the western north carolina appalachian foodshed project

88 Pages·2016·21.39 MB·English

THE WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA APPALACHIAN FOODSHED PROJECT
COMMUNITY FOOD SECURITY ASSESSMENT
Authors
JOHN T. ESHLEMAN, North Carolina State University
MICHELLE SCHROEDER-MORENO, North Carolina State University
ANGEL CRUZ, North Carolina State University
Additional Contributors:
LAURA CHEATHAM, AFP WNC Community Coordinator
KATHLEEN WOOD, Dig In! Community Garden
ALPHIE RODRIGUEZ, former Community Food Security Assessment Coordinator with the AFP
WNC Food Security Advisory Committee
LAURA CHEATHAM, AFP WNC Community Coordinator
DARCEL EDDINS, Bountiful Cities
CATHY HOHENSTEIN, Buncombe County Extension
VIRGINIA NEW, Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program
Funded through the USDA's Agriculture, Food and Research Initiative
(AFRI) grants program TIM RICHARDS, WNC Community Foundation
Award Number: 2011-68004-30079 LAURIE STRADLEY, NC Center for Health & Wellness
KATHLEEN WOOD, Dig In! Community Garden
ROSS YOUNG, Madison County Extension
JANA BARTLESON, Toe River Food Security Network
5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
13
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
17
THE APPALACHIAN FOODSHED PROJECT
25 COMMUNITY FOOD SECURITY ASSESSMENT:
QUANTITATIVE INDICATORS
37 COMMUNITY FOOD SECURITY ASSESSMENT:
PRACTITIONER INTERVIEWS AND COMMUNITY
FOCUS GROUPS
71
CONCLUSION:
QUESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
81
APPENDIX A
82
APPENDIX B
84
APPENDIX C
WNC Food Security Advisory Committee
LAURA CHEATHAM, AFP WNC Community Coordinator
DARCEL EDDINS, Bountiful Cities
CATHY HOHENSTEIN, Buncombe County Extension
VIRGINIA NEW, Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program
TIM RICHARDS, WNC Community Foundation
LAURIE STRADLEY, NC Center for Health & Wellness
KATHLEEN WOOD, Dig In! Community Garden
ROSS YOUNG, Madison County Extension
JANA BARTLESON, Toe River Food Security Network

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A RY
Y
R
A
M
M
U
S

E The Appalachian Foodshed Project (AFP) is a multi-state By applying this mixed-method approach, the CFSA contributes
V
collaboration of researchers and community partners in the both regional indicators related to food security and in-
I
T
U Appalachian regions of Western North Carolina, Virginia, and depth responses to pertinent questions about the topic from
C West Virginia. In Western North Carolina (WNC), the project was practitioners working to improve community food security and
E
X designed to engage organizational leaders working within the community members who are possibly food insecure themselves.
E
community food system to create a common agenda to better The result is a clearer picture of the scope of the problem, how
understand and address food security in the 27-county region. practitioners and individuals experience food security “on the
This WNC Food Security Advisory Committee, in collaboration ground,” and potential paths to improving access to healthy foods
with a research team from North Carolina State University, in WNC.
designed a community food security assessment (CFSA) to
systematically examine community food issues and assets to GUIDING FRAMEWORK:
WHOLE MEASURES TO COMMUNITY FOOD SYSTEMS
inform actions that make the region more food secure. The
purpose of this report is to summarize key findings from the
The Whole Measures for Community Food Systems1 is a
WNC CFSA.
framework to help communities evaluate, plan, and create
dialogue to inform community-based change within the food
COMMUNITY FOOD SECURITY ASSESSMENT DESIGN
system. The framework centers on six “fields of practice” that
The purpose of the WNC CFSA is to establish the scope of the represent fundamental values of a food system that meets the
problem, identify extant barriers to and assets for improving food needs of whole communities: Justice and Fairness, Strong
security, and clarify key questions for communities to consider as Communities, Vibrant Farms, Healthy People, Sustainable
they make long-term strides to creating a more just and equitable Ecosystems and Thriving Local Economies. In sum, these six
food system. To accomplish these goals, the WNC Food Security “fields” describe a community-based food system that reveals
T
EC Advisory Committee designed the assessment with two key and dismantles injustice in the food system; improves equity and
J
RO components that together aid understandings of food security in responds to community food needs; supports local, sustainable
P
D the region: farms; provides healthy food for all people; sustains a healthy
E
SH 1. Quantitative data were gathered to systematically define the environment and community ecosystem; and stimulates the local
D
OO scope of the problem and provide baseline data about the food system economy. In this project, the Whole Measures are
F
N food system in all of WNC. used to describe current understandings of the community food
A
HI 2. Qualitative data from three representative counties system in WNC, opportunities for organizations to work together
C
A (Buncombe, Mitchell, and Yancey) were collected to provide
L to improve the food system, and potential next steps to better
PA an in-depth account of key challenges and questions related
AP to healthy food access and food security from a community address food security challenges in WNC.
A
N perspective. This included:
LI
O a. Key informant interviews with 24 organizational
R
CA leaders that work in some capacity to address food
TH security in their communities, including church-based,
R
O non-profit, and government service providers.
N
N b. Five focus groups with resource-limited community
STER members (58 participants) conducted in partnership 1VAablui-eNsa-Bdaesr e, dJ .P elat nanl.i n2g0 0a9n.d “ EWvahloulaet iMone.”a sCuorems mfour nCiotym mFouondity S Feocoudr Sityys Cteomasli:t ion
E
W with local service providers. (http://www.wholecommunities.org/pdf/WholeMeasuresCFS.pdf).
E
H
T
6
E
X
E
C
U
T
I
V
E

