El Valle de Guadalupe is an area of Ensenada Municipality in Baja California, Mexico. The region contributes to more than three quarters of the country’s total wine production, according to a paper in Wine Economics and Policy. And wine-related tourism brings in US$180 million of annual revenue to Baja California.

Between 2014 and 2019, 18 percent of the agricultural and wine region in El Valle de Guadalupe was lost to urban development, members of Rescatemos El Valle report. The land has been subdivided and sold for the construction of private homes, businesses, and concert venues. The Municipal Institute for Research and Planning (IMIP) of Ensenada expects that less than half of the 5,445 arable hectares that existed in 2017 will remain by 2027. And if urbanization is not halted, IMIP predicts the region will cease to be known as “wine country” by 2037.

In a virtual press conference, members of Rescatemos El Valle–including President of Baja California State Council of Vine Producers Fernando Pérez Castro and winemaker Natalia Badan–emphasized the impacts of deforestation on the land. “In general terms, the uncontrolled growth of human settlements is identified as the main cause of the problem in Valle de Guadalupe,” a Spokesperson said, “which results in direct effects on water, soil agriculture, the community, and the landscape.”

In 2010, a Sectoral Program for Urban-Tourism Development of the Wine Valleys (PSDUT) was created to conserve 95 percent agricultural land for the next 30 years. But officials considered the plan a failure and replaced it with an updated version which reduced the declared area of conservation.

Rescatemos El Valle, howerever, wants more regulation. They are calling for the creation of federal agencies to protect the agricultural and biocultural heritage of the land. The campaign also proposes the naming of El Valle de Guadalupe as a “zone of natural and cultural beauty.”

“The campaign was to emphasize the importance of agricultural land use,” Ileana Espejel, campaign member and Professor of Ecosystems Management at Universidad Autonoma de Baja California, tells Food Tank. “Only 9 percent of the soil of Baja California is suitable for agriculture. We cannot yield an inch of this valuable land, even if its use is to produce alcoholic beverages. These beverages greatly increased the state’s income and put Ensenada on the world map.”

Espejel and her team have prepared regional plans to order land use laws in El Valle de Guadalupe since the 1990s. Espejel says she sees the valley as a “transdisciplinary laboratory” where different members of the community, with varying backgrounds and expertise, unite to advocate for the land.

Espejel says the campaign has helped restrict concerts in the valley, end illegal constructions, and support a project to update the aquifer data and build green infrastructure this summer.

Members of Rescatemos El Valle hope that the concrete and immediate actions to protect this national heritage will be used as an example to save other agricultural areas in the country.

“Cities can be built in so many other places,” Espejel tells Food Tank, “but losing fertile soil is unforgivable.”

Articles like the one you just read are made possible through the generosity of Food Tank members. Can we please count on you to be part of our growing movement? Become a member today by clicking here.

Photo courtesy of Boudewijn Boer, Wikimedia Commons

The post El Valle de Guadalupe Under Threat: The Campaign to Save Mexico’s Wine Country appeared first on Food Tank.

A citizen eater is engaged in food systems, active in pushing policy forward, and focused on building policies where everyone is nourished and can access and afford healthful food. So many of the local food system wins we’re tracking at Food Tank are made possible thanks to tireless advocates working in the communities where they live.

Just as one example, let’s highlight the city of Atlanta—where we’ll be next week for a Summit on Sunday, April 14, starting at 1:30PM, in partnership with Emory University and Spelman College and in consultation with the CDC Foundation, in support of the Biden-Harris Administration National Strategy on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health. And please feel free to forward this message to your networks in Atlanta! It’ll be an unforgettable afternoon.

There, many leaders and organizations are working hard to support local food producers and food economies, provide educational resources and agricultural training, and—at the heart of it all—make sure their neighbors are nourished.

Open Hand Atlanta, for example, delivers meals free of charge to folks in Atlanta and around the state with the goal of eliminating diet-related chronic illnesses, and they operate a teaching kitchen to offer nutrition support. Mariposas Rebeldes focuses on building access to ecology and community gardening for queer folks, and The Grocery Spot exemplifies a sustainable, community-first model for a nonprofit grocery store.

There are many inspiring organizations working across Atlanta, so I hope you’ll read the full list HERE. So many citizen eaters, stepping up as changemakers!

The Acres of Ancestry Initiative and Black Agrarian Fund work to restore land ownership by boosting food and fiber economies across the South and connecting people with financial resources through the Black Belt Justice Center—and Tracy Lloyd McCurty, the center’s Executive Director, will be at our Summit.

