Transcript Building Capacity and Resilience in the NE Agricultural

Building Capacity and Resilience in the
NE Agricultural and Food System
An Update from the NE Center
Stephan J. Goetz, Ph.D.
Director, The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development
and Professor of Agricultural and Regional Economics
The Pennsylvania State University
2013 Northeast Joint Summer Session, Cornell University
Ithaca, NY ● July 8, 2013
Funding under NIFA Grant 2012-51150-19609 and others is gratefully acknowledged.
1
Contact: Stephan J. Goetz, Director ● [email protected] ● (814) 777-4656 ● http://nercrd.psu.edu
Presentation Outline
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Update from the NE Center
The NE Food System: Context
NE Capacity to meet consumption needs
Economic Resilience in a Food System
Conclusion
2
The Northeast Regional Center for RD
1. Mission: to support NE Land Grant Universities
in their rural development activities


Report to BOD drawn from NERA/NEED and others
Advised by Technical Advisory Committee
2. Priority areas: food systems, entrepreneurship
and jobs, natural resources, capacity building
3. Core Budget (annual):



USDA/NIFA: $230,000 (down ~25%)
NERA: $40,788 off-the-top regional funds
Penn State: $32,600 plus >50% of director’s salary
plus other support
3
The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development
External Grant Funding (2013)
Name
Amount Lifespan NE LGU
($)
(years) Share (%)
AFRI EFSNE Global Food Security 5,000,000
5
72
AFRI NARDeP Policy Research
768,000
2
>50
AFRI Foundational (UVM, ERS)
472,669
3
95
AFRI Capacity (UMES, UDE, TSU)
450,000
3
49
eXtension COP (PSU, others)
50,000
1
50
TOTAL (annualized, to NE LGUs) 800,000+
All grants address food systems development issues.
44
NERCRD Grants and Food Systems Network
AFRI-GFS
AFRI-NARDeP
AFRI-UVM
AFRI-CBGP
eXtension CLRFS Core
5
Locations of Northeast Food System Open Forum
Land Grant Univ. Participants* (May 30, 2013)
Open Forum webinar organized by NE Center Scholar
Dr. Doolarie Singh-Knights, West Virginia University
7
8
2
10
NOAA
2
5 1
Presenter
1 No. of LGU participants
8
Quebec
2
74 total participants,
including 7 outside
the region (one from
Canada)
1
3
1
6
Upcoming conference (planned)
May 13-15, 2014
Baltimore, MD
Enhancing Food Security and Rural Viability
through Innovative Food Systems Practices
(tentative)
7
2. Context
8
The NE Food System: Context
Northeast as a percent of U.S.
%
(excluding Alaska)
Population
Land area
Crop land area
CRP land
Pasture land
Range land
Forest land
21.6
5.6
4.2
0.4
6.4
0.0
19.4
Compiled from US Census, USDA NRCS and ISU Ctr Survey Stat and Methodology
9
Food System: Analytical framework
Product flows
1. Production  Distribution  Consumption
Price signals
2. Questions of capacity – at what price? –
changes over time, at all three levels
3. Questions about resilience: ecological and
economic
10
Why distribution matters
90.2% of every consumer dollar pays for costs incurred after food leaves the farm
http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-dollar-series/food-dollar-application.aspx
11
Why distribution matters (cont.): where the
consumer dollar goes…
http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-dollar-series/food-dollar-application.aspx
12
Distribution channels becoming more concentrated
How do reductions
in supply chain
options affect
farmers’ access to
markets, and their
economic
resilience?
http://www.dailyyonder.com/examining-walmarts-rural-stranglehold/2010/12/06/3068
13
Why distribution matters (cont.): where the
consumer dollar goes…
http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-dollar-series/food-dollar-application.aspx
14
EFSNE
Enhancing Food Security in the Northeast through
Regional Food Systems Development (AFRI GFS)
NIFA Grant No. 2011-68004-30057
Project Goal:
To assess whether greater reliance on regionallyproduced foods can improve food access and
affordability for disadvantaged communities, while
also benefiting farmers, food supply chain firms,
and others in the food system.
Production  Distribution  Consumption,
outreach, education, scenario modeling, evaluation
15
EFSNE
Project Sites and Collaborators
Advisory Council
Robert King, Professor, Univ. of Minnesota
Toni Liquori, NYC School Food FOCUS
David Marvel, President, Fruit and
Vegetable Growers Assoc. of DE
Joyce Smith, Operation Reachout
Southwest, Baltimore
ARS/Orono, ME
Syracuse
New York
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
Baltimore
Charleston
ARS/ERS Wash DC
Rural Study Sites (DE, NY and VT)
Metro Study Sites
Evaluation Design Consultant
16
Ted Wilson, The Headwaters Group
EFSNE
Survey/Modeling Strategy
One of 9 locations
(e.g., Syracuse)
Location
One neighborhood or
community per (underserved)
location; focus groups
Two stores on average
per neighborhood; consumers
patronizing the stores
Supply chains,
business owners
Local
Ag. production capacity
in 300 Northeast Counties
Regional
Market
Baskets
National
International
Milk, beef, apples, peaches, cabbage, potatoes, broccoli, bread
3. Capacity
18
EFSNE
Baseline Land Use (Regional)
Other land
in farms
(not in production)
Source: T. Griffin
and C. Peters, Tufts
19
EFSNE
Baseline Balance (Regional)
Vegetable
Group
Regional SelfReliance
Dark Green
12%
Starchy
44%
Red and
Orange
Other
13%
34%
Source: T. Griffin and C. Peters (Tufts University)
20
EFSNE
Geospatial Crop Modeling
What types of scenarios can we simulate to
evaluate the potential production capacity?
• Current production
• Results aggregated to the county-level
• Three crops to be simulated (potatoes, corn, wheat)
• Water-limited (WL) and non-limited (NL) scenarios
• Production Scenarios



