For advocates of local food, it's a success story when government agencies move toward purchasing local foods for their own programs. By sheer volume alone, these large organizations have a significant impact on local agriculture (read: small to medium size local and regional farms and food processors). This is called preferential purchasing, when a buyer places a preference (in this case where the food comes from) on some aspect of a large purchase. Regular demand from a large institution can mean a lot to a farm or cooperative of growers: a guaranteed market that encourages agricultural production. It seems like an easy win-win: local government agencies like schools, prisons and offices support their own local economy by buying food from local farms.
But it is not always that easy. Many states, and some federal programs, specifically do not allow preferentially purchasing specifically to ensure equity in the way the public dollar is spent. This is navigated by the elaborate bidding process required for purchase of big ticket items or high volume sales purchased with tax payer dollars. Here's how it works: a state or local government agency puts out a request for proposals (RFP) outlining what they want to buy: a fleet of hybrid cars, four thousand pounds of apples or a new suite of office computers. Individual companies respond to the RFP with a bid outlining the exact details of what they can offer and at what price. The government agency is then required, usually, to select the lowest price bid. This bidding process allows for large purchases to be transparent, unbiased and (hopefully) corruption free.
However, when a food items is to be purchased: the local option does not usually offer the lowest price. Sure, maybe the it's the freshest, the tastiest or the best variety...but not always the least expensive. This can put local products at a disadvantage, especially since in many states it is illegal (ie, not competitive enough) to specify you want a food item from your own state.
So what to do? How can local governments support the purchase of local foods and the local economy in a fair way? Many are turning to changing the laws to allow for more local procurement. This is the case with the New York City Council and the proposed Local Law to Amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to the purchase of New York state food. Sounds like a mouthful, but it would turn the tide and make it possible for New York City to include a preference for New York State food items when it releases an RFP. Farmers markets and CSA may be the sexy, visible face of increasing access to local food...but subtle policy changes like allowing for the preference of local foods will make dramatic changes in the marketplace for local and regional foods.
Showing posts with label regulation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label regulation. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Raw Cheese, Please.
I didn’t like milk at all as a child. We drank only watery, flavorless, fat free milk, and that probably had a lot to do with my distaste. Cheese on the other hand, that delicious and creamy milk product, has always been a favorite. I would always head to the ‘specialty cheese’ section at the grocery store (a kid with a taste for…Mozzarella, Brie and Camembert), but my life really changed when I discovered farmstead cheese…straight from the source.
These cheeses are fantastic not only for their taste, but for what they represent: the all out struggle to survive as a farmer. That may sound like an outlandish statement, but it’s true. Many dairymen and women (of cows, sheep and goats) have turned to making artisan, farmstead cheese when selling plain ol’ milk no longer pays the bills. And really these days, selling plain ol’ milk rarely pays the bills for small-scale, pasture based dairy farms. So farmers turn to cheese, a historic method of milk preservation, to increase the value of the milk they produce and in return the income on the farm. It's a delicious win-win.
In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) allows raw milk to be used in cheese production for any cheese aged over 60 days. Raw milk, milk that has not been pasteurized or heated to kill pathogens, is highly regulated (if not banned) in its liquid form in most states due to 'health hazards'. It is a contentious issue across the United States, but we’ll save the whole debate for another day. For now, suffice it to say that the allowance of raw milk for aged cheese is a lucky loophole for small cheese producers, based on the idea that aging cheese for that duration will minimize pathogen risk. Lucky on two fronts: small farmers don’t have to invest in infrastructure to pasteurize the milk produced from their own herd before making cheese AND the final cheese product is of a much richer and distinct taste.
Many of these small farmers who make farmstead cheese rely solely on old-world techniques, the fresh, raw milk from their herd and small equipment to produce the award winning cheeses that support their farm. But what if the rules of the game changed?
That just may be the case as the FDA is reconsidering the rules for use of raw milk in cheese making after multiple food safety scares and recalls in the past year. The results aren’t in yet, but new regulations may require raw milk cheeses to be aged for at least ninety days all the way to banning the use of raw milk in cheese all together. The New York Times outlines the argument well, but neglect to address the economic effects the ban may have on farmers. Yet again, regulators are faced with the delicate balance of public health versus the absolute deliciousness of this cheese with the economic impact on small farmers if these regulations change.
