatives from production agriculture, consumer groups, environmental organizations, farm labor, retail produce and an independent testing lab are all seated around the same table. Imagine the president of the Farm Bureau sitting next to the president of Mothers and Others for Safe Food. Toss in the Green's Party, California Rural Legal
Assistance, a few others,
and you have the Ventura County Food Safety Study Group - 18 different
people trying to find some common ground.
Two months after the use
of Alar on apples drew widespread interest, the Cooperative Extension
office in Ventura County decided to try to become more proactive. With
the assistance of UC Berkeley Agricultural Economist L. Tim Wallace,
I concluded that a new forum was needed in which strategies for improving
food safety could be explored, discussed, and debated in a non-threatening
and constructive way. After some hesitation, people from several organizations
met and the Ventura County Food Safety Study Group was launched. The goals
were to rebuild trust and respect between the different groups, and to
open new lines of communication. The model used for problem resolution
is a process that was developed by the Extension public policy workgroup.
Over the last fourteen months
participants have learned a great deal. Progress has been slow but steady.
Through three-hour meetings once a month and several field trips, misconceptions
and myths have been dispelled, people are listening to each other and
there is better understanding and communication among the participants.
Discussions have not always been easy, but they've been lively and generally
positive and constructive.
A big breakthrough came this
summer when the group went on tours to actually see and experience some
of the things we had been discussing. The group visited various members'
production, processing, and retail food operations. These visits provided
a broader perspective and understanding of the actual food system at work.
In hindsight, this "reality check" should have been done earlier
in the process. It will be interesting to see how the tours change the
flavor of the discussions and the proposals being discussed.
While no policy recommendations
on food safety have been developed, many alternatives aimed at improving
the existing system have been identified and discussed. Each alternative
is reviewed and evaluated against a list of criteria including environmental
costs, enforceability, and improved credibility. Each is also considered
from the perspective of each member of the food system (i.e., the farmer,
retailer, processor). One of the more tangible alternatives, for example,
is a special label that would be affixed to produce grown in Ventura county
that meets all the requirements of the system developed by the study group.
Because the process is probably
more important than the product, Jim Reedy, community resource
advisor from Solano County, has been assigned to observe and record the
process and proceedings.
For now, the members are
hanging on to this new coalition of frequently conflicting interests,
trying to build a new base for dialogue - which should result in more
sustainable policy alternatives for decision-makers.
[ Back | Search | Feedback ]