Wholesome Wave Georgia works to increase access to nutritious food options and help folks enroll in assistance programs—and Will Sellers, their Executive Director, will be at our Summit. Save Our Legacy Ourself, or SOLO, works to uplift heirloom crops and preserve the heritage of the Saltwater Geechee people—and Maurice Bailey, the organization’s President, will be at our Summit. Diversity Dietetics fosters collaborations to build a more diverse field of nutritionists and dietitians—and the Co-Founder and Executive Director, Tamara Melton, RDN, will be at our Summit.

And many of the most amazing food system leaders, farmers, researchers, scientists, journalists, lawmakers, food bank leaders, and others are joining us at the Empowering Eaters Summit next Sunday, April 14.

I hope you’ll join us, too. The event is completely free and open to the public, whether in-person or via livestream! So please CLICK HERE to secure your spot at the event.

Here’s a partial list of speakers, which you definitely won’t want to miss: Maurice Bailey, SOLO; Fedele Bauccio, Bon Appétit Management Company; Ravi Bellamkonda, Emory University; Kelliann Blazek, Special Assistant to the President for Agriculture and Rural Policy; Caree Cotwright, USDA; Andre Dickens, Mayor, City of Atlanta (via video); Rachel Ferencik, CDC Foundation; Diane Harris, Centers for Disease Control; Dr. Nik Heynen, University of Georgia; Kevin Holt, H&H Hospitality ; Dr. Kimberly Jackson, Spelman College; Steven Jennings, Ahold Delhaize USA; Sabrina Li, Emory University; Tracy Lloyd McCurty, Black Belt Justice Center; U.S. Congresswoman Lucy McBath (GA-07); Will McIntee, The White House; Beth McKibben, RoughDraft Atlanta; Tamara S. Melton, Diversify Dietetics; Alastair Pullen, Atlanta Neighborhood Charter School; Karuna Rawal, Nature’s Fynd; Tambra Raye Stevenson, Women Advancing Nutrition Dietetics and Agriculture (WANDA); Rose Scott, NPR-Atlanta; Pamela Scott-Johnson, Spelman College; Kashi Sehgal, Rataaza; Will Sellers, Wholesome Wave Georgia; Arthur Tripp, USDA Farm Service Agency; Kyle Waide, The Atlanta Community Food Bank; and Raphaela Ysrael, Atlanta Harvest, and many more!  More info is HERE.

We will also have breakout sessions, where discussions will inform a policy report submitted directly to the White House, and an amazing reception with our food and beverage partners.

As I mentioned: Progress in the food system comes down to empowering eaters, today and for generations to come.

That idea is at the core of discussions at the Summit around food and land justice, healthier school foods, food is medicine, procurement and business solutions, student best practices, and so much more.

HERE’s that registration link, so we know you’ll be joining us.

I look forward to seeing you next weekend! And, as always, my inbox at danielle@foodtank.com is open to Food Tankers around the world—send me the questions and concerns on your mind, and let’s keep the conversation going.

One last note: What’s amazing about the food movement is that every city in the world has so many amazing projects we can learn from! This week, we highlighted these fantastic 20 organizations just in and around Atlanta, including Acres of Ancestry Initiative/Black Agrarian Fund; Atlanta Community Food Bank; Community Farmers Markets (CFM); Diversity Dietetics; Friends of the Urban Food Forest at Browns Mill; Food Well Alliance; Georgia Foundation for Agriculture; Georgia Organics; Giving Kitchen; Global Growers Network (GGN); Mariposas Rebeldes; Open Hand Atlanta; Recovery Eco Agriculture Project; Save Our Legacy Ourself (SOLO); Slow Food Atlanta; The Common Market; The Grocery Spot; Truly Living Well Center for Natural Urban Agriculture (TLW); Umi Feeds; and Wholesome Wave Georgia. I hope you’ll read more HERE about the many best practices and replicable models in Atlanta.

And at the same time, I hope you’ll find some organizations carrying out these best practices in your community! We can’t take these local organizations for granted—it was not always the case that our cities had thriving food networks, so let’s celebrate empowered eaters!

Articles like the one you just read are made possible through the generosity of Food Tank members. Can we please count on you to be part of our growing movement? Become a member today by clicking here.

Photo courtesy of Markus Spiske, Unsplash

The post Progress in The Food System Means Empowering Eaters—Today and for Generations to Come appeared first on Food Tank.

 In 2022, the number of farms with new and beginning producers in the United States increased by about 5 percent from 2017. The number of producers under the age of 44 also increased by 7 percent from 2017 to 2022.

New farmers and ranchers can help to improve the national food supply and the future of agriculture, according to Denis Ebodaghe, the National Program Leader for the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture. “Supporting new farmers and ranchers will ensure a safe and sustainable food supply,” Ebodaghe tells Food Tank.

The Census shows that farmers in the U.S. are, on average, aging. In 2012, USDA data revealed the average age of farmers to be 56.3 years; the latest report shows it is now 58.1. According to Ebodaghe, “there is the urgent need to ensure that strategies are in place to grow the next generation of farmers and ranchers.”