In this case, small farmers have enough on their plate in running a sanitary, efficient and delicious small dairy and don’t need another regulation limiting their ability to be financially viable. And consumers, us adult supporters of raw milk cheeses…we don’t have enough options on our plate. So please FDA, please don’t take away our raw milk cheese.
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
A-salt-ed.
This is how the conversation usually goes…
Dad: “Did you hear the government wants to regulate _______ in the food system?”
Me: “Yup. Whaddya think?”
Dad: “No way. Too much government interference.”
Me: “I see. Do you think that there might be an important underlying factor in why they are trying to regulate this?”
Dad: “Sure. But it’s a slippery slope. People should be personally responsible for their own well-being and education.” (-or- “Let the market decide”. Depending on the topic).
Me: (As eager daughter waiting to best her father in political debate…some sort of out pouring of nutrition or agriculture or food facts followed by…) “But what about those things that people just don’t know!”
The topics have covered milk support pricing and organics to the National School Lunch Program. In politically oriented debates about food and agricultural regulation, we excel at understanding where the other person is coming from. Or at least, we can predict and prepare. In December, we had this debate about salt. Not just about salt, but about government regulations to reduce the salt content of processed foods available for sale.
His argument: How much is the government going to regulate? People should just be educated on salt intake and make the best decisions for themselves.
Usually I agree with him on this point. People should be responsible for making the best decisions for their health and well-being. He and I both support education and awareness campaigns for health and nutrition topics. But in the case of sodium, consumer education is not enough.
Salt consumption in the US is trending up. Many of us have been successfully educated to avoid consuming excess salt by minimizing salt added when cooking at home, minimizing salt added to the plate served to us and avoiding the culprit ‘salty foods’ like the salted nuts at the Super Bowl party, an otherwise healthy salted pretzel snack and delicious serving of salted french fries or even a cube of cheese. In other words, we have become good at avoiding the sodium we add to food or the sodium we can see.
The problem here? Sodium lurks, in alarming quantities, in unassuming processed foods that don’t taste salty. In other words, even well-intended folks may be getting too much sodium from the foods they would least expect and in much higher quantities than most of us need.
Beyond that, it’s hard to visualize just how much sodium each of us needs each day. The newly released Dietary Guidelines for America 2010 recommends less than 2,300 mg of sodium per day…unless you are “over 51 or those of any age who are African American or have hypertension, diabetes, or chronic kidney disease.” These vulnerable populations are recommended less than 1500 mg of sodium per day.
I decided I would poll my Dad (a well-educated and aware consumer) for a small telephone survey.
Me: “Hi Dad. Do you know how much sodium you should have each day?”
Dad: “Numbers, Hmm. 18-22 grams. Those are the numbers that come to mind.”
Me: “Do you know how much that is, like if you were to cook with it?”
Dad: “Like a measurement unit? I have no idea.”
Me: “Well, one teaspoon is about 2,325 milligrams.”
Dad: “How much air should you have in your tires?”
Me: "Thanks Dad."
We had a lovely chat. I informed my Dad that since he’s over 51, he should be getting about 1500 milligrams per day, way less than a teaspoon. I also told him that my tires should be inflated to 46 psi. He told me my mom and he don’t add any salt to the food they cook at home in their attempts to be salt conscious. We both got curious to check our pantries and read some Nutrition Facts labels for hidden sodium content.
But it proves a point for recommended levels of any nutrient. All the smartest people in the world can set all the most up-to-date standards…but this information has to be accessible to the consumer in an understandable format.
However, salt may require a little something more than an educational campaign, considering that we can’t use our taste buds to accurately judge the sodium content of processed foods. The Institute of Medicine (IOM) argues in Strategies to Reduce Sodium Intake in the United States that this extra, unrecognized salt consumption from processed foods poses a health threat. And this is precisely the argument for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to establish guidelines for allowable salt content of processed foods.