S
U
M
M
A
R
Y
COMMUNITY FOOD SECURITY ASSESSMENT:
QUANTITATIVE INDICATORS
The AFP partnered with the National Environmental Modeling and Analysis Center (NEMAC) at the University of North Carolina at
Asheville to provide new information about food security in the region in summary and map form. Additionally, the research added other
secondary data measures through incorporating Whole Measures concepts. These include: income and poverty, nutritional health, and
agricultural data in WNC. Several key findings from the quantitative measures include:
FOOD SECURITY HEALTH
• In 2012, 16.3% of households in WNC were food insecure, • Obesity rates in WNC are below both state and national
a rate higher than the national average (14.5%), but slightly levels, averaging over 28% of the adult population in 2012,
below the state rate (17%). but this rate has been increasing over time.
• 44 census tracts (of 320 total) are classified as food deserts • Diabetes rates in WNC are slightly higher than the state as
in the region, ranging from densely populated areas around a whole, ranging from 8.5% to 14.4%, and these rates are
metropolitan areas—such as Asheville, Hendersonville, also increasing over time.
Lenoir, Morganton, and Shelby—to rural, sparsely • Rates of physical inactivity are lower in WNC than the
populated places in Ashe, Cleveland, Jackson, Madison, state as a whole, ranging from 20% of adults physically
Mitchell, Rutherford, and Wilkes counties. inactive in Buncombe Country to 31% in Wilkes County.
• In 2013, 14% of households in WNC received aid from
the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP),
ranging from under 9% in Watauga to almost 22% in
Rutherford County. C
O
M
M
U
N
INCOME AND POVERTY AGRICULTURE AND FOOD SYSTEMS IT
Y
• Median household income in WNC was $37,190 in 2010, • In 2012, WNC accounted for only 7% of the state’s total farm F
O
O
almost 18% and 30% less than the state and nation income, down from 10% in 2007. D
S
respectively. • Between 2002 and 2012, the total number of farms in WNC E
C
U
• The region’s unemployment rate has also been has declined in 21 of 27 counties. R
IT
consistently above state and national averages, and • Despite aggregate farm losses, the number of farms selling Y A
S
overall,approximately 17% of WNC residents live below the directly to consumers increased 39% between 2007 and S
E
poverty line. 2012, much higher than the state and national rates. SS
M
E
N
T
7
COMMUNITY FOOD SECURITY ASSESSMENT:
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS
The qualitative component of the research yielded several key findings about food security in WNC. These are categorized into four
sections: framing the problem of food security, barriers to healthy food access and food security, current assets to address food
Y
R security, and ideas to improve access to healthy food and food security. These results combine findings from the 24 participant
A
M interviews and five community focus groups.
M
U
S