But the number of producers under the age of 44 is on the rise. This may be because of the COVID-19 pandemic, says Michelle Hughes, Co-Executive Director of the NYFC.

“The pandemic revealed cracks in our consolidated food supply chain. The urgency of the climate crisis and the need for racial justice transformation in our society are all motivators and issues we hear about very often from our members,” Hughes tells Food Tank. 

Of producers under 44 years old, those under 25 increased by the greatest amount.

However, as the number of new and young farmers increases, the total number of farms in the U.S. decreased by about 7 percent from 2017-2022, the Census shows.

To help new farmers and ranchers establish and sustain their careers, Ebodaghe says they need “education, mentoring and technical assistance…to help minimize farming risks and maximize farm profits.” With these, producers “cannot only survive but thrive to grow food and fiber for generations to come.”

The NYFC also advocates for programs and policies that can reduce barriers of entry to help new farmers. They seek to address access to affordable land, capital, housing, health care and production costs, student loan debt, and the climate crisis.

“All of these challenges are multi-faceted, and require planning, coordination, policy development, and program evaluation at every level of government,” Hughes tells Food Tank. “The challenges facing the next generation of young farmers are complex, but equitable land access is foundational to all of the solutions proposed in our work.”

Through the One Million Acres for the Future campaign, the Coalition advocates for the next Farm Bill to invest in 1 million acres of land accessible to new farmers.

These interventions are particularly important to support producers who identify as Hispanic, American Indian, Asian, Black, Native Hawaiian or more than one race, the Census shows. The data reveal that they represent just 7.6 percent of all producers in the United States. A survey of young farmers by NYFC also finds that BIPOC growers experience the most common challenges for young farmers at higher rates.

But these young farmers are also very likely to be motivated by intersectional issues including conservation, anti-racism, and food sovereignty and security, the NYFC shows. Of the Black farmers surveyed, for example, 74 percent say they are primarily motivated by anti-racism work and healing from white supremacy.

“Young Farmers are stewarding and providing the infrastructure for food system transformation that ripples across food access, public health, and environmental and climate outcomes,” Hughes tells Food Tank. “All these values and priorities are demanding a shift in U.S. agriculture and we hope policymakers will invest in this more resilient food system that the new generation is leading.”

More new and young farmers may also aid the environment, according to research published in Organic Agriculture. The study shows that this group is more likely to employ regenerative and organic practices than their established peers. And the NYFC survey reveals that 83 percent of young farmer respondents were primarily motivated by conservation or regeneration.

The number of producers under 44 years old with certified organic status or exempt organic status—meaning the farm meets requirements to represent their products as organic without obtaining certification—also decreased from 2017 to 2022. But the Census does not evaluate regenerative agriculture practices.

According to Hughes, young and BIPOC farmers “are leading the way, modeling solutions at the community level to produce and distribute high quality, fresh, affordable products…As we have clearly seen the connections between small-scale agriculture and the stability of our food systems, as well as our collective well-being, we must do more to invest in and support farmers selling into local and regional markets and directly to consumers.”

Articles like the one you just read are made possible through the generosity of Food Tank members. Can we please count on you to be part of our growing movement? Become a member today by clicking here.

Photo courtesy of Zoe Schaeffer, Unsplash

The post New and Young Farmers Increasing, According to Agriculture Census appeared first on Food Tank.

Here’s a trivia question:

Where are the most important transformations in the food system taking place right now?

a. The United Nations headquarters

b. In the U.S. Congress

c. At a high-level dialogue in Europe or the Middle East

d. Within a few miles of where you’re reading this letter

If you answered (d), you’re correct!

When we talk about food system transformation, we’re not talking about a sudden metamorphosis in some far-off place at some indeterminate point in the future.

Rebuilding the food system in a more resilient, sustainable, equitable way is happening right now, as we speak, in neighborhoods and cities across the world.

And it’s not like a caterpillar becoming a butterfly or a tadpole becoming a frog. It’s a gradual process—sometimes it can feel slow, as many of us probably know!—that moves forward sometimes in big leaps but much more often in small steps.

But because of tireless advocates at the local level, we are indeed moving forward. Every step forward is a win: a win for producers, a win for eaters, a win for the planet.

And as Food Tankers know, we don’t just do this work for ourselves. A stronger, more just food system is vital toward nourishing future generations too, which is what we’ll be discussing at our next Summit in a couple weeks.

When I look out at the state of the food system, I see so much that’s going well.