Water use
Land use change
Climate change
• Questions
−
−
−
−
How much land
Highest potential yield?
Production constraints?
Resource needs?
Based on Resop, J., D. Fleisher et al., Computers and Electronics in Agric. 89(2012):51-61
21
EFSNE
Yield Index - One step further
Based on Resop, J., D. Fleisher et al., Computers and Electronics in Agric. 89(2012):51-61
22
EFSNE
Crop Production Footprints
USDA, FSA, NAIP
18 June 2009
1500 ha scene
(1 m resolution image)
Cropland Data Layer 2009 CDLs 2008-2010
Barley=deep pink, Broccoli=orange, crop sequence mosaic
Potato=brown, Rye=purple
1500 ha scene
(56 m resolution)
P-B-P (purple), P-Br-B (bright
green), B-P-B (dark green),
Br-R-P (bright red)
(56 m resolution RGB)
Source: Defauw, S. et al. Amer. J. Potato Research 89(2012):471-488
23
Drivers for Change in NE Agriculture
24
Starting
in the
1850s
Slide courtesy Tim Griffin
(adapted)
Fruit & Vegetable Production, the U.S.
Source: Goetz et al. (2013) forthcoming
Fresh Vegetables Production, NE Counties
Preliminary estimates
Lowest
Middle
Highest
Source: H. Etemadnia, Penn State and P. Canning, USDA ERS Washington, DC
Lowest
Middle
Highest
Existing Locations of Fruit and Vegetables Wholesalers (Hubs)
Total Counties
300
# counties with no hub
151
# counties with hub
149
# counties with more than 20 hubs
12
# counties with 1 hub
56
27
Research questions
• Given that food is not produced where it is
consumed…
– What is the role of hubs in ensuring least-cost
assembly and distribution of food? Where should
hubs/aggregators be located?
– For perishables, what are the quickest pathways?
– How might optimal supply chain locations and
aggregations change as climate changes?
– Are concentrated supply chains also resilient, and
resistant to failure or other disruption?
28
4. Resilience
29
Resilience
• Allen and Fink, 2005. p.1034
– “The capability of a system to maintain its function/
structure in the face of change”
• Davies, 2011. p.370 and 371
– “Capacity to withstand change”
– “Ability to return to a long-run development path”
• Xu et al., 2011. p.662
– Response to failures in different sectors that are interconnected through the input-output network [supply
chain]
Source : Han, Y. and S. Goetz (2013), presented at the 2013 SRSA Meeting
Detailed U.S. Input-Output Table IMPLAN
31
Strongest Inter-Sectoral Connections (SSC)
Agriculture and forestry
support activities (19)
𝒂𝟏𝟗,𝟏𝟓 = 𝟎. 𝟎𝟐𝟔𝟓
Logging (15)
Adapted from Xu, M. et al. Advances in Complex Systems 14(5)2011: 656.
32
Strongest Inter-Sectoral Connections (SSC)
Agriculture and forestry
support activities (19)
𝒂𝟏𝟗,𝟏𝟓 = 𝟎. 𝟎𝟐𝟔𝟓
Logging (15)
𝒂𝟏𝟗,𝟏𝟔 = 0.5414
Forest nurseries, forest
products, and timber
tracts (16)
𝑎19,16 * 𝑎16,15 = 0.2141
𝒂𝟏𝟔,𝟏𝟓 = 0. 3955
Adapted from Xu, M. et al. Advances in Complex Systems 14(5)2011: 656.
33
Backbone Industries to Agriculture
Largest commodity transactions
to agricultural industries
34
Backbone Industries for Food
Manufacturing
Largest commodity transactions
to processing industries
Resilience depends on how a network is organized…
Albert, R., H. Jeong and A. Barabasi, Error and attack tolerance of complex networks
Nature vol. 406, July 27, pp. 378-382.
36
Networks of Agricultural and Food Processing Industries
• For agriculture and for food processing, there is
evidence that networks are scale-free
 If so, the Food System is resilient to random
disruptions or failures, but not to targeted disruption
Agriculture (w>$10mn)
γ(Agriculture) = 1.133
N (s) ~ s  γ γ(Food processing) = 1.154
37
5. Conclusions
• Capacity
– determined by what is physically possible, but also
depends on prices, costs
– Potatoes: “…field-scale physiological response to
microtopological variations … combined with
challenges to productivity and profitability”
(Defauw et al. p. 472)
• Resilience
– important at the production level, but also for the
distribution system, AND for consumption
38
Thank You!
[email protected]
39
Collaborations/Credits
• Thanks to the following individuals for their
help with this presentation:
– P. Canning, USDA ERS Washington, DC
– K. Clancy, EFSNE Deputy Director
– H. Etemadnia, Y. Han, Penn State
– D. Fleisher, USDA ARS Beltsville, MD
– T. Griffin, C. Peters, Tufts U
40
The red dots are agriculture industries, as shown below:
“Fishing” and “hunting and trapping” is dropped because of w>10
threshold. Thank you.
The red dots are
agriculture industries, as
shown below:
111200 Vegetable and melon farming
111335 Tree nut farming
Greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture
111400
production
111910 Tobacco farming
111920 Cotton farming
112120 Dairy cattle and milk production
112300 Poultry and egg production
113300 Logging
41