We are accustomed to salt, we eat it without realizing it, and it is unhealthy. Therefore, because of this asymmetry of information, some regulation needs to be established to protect consumers. Fair enough. This regulation will affect all producers equally, can work to decrease sodium levels in processed foods and reduce overall sodium consumption. This may be the long arm of government regulation reaching in to help the hapless American consumer…but it can counteract long term health costs and possibly save lives. Just take it as a grain of salt.
Dad: “Did you hear the government wants to regulate _______ in the food system?”
Me: “Yup. Whaddya think?”
Dad: “No way. Too much government interference.”
Me: “I see. Do you think that there might be an important underlying factor in why they are trying to regulate this?”
Dad: “Sure. But it’s a slippery slope. People should be personally responsible for their own well-being and education.” (-or- “Let the market decide”. Depending on the topic).
Me: (As eager daughter waiting to best her father in political debate…some sort of out pouring of nutrition or agriculture or food facts followed by…) “But what about those things that people just don’t know!”
The topics have covered milk support pricing and organics to the National School Lunch Program. In politically oriented debates about food and agricultural regulation, we excel at understanding where the other person is coming from. Or at least, we can predict and prepare. In December, we had this debate about salt. Not just about salt, but about government regulations to reduce the salt content of processed foods available for sale.
His argument: How much is the government going to regulate? People should just be educated on salt intake and make the best decisions for themselves.
Usually I agree with him on this point. People should be responsible for making the best decisions for their health and well-being. He and I both support education and awareness campaigns for health and nutrition topics. But in the case of sodium, consumer education is not enough.
Salt consumption in the US is trending up. Many of us have been successfully educated to avoid consuming excess salt by minimizing salt added when cooking at home, minimizing salt added to the plate served to us and avoiding the culprit ‘salty foods’ like the salted nuts at the Super Bowl party, an otherwise healthy salted pretzel snack and delicious serving of salted french fries or even a cube of cheese. In other words, we have become good at avoiding the sodium we add to food or the sodium we can see.
The problem here? Sodium lurks, in alarming quantities, in unassuming processed foods that don’t taste salty. In other words, even well-intended folks may be getting too much sodium from the foods they would least expect and in much higher quantities than most of us need.
Beyond that, it’s hard to visualize just how much sodium each of us needs each day. The newly released Dietary Guidelines for America 2010 recommends less than 2,300 mg of sodium per day…unless you are “over 51 or those of any age who are African American or have hypertension, diabetes, or chronic kidney disease.” These vulnerable populations are recommended less than 1500 mg of sodium per day.
I decided I would poll my Dad (a well-educated and aware consumer) for a small telephone survey.
Me: “Hi Dad. Do you know how much sodium you should have each day?”
Dad: “Numbers, Hmm. 18-22 grams. Those are the numbers that come to mind.”
Me: “Do you know how much that is, like if you were to cook with it?”
Dad: “Like a measurement unit? I have no idea.”
Me: “Well, one teaspoon is about 2,325 milligrams.”
Dad: “How much air should you have in your tires?”
Me: "Thanks Dad."
We had a lovely chat. I informed my Dad that since he’s over 51, he should be getting about 1500 milligrams per day, way less than a teaspoon. I also told him that my tires should be inflated to 46 psi. He told me my mom and he don’t add any salt to the food they cook at home in their attempts to be salt conscious. We both got curious to check our pantries and read some Nutrition Facts labels for hidden sodium content.
But it proves a point for recommended levels of any nutrient. All the smartest people in the world can set all the most up-to-date standards…but this information has to be accessible to the consumer in an understandable format.
However, salt may require a little something more than an educational campaign, considering that we can’t use our taste buds to accurately judge the sodium content of processed foods. The Institute of Medicine (IOM) argues in Strategies to Reduce Sodium Intake in the United States that this extra, unrecognized salt consumption from processed foods poses a health threat. And this is precisely the argument for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to establish guidelines for allowable salt content of processed foods.
We are accustomed to salt, we eat it without realizing it, and it is unhealthy. Therefore, because of this asymmetry of information, some regulation needs to be established to protect consumers. Fair enough. This regulation will affect all producers equally, can work to decrease sodium levels in processed foods and reduce overall sodium consumption. This may be the long arm of government regulation reaching in to help the hapless American consumer…but it can counteract long term health costs and possibly save lives. Just take it as a grain of salt.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)