Just take food waste, for example. Last year, the city of Chicago launched a composting program that allows residents to drop off food scraps at 15 locations around the city, where they’re collected and turned into compost for soil. And in Maryland, where I live, policymakers created a food residual diversion law in 2021, which requires any company, store, school, organization, or agency that handles food and is located within 30 miles of a compost facility to divert food scraps away from landfills.

Or look at school meals. Maine and California passed laws in 2021 that guaranteed free lunches for all school students, and several other states including Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Michigan, Connecticut, and Vermont have also done so since then.

And that’s just the beginning! Here are some other food policy wins we’re tracking on the local level around the country:

Minimum wage protections are being strengthened. In Chicago, the subminimum wage for tipped workers is being phased out following city council action last year, so employees including many food service workers will eventually be paid the standard hourly minimum wage rather than significantly less. First-of-its-kind legislation in New York City last year increased the minimum wage for app-based delivery workers, and in California, effective next month, the minimum wage will be raised to $20 for fast food workers at large franchises. Plus, the state created a Fast Food Council with workers, union members, and companies to set standards for workplace safety and wages.

Small-scale food producers are getting the rights they’re due. In Arkansas, a variety of laws passed in 2021 allow for homegrown or homemade food and drink to be sold at farmers markets, farm stands, homes, and even online to help boost local economies. A program called New Mexico Grown helps schools, educational institutions, and organizations serving elderly populations in that state to source food from local producers. And in Nevada, a 2023 law expands sidewalk vendors’ rights to sell food on the street.

Urban agriculture is getting official. In Detroit, the mayor appointed Tepfirah Rushdan as the city’s first Director of Urban Agriculture last fall to encourage and support urban farmers and streamline the use of abandoned lots as farms and gardens. And a couple years ago in Boston, mayor Michelle Wu created GrowBoston, the city’s office of urban agriculture, to work alongside the Mayor’s Office of Food Justice to fund and develop urban ag projects.

States are hearing the needs of rural communities, too. In Colorado, the Consumer Right to Repair Agriculture Equipment Act, which went into effect in January, means that owners of agricultural equipment can repair their machinery independently, rather than being required to go through the manufacturer. And in Missouri, a broad ag law signed last summer includes tax credits for farmers who help new farmers get started, plus programs to boost flood resilience along the Missouri and Mississippi rivers.

As I mentioned, the list goes on. Recent laws passed in Colorado and Rhode Island limit the sale and use of neonicotinoid pesticides, which harm bees and other pollinators. The city council of Perris, California, recently passed an ordinance that requires grocery stores in the city to stock healthy food and drink items at check-out counters instead of junk food, following the lead of Berkeley’s similar 2020 regulation.

Municipal food policy councils and neighborhood advocates are making even more advances toward a better food system, too. At the end of the day, progress in the food system comes down to empowering eaters, today and for generations to come.

So I hope you’ll click HERE to grab your spot at our upcoming Summit in partnership with Emory University and Spelman College—in person or via livestream on Sunday, April 14—where we’ll all be inspired by 35+ amazing speakers discussing how food policy can build accessibility and affordability in the food system.

And I hope, too, that you’ll commit to creating more food policy wins in your communities! Again, transforming the food system is not a one-and-done process, nor is it one that only takes place in Capitol buildings and meeting rooms. Building a better food system requires effort from all of us—right where we live.

Let’s chat about how to make that happen. Email me at danielle@foodtank.com to share what’s going well where you live, and let me know how I can connect you with Food Tank’s resources to boost your efforts.

Articles like the one you just read are made possible through the generosity of Food Tank members. Can we please count on you to be part of our growing movement? Become a member today by clicking here.

Photo courtesy of Markus Spiske, Unsplash

The post Where Are You Reading This? That’s Where Food System Transformation Is Happening appeared first on Food Tank.

The purpose of Mexico’s restrictions on GM corn is to safeguard the integrity of native corn from GM contamination and to protect human health. The purpose of the U.S. and Canadian challenge is to defend the interests of the biotechnology industry.

The U.S. and Canada want to force Mexico to open its market to all genetically modified foods and seeds. Canada is supporting the U.S. challenge (as a third party in the dispute) even though Canada does not export any corn to Mexico.

Mexico has the right to restrict the use of GM corn. The U.S. argues that Mexico’s actions are not based on scientific principles, but the government has sufficient science to justify its precautionary policies.

Our organization, the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network, is a large network of farmer and environmental groups that has been monitoring the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) for over 15 years, and we support Mexico’s restrictions. We were one of two Canadian groups that were given permission to send expert comments on the risks of GM corn to the arbitration panel in this dispute, but in January, Canadian groups were uninvited at the request of the U.S. government, supported by Canada, on the technicality that the dispute is just between the U.S. and Mexico.

We published our analysis anyway, to show that Mexico’s ban is supported by the science. Research continues to find indicators of potential harm to humans from eating GM insect-resistant corn. The science also continues to warn of health impacts from exposure to the herbicide glyphosate which is used in GM corn production.