E
V FRAMING THE PROBLEM: BARRIERS TO FOOD SECURITY AND HEALTHY FOOD ACCESS
I
T FOOD INSECURITY AND HEALTHY FOOD AVAILABILITY • Systemic poverty was noted as the “core” problem, particularly
U
C • Food security was defined as access to healthy food as a chronic, not temporary condition. Poverty affects
E household-level resources to acquire healthy food and creates
X specifically, as well as having the necessary resources to
E trade-offs between food and other daily needs.
acquire healthy food.
• Healthy food affordability was described as a barrier with many
• Evidence of food insecurity was described based on observed
respondents asserting that healthy food is more expensive than
increasing demand for food assistance services.
unhealthy alternatives, although several interviewees thought
• Healthy food was defined in terms of specific food items (such
that this was only a perception.
as fruits and vegetables and meat), “whole foods” that are not
• Insufficiencies of subsidized food programs and assistance
processed, growing and production practices, and how food
were described, including shortfalls in public assistance such
is prepared.
that a growing number of community members rely upon the
• Healthy food availability was not cited as a problem; instead,
emergency food system on a regular basis.
access to this available healthy food was a key constraint.
• Organizational capacity and resource limitations to meet
growing demand for emergency food services were noted as a
barrier among emergency food service providers.
• Cultural barriers and stigma, mostly around class and race
CURRENT ASSETS:
issues, were described as barriers to accessing the local food
ORGANIZATIONS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES system.
• Respondents highlighted several successful collaborations • Transportation limitations were a barrier to accessing
aimed at alleviating food insecurity among non-profit available healthy foods, including challenges posed by public
organizations, churches, and government agencies, and transportation services.
they desired platforms to increase these partnerships. • Knowledge gaps were the most commonly cited barrier
• Many projects and programs were described as helping to among practitioner interviewees, including knowledge about
improve food security in the community, most commonly a) how to shop for and prepare healthy food, while focus group
T emergency food programs deemed “vital” for addressing respondents stressed affordability and transportation foremost.
C
E
J federal supplemental food assistance shortfalls and b)
O
PR community gardens that help community members produce
D
E their own food. IDEAS FOR IMPROVING FOOD SECURITY
H
S • Policies to address food security were mentioned only
D AND ACCESS TO HEALTHY FOOD
O
O sparingly, with some respondents noting this as an area they
F • Despite a long list of barriers to improving healthy food access
N would like to learn more about.
A and food security, relatively few ideas were expressed to help
HI
C improve upon these problems.
A
AL • The ideas that were identified to improve access to healthy
P
AP food and food security focused on education primarily
A • General ideas such as community and economic development
N
OLI were noted by respondents, but specific ideas about these
R
A concepts were not offered.
C
H
T
R
O
N
N
R
E
T
S
E
W
E
H
T
8
CONCLUSION:
LINKING TO WHOLE MEASURES AND NEXT STEPS
In the conclusion to the WNC community food security assessment, we return to the Whole Measures to summarize the findings
and highlight next steps in the form of key questions for communities to engage and potential recommendations to consider.
E
X
E
C
U
T
I
V
JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS STRONG COMMUNITIES E