Most GM corn plants are genetically modified to kill insect pests. The GM plants express a toxin from the soil bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) that is known to harm the guts of specific types of insects but not others. Farmers have long used Bt as a spray to kill pests but the Bt toxins in GM crops are different from this natural Bt in structure, function, and biological effects. In fact, peer-reviewed studies across the scientific literature continue to find that Bt toxins in GM plants can harm insects (spiders, wasps, ladybugs, and lacewings, for example) that are not the intended targets.

Just last year, new peer-reviewed studies further found impacts of Bt where there was assumed to be none. For example, a 2023 study conducted by a team of researchers from universities in Brazil and Colombia, funded by the Brazilian government, found Bt had many significant impacts on the health of wasps, even affecting the next generation. University researchers in China and Pakistan also found lower diversity of bacteria in the gut of wolf spiders exposed to Bt. This adds to a laboratory test published in 2023, funded by the French government, that found a particular Bt toxin disrupts normal growth and functioning of gut cells in fruit flies, raising the possibility that Bt toxins could harm the intestinal lining of animals, including humans.

To add to these results, a number of animal feeding trials also find that Bt toxins and GM Bt crops could have toxic effects on mammals. Toxic effects and indications of toxicity have variously been observed in the blood, stomach, small intestine, liver, kidney, spleen, and pancreas, as well as immune responses, though the mechanism is not clear from these studies. Critically, animal feeding studies are not required by the U.S. or Canadian governments in order to demonstrate GM food safety. In fact, there are very few long-term and multigenerational tests on animals in the scientific literature.

But Bt toxicity is not the only safety concern. GM corn production is also tied to the use of glyphosate and other herbicides that are linked to serious health problems including neurological diseases and some cancers. The International Agency for Cancer Research of the World Health Organization classifies glyphosate is a “probable human carcinogen” and, as successful lawsuits against Bayer/Monsanto demonstrate, there is ample evidence that direct exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides can result in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in particular. Critically, evidence also points to danger from exposure to residues in food which is the concern highlighted by Mexico in relation to GM corn.

This concern is particularly pressing because Mexicans eat more corn than anyone in the world, largely through minimally processed flour for tortilla. This is an entirely different way of eating GM corn from the diet of corn ingredients in highly processed foods in the U.S. and Canada. Mexico’s unique dietary exposure to GM corn requires Mexico to set its own “acceptable level of protection” from the risks.

In their submission to the trade dispute panel, the U.S. government argues that no adverse health effects on consumers have been found. However, with no monitoring of GM foods, there is no scientific basis for making this statement. There have been no post-market studies on human populations to determine if there have been adverse health effects and, without tracing or labelling of GM foods, such studies are not possible.

The U.S. and Canada essentially argue that if they have decided a genetically modified food is safe, then Mexico should agree.

In early March, Mexico’s formal defense of the GM corn ban will be published as part of the trade dispute process. Soon after, we’ll hear arguments from eight non-governmental groups who have permission to send comments. Those documents should make it clear that Mexico’s corn restrictions are backed by science and are justified in order to defend the future of corn and protect food safety.

This article was written by Lucy Sharratt, Coordinator of the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network, a project of MakeWay Charitable Society. 

Articles like the one you just read are made possible through the generosity of Food Tank members. Can we please count on you to be part of our growing movement? Become a member today by clicking here.

Photo courtesy of Mark Holloway, Unsplash

The post Mexico’s Precaution on GM Corn Safety Is Justified appeared first on Food Tank.

It sounds counter-intuitive, but it might just be true. The math is pretty simple. Despite all the bluster about Mexico’s February 2023 restrictions on GM corn, they affect a very small share of U.S. exports. After negotiations with the U.S. government over a more restrictive 2020 decree, Mexico dramatically limited its revised order, exempting GM feed corn from any mandated reductions. The restrictions apply only to the use of GM corn in tortillas and other products minimally processed for direct human consumption.

The restrictions were intended mainly as precautionary measures for a population that consumes more such corn products than anyone else on the planet. The corn for tortillas, and the minimally processed flour for tamales, enchiladas, and other Mexican staples, are overwhelmingly non-GM white and native varieties from Mexican producers.

Before the decree, Mexico was importing only about 600,000 tons of white corn from the U.S. each year, a tiny share of the 16.5 million tons of U.S. corn it imported last year. That means that barely 3 percent of U.S. corn exports are potentially affected by Mexico’s restrictions. But the share is actually closer to 1 percent, because only an estimated half of U.S. white corn are GM varieties, and barely half of U.S. white corn exports are destined for Mexico’s tortilla industry, according to USDA reports.

So just 1 percent of U.S. corn exports are potentially affected by Mexico’s policies. From the beginning, the Mexican government has asserted that its revised and less restrictive decree has little impact on U.S. producers. They are right, and the U.S. in the formal presentation of its complaint did not even attempt to quantify how many U.S. farmers are affected.

And here’s the thing: Those who are affected can always switch to non-GMO white food-grade corn and export to Mexico’s tortilla industry.

U.S. farmers who do that could earn premium prices, ranging from $0.25 to $0.50 per bushel for non-GMO white corn, according to industry sources. Such premiums could be particularly attractive right now to farmers who saw corn prices fall more than 30 percent last year.

U.S. trade officials have preferred not to discuss non-GM opportunities for U.S. farmers, but some farmers and grain suppliers would welcome them.

“I think the U.S. farmer would be delighted to have a market where they would get paid more by providing an identity-preserved, (non-GMO) crop,” says Lynn Clarkson, CEO of Clarkson Grain, a leading U.S. supplier of non-GM corn.

Graham Christensen, a fifth-generation farmer in Lyons, Nebraska, is one example. “Absolutely, if there’s a demand there, let’s find ways to partner with Mexico,” he says. “They’re that much closer, and they’re a trade partner. We should make it happen.”

Nate Belcher, co-owner of Hybrid85, a Nebraska-based non-GM corn seed company, says his state—the leading producer of white corn in the U.S.—could meet Mexico’s demand for non-GMO corn.

“There’s a US$450 million market in corn going from Nebraska to Mexico. We could fill the non-GMO demand from Nebraska and a good portion of the Midwest as well,” he says.

According to Farm Action, a farm advocacy group, “if the U.S. shifted 180,000 acres (0.2 percent of its corn acreage) of GM corn to non-GMO, it would generate US$7.75 million in additional premiums for U.S. farmers and successfully meet Mexico’s needs.”

The U.S. trade officials and farm commodity groups are ignoring basic business common sense: Give the customers what they want. Mexico wants non-GM corn, and U.S. farmers can supply it, creating a mutually beneficial relationship instead of the current animosity of the current trade dispute.

U.S. farmers would be better served if our government supported a smooth transition for farmers affected by Mexico’s corn policies to non-GM production to meet that country’s changing demand.

This piece is written by Ken Roseboro, the publisher of The Organic and Non-GMO Report and Timothy A. Wise, a Senior Advisor at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy.

Articles like the one you just read are made possible through the generosity of Food Tank members. Can we please count on you to be part of our growing movement? Become a member today by clicking here.

Photo courtesy of Waldemar, Unsplash

The post Hardline U.S. Stance Ignores Non-GM Corn Opportunity for U.S. Farmers appeared first on Food Tank.

California’s Prop 12, and Massachusetts’ similar Question 3, requires that fresh pork sold into the state be raised on farms not using gestation crates. These 7×2 foot crates house pregnant pigs for days, weeks and even months without giving animals the ability to stand up, turn around and lie down. Animal welfare expert Dr. Temple Grandin compares gestation crates to being strapped into an airplane seat for months at a time.

While gestation crates are the dominant industry practice today, they are out of touch with consumers’ animal care expectations. Both Prop 12 and Question 3 passed with sweeping voter support. A 2021 poll found that 75 percent of Americans say retailers and restaurants have a responsibility to ensure that gestation crates are not used by suppliers.

The post Op-Ed | California Crate-Free Law Offers Hog Farmers Economic Opportunity appeared first on Food Tank.

Fish Month comes after the WTO approved the Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies at the 12th Ministerial Conference (MC12). The Agreement regulates subsidies for illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing, subsidies for overfished stocks, or those with an unknown population and subsidies for fishing outside of national jurisdiction. The Agreement also requires member states to notify the WTO on the status of fisheries subsidies.

According to the WTO, the initial Agreement set at MC12 marks the first time the WTO has fully met a United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target. SDG 14.6 is a target of SDG 14, Life Below Water, that relates specifically to regulating fisheries subsidies that contribute to overcapacity, overfishing and IUU fishing and minimizing the creation of new subsidies of these kinds. The Agreement is also the first WTO agreement focused on the environment and the first binding, multilateral WTO agreement on ocean sustainability.

In this latest round of discussions, the WTO Committee on Fisheries Subsidies negotiated the outstanding issue of subsidies that cause overfishing and overcapacity. As Fish Month drew to a close, 60 member governments had formally accepted the Agreement, representing 55 percent of the total that is needed for it to come into effect. 

The Committee will now present a text at the upcoming MC13 at the end of February 2024. During the Conference, the text will be reviewed and voted on by WTO ministers.

The WTO defines overcapacity as fishing at levels that exceed sustainable catch levels of a fishery, a practice which they argue leads to overfishing or IUU fishing.