Food insecurity rates are higher than the national average in Despite challenges to creating a just and fair food system, strong S
U
WNC and demand for food assistance continues to grow in the communities in WNC help to address some of these concerns.
M
region. At its core, systemic poverty challenges the justice and In each focus group, respondents asserted that they live in
M
fairness of the food system, and resource-limited community communities where they are cared for and have support to help
A
members note affordability and transportation as primary meet their food needs. A strong base of organizations with a R
Y
barriers to healthy food access, which are ultimately linked to willingness to collaborate is also a sign of strong communities,
poverty. Efforts to extend local food systems to all community although organizational capacity is an ongoing challenge. Although
members are positive steps, but cultural barriers and stigma an idealized community food system would not require emergency
related to race and class create challenges that must also be food services like food pantries, in WNC, these services are viewed
addressed to create welcome environments for all community positively as responses to pressing community food needs among a
members. growing proportion of the population that is food insecure.
VIBRANT FARMS
HEALTHY PEOPLE
Despite overall declines in the number of farms across the
Healthy food is a cornerstone of a community of healthy people.
region, the last decade has shown remarkable growth of farms
Our research suggested that demand for healthy food among food
that sell directly to consumers, both in number of farms and
insecure community members is high, and respondents asserted
revenue of these sales. Demand for food from local farms is
that healthy foods were available where they lived. However,
high in the region, and respondents asserted the importance of
availability does not connote accessibility, and key barriers to
supporting the viability of local farms. However, questions were
healthy food access include the real (or perceived) higher price of
raised about the ability of “alternative” food systems to align
healthy food and transportation limitations that make accessing
with the need for subsidized, affordable healthy foods demanded
stores, markets, and emergency food programs a challenge.
by the emergency food system, including concerns about the
Practitioner interviewees expressed that there is a great need
ability of resource-limited community members to access local
for education about healthy food, although this viewpoint was
food options, particularly when these food items may cost more
less common among resource-limited community members, who
or require alternate transportation to access.
instead emphasized affordability and other barriers. Emphasizing
healthy food education is one important facet of creating healthy
people, but innovative ideas that go beyond education to address
SUSTAINABLE ECOSYSTEMS
other healthy food access barriers are also encouraged.
In pursuit of environmental sustainability, preservation and
viability of farms benefits the protection of open space. This C
research did not emphasize the relationship between food THRIVING LOCAL ECONOMIES OM
M
security and sustainable agriculture and natural resource Systemic poverty was a key barrier to food security discussed in the U
N
protection, although interviewee and focus group participants qualitative interviews, as community members without sustainable IT
Y
asserted a desire to source foods produced without hormones, incomes are apt to require emergency food systems to meet their FO
O
antibiotics, and synthetic inputs, principles central to sustainable nutritional needs. Several respondents described the importance D
S
agriculture (although their rationale was largely health, not of spending money locally to support economic development, and EC
U
environmentally motivated). While there are a number of several local programs are aimed at developing skills to help expand R
IT
organizations throughout WNC working to promote sustainable the local workforce to include more community members. A focus on Y A
agriculture and environmental stewardship, questions remain in local economic development policy and other food system policies, SS
E
making the direct connection between community food security which was not prioritized by respondents in the research, may help SS
M
and sustainable agricultural and natural resource management. create local economies and food systems that benefit community E
N
members of all classes. T
9
NEXT STEPS:
CONSIDERATIONS MOVING FORWARD
The implications of these findings can be articulated in
two overlapping ways to guide community-based efforts to
Recommendations
improve food security moving forward—key questions for
Y
The following list of projects and policies provides potential
R continued, impactful work and specific recommendations for
A starting points for community stakeholders to engage
action.
M
efforts to alleviate food insecurity in their communities.
M
Recommendations such as these are only useful when
U Key questions for enhanced efforts to alleviate
S stakeholders support them and are invested in their
food security

E outcomes, requiring not only community input but also
V • Given the “gap” between federal food assistance and
I strategic leadership and collaboration.
T
adequate access to healthy food at the end of the month,
U
• Increase efforts to integrate the diversity of advocates
C what realistic changes can be pursued to bridge this
E and practitioners into viable, long-term collaborative
X gap? How does this gap affect the capacity of emergency
E networks that honor the diverse approaches, skills, and
food providers?
experiences of participants.
• What supply models are feasible to increase the
• Inform practitioners of pertinent policy issues related to
availability of in-demand fresh produce, meats, and other
food security, and provide training on ways to advocate
perishable items for food insecure community members?
at the local and other policy levels.
• How do we reconcile the tensions between emergency
• Strengthen relationships with local government
and local food systems, particularly in terms of access,
and planning departments, particularly focused on
affordability, and cultural dynamics?
transportation needs of food insecure community
• How do we foster healthy food venues and programs
members, to identify workable solutions to better connect
culturally appropriate for everyone?
individuals to healthy food venues.
• In addition to educational programs, what specific
• Engage in open discussions about ways to approach
projects and policies can the community pursue to
race and class barriers at food venues, particularly
overcome substantial barriers to food security?
farmers markets and other sites commonly associated
• What specific structures are needed to bolster the
with local food networks.
collaborative potential of food security stakeholders and,
• Continue to prioritize food-based education and outreach,
importantly, how can we sustain those networks moving
particularly targeted in key areas of food shopping,
forward?
preparation, and home-growing, so long as demand for
• How can organizations access funding to implement
T
JEC new programs and services to better serve food insecure these efforts is affirmed by community members.
PRO community members? • Increase efforts to expand key healthy food assistance
D programs that “get food to where people are,” including
E • How do we sustain subsidized healthy food programs
H
S mobile markets, backpack programs, and community
D that are often grant dependent?
O
O garden distribution models.
F • How do we identify, understand, and approach power
AN dynamics among organizations within our community • Increase the availability of EBT machines at farmers
HI
AC who share an overlapping interest in addressing food markets and other local food venues to accept EBT.
L
A Expand marketing and outreach efforts to promote these
P security?
P
A programs to food insecure community members.
A
N
LI
O
R
A
C
H
T
R
O
N
N
R
E
T
S
E
W
E
H
T
10