Ernesto Fernández Monge, senior officer of Conservation Support for Pew Charitable Trusts and subsidies expert, tells Food Tank that the current negotiations focus on issues that members did not reach a consensus on by the time of the initial agreement.

“While the agreement reached at MC12 aims to prevent the most damaging impacts of fisheries subsidies, the ongoing talks can be seen as an opportunity to better address the underlying role of subsidies in driving overcapacity in global fishing fleets and incentivizing unsustainable levels of fishing,” Fernández Monge tells Food Tank. “As such, they are an opportunity to tackle more directly, and more broadly, one of the root causes of overfishing.”

According to the U.N. Conference on Trade and Development, fisheries subsidies are estimated to be about US$35 billion worldwide, with US$20 billion contributing directly to overfishing.

In December 2023, WTO Ambassador Einar Gunnarsson, Chair of the WTO fisheries subsidies negotiations, released a draft of the new agreement. Current negotiations are based on this text which prohibits subsidies that contribute to overcapacity or overfishing. It also requires member countries to consider the consequences of subsidies on overcapacity and overfishing before granting them and introduces exceptions for Least Developed Countries, and for countries that are actively keeping fisheries stocks at sustainable levels.

“Let us use this opportunity to take this very important, concrete step toward improving the health of our ocean, and thus the lives and livelihoods of people everywhere,” Gunnarsson says of the fish month negotiations.

Fernández Monge tells Food Tank that current negotiations focus on identifying how to regulate countries with the largest fishing industries compared to least developed and developing countries.

“Developing countries, particularly the small ones, are the ones that will benefit the most from the agreement,” Fernández Monge tells Food Tank. He explains that many countries with major fishing industries use subsidies to operate in the waters of other countries. This means that large countries are competing with small countries and local fishing communities for the same stocks, leading to depletion.

Following MC13, if members reach an agreement, this will either be added to the MC12 agreement as an amendment or as a new agreement that will need to be accepted by member countries.

Despite being adopted by consensus at MC12, the previous agreement has not gone into effect. This is because not enough WTO member states have formally accepted the agreement individually. There is a push to ratify the agreement by MC13.

“In addition to delivering the second wave of negotiations, we hope that the Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies will enter into force by MC13 as well,” says WTO Deputy Director-General Angela Ellard. “We know that many members are working hard to deposit their instruments before MC13.”

Articles like the one you just read are made possible through the generosity of Food Tank members. Can we please count on you to be part of our growing movement? Become a member today by clicking here.

Photo courtesy of Jean Wimmerlin, Unsplash

The post Bridging Seas to Sustainability: WTO’s ‘Fish Month’ Pushes Against Fishing Subsidies appeared first on Food Tank.

It is obvious to most of us that food is a human right. But our discussions of food justice need to be grounded—literally—in what experts are calling a right to healthy soils.

Without well-nourished soil, “the global issues of climate change and food security cannot be addressed,” says soil scientist Dr. Rattan Lal. He’s the recipient of the World Food Prize and a Distinguished University Professor of Soil Science at The Ohio State University.

I had the opportunity to chat with Dr. Lal recently at a U.N. human rights conference on food justice in Doha, Qatar. World leaders had some crucial discussions at that summit—and, as always, I personally learned so much from Dr. Lal.

“The right to food and right to soil are inextricably linked,” Dr. Lal says.

If we want good food, we need good soil. Ninety-five percent of food nutrients come from soils, the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization calculates—which makes the problem of soil erosion so much more concerning.

As Adrian Lipscombe, a chef and the Founder of the 40 Acres Project, put it: “If we don’t have soil health, we’re not going to have food.”

Soil erosion specifically refers to the removal of topsoil from the land’s surface, which can be caused by factors like water, wind, and tillage. Of course, some of these processes are natural—but healthy soils have the resiliency to resist excess erosion, whereas degraded soils are more vulnerable to even natural climatic cycles.

About a third of the world’s soils are currently degraded, the FAO says, and poor land management practices and hyper-industrialized agriculture is pushing that number higher.

And that has direct impacts on our food supply and climate. Poor soils can cut crop yields by up to 50 percent—which, if we’re not careful, could result in more soil being tilled to grow more crops, which degrades more soil, which pushes us closer to climate catastrophe.

And while poor soils hurt the environment, good soils can help repair the earth. Healthy soils, boosted by regenerative farming practices, can sequester more carbon from the atmosphere and more effectively store and drain water. Farmers can use techniques like no-till growing, cover cropping, rotational grazing and planting, and implementing other buffers against erosion.

“We need the soil for our physical sustenance,” says the amazing Leah Penniman of Soul Fire Farm, “but I also very much believe we need the soil for our psycho-spiritual wellness.”

Luckily, plenty of powerful, inspiring organizations around the world are pushing us in the right direction. Food and Land Use Coalition is building an evidence base to help producers and investors scale up solutions. 1000 Landscapes for 1 Billion People is bringing together individual advocates into a powerful voice for regenerative landscapes, broader than farms alone. Better Soils, Better Lives is helping heal soils among smallholders in sub-Saharan Africa with green manure and cover cropping, and the Vision for Adapted Crops and Soils is working across the African continent to build nutritious food production through soil health.

We’re seeing the power of storytelling, too. The film “Common Ground” does a great job documenting farmers who are using regenerative agriculture to heal the planet and protect our health—in economically beneficial ways. The organization behind the film, Kiss the Ground, has launched a campaign to help 100,000 more farmers transition 100 million more acres of U.S. farmland toward regenerative practices by the end of the decade.

And they’re pushing innovation. Because most grains need to be replanted every season, it’s hard for even regenerative farmers to minimize the disturbance to their land and build biodiversity, says Tim Crews, Chief Scientist & Director of the International Initiative at The Land Institute. So they’re working to highlight how perennial grains can help rebuild soils.

“Developing new perennial grains that persist year over year opens up unprecedented opportunities for farmers to greatly improve soil health as a natural outcome of agriculture,” he tells Food Tank.

But they can’t do it alone.

We need policymakers, investors, business leaders, chefs, and researchers to take serious steps toward making soil health a fundamental part of our institutional approach to food and agriculture.

Take the Soil Health Act, for example: It’s a proposed piece of legislation Dr. Rattan Lal is advocating, to complement the Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act. Let’s put this in the next Farm Bill!

Just last month, several members of the U.S. House of Representatives introduced the Innovative Practices for Soil Health Act, which would boost the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s ability to support farmers and land caretakers in adopting more regenerative methods. And I’m pleased that the Inflation Reduction Act, passed in 2022, committed a historic US$20 million toward rebuilding healthy soils, improving water quality, and conserving the land.

“You don’t have to own a farm or a ranch to make meaningful change,” says rancher Gabe Brown, of Brown’s Ranch in North Dakota. “It starts with each and every one of us. It can start in your local community with community gardens using regenerative practices. You can insist that your schools source and serve regeneratively grown food.”

He’s absolutely right.

I’m going to be blunt: If we’re not prioritizing soil health in our conversations about food justice and the human right to nutritious food, we’re falling short.

There’s so much that each of us can do to build a stronger foundation underneath our feet.

Articles like the one you just read are made possible through the generosity of Food Tank members. Can we please count on you to be part of our growing movement? Become a member today by clicking here.

Photo courtesy of Zoe Schaeffer, Unsplash

The post We Can’t Achieve Food Justice if We Don’t Prioritize Soil Health appeared first on Food Tank.

In 2024, the Agri-Food Analytics Lab predicts that average Canadian families of four will spend CAD 701.79 more on food—up from CAD 15,595.21 in 2023. The higher costs are due in part to natural disasters related to the climate crisis, like flooding and wildfires. The speakers say that advocates recognize the need for sustainable food systems, and municipal governments may be powerful in implementing change. 

The webinar’s organizers highlighted the City of Guelph’s efforts in creating a local, circular food system. With a population of 120,000 and a passion for converting food waste into food security, the city won Canada’s Smart Cities Challenge in 2020. 

The winning project, Our Food Futures, “ties together goals of access to affordable, nutritious food, climate action and sustainability, healthy communities, business innovation and social enterprise, and social partnerships,” says Schnurr. One hundred and fifty organizations, such as the SEED, the Second Harvest Food Rescue App, and Community FEWD, collected food waste and distributed food. They also worked with the municipality’s health organization to prescribe produce to patients. It was important for the project to “bring everyone’s perspective into the picture,” says Dainard, who serves as the Smart Cities Project Manager in Wellington.  

Our Food Futures also supported a regenerative agriculture pilot program in Alberta. Dainard explains, “Being able to support farmers as they transition to regenerative agriculture is a part of regional security. It’s going to make us more resistant to the shifts that are coming because of climate change.” As the global food system strains to feed over 8 billion people amid war, pandemics, and political upheaval, local food systems will be at the forefront of the effort to feed communities. 

Building on the pilot’s success, Wellington compiled lessons into a handbook for other municipalities. Speakers reinforced that collaborative efforts with organizations, companies, indigenous leaders, and governments throughout Canada are essential to helping communities access food amidst the climate crisis.

Articles like the one you just read are made possible through the generosity of Food Tank members. Can we please count on you to be part of our growing movement? Become a member today by clicking here.

Photo courtesy of Randy Fath, Upsplash

The post Empowering Municipalities for Climate-Resilient Food Security in Canada appeared first on Food Tank.