The Growth And Challenges Of Local Agriculture In Alaska

Alaska is an infamously food insecure state. Researchers estimate that 95% of the food consumed in the state is imported. Consequently, of the 2 billion dollars Alaskans spend on food, 1. 9 billion of that is money that could be stimulating Alaska’s own economy but is instead leaving the state. In recent years, however, the local food movement has been growing. Despite the unique environmental and economic challenges posed to small farms in Alaska, direct farm to consumer sales rose 67% from 2002 to 2012, a growth rate 13 times the national average. This is due to many factors including government programs and private entities encouraging local agriculture and a growing awareness of the health and environmental benefits of eating local products. However, the state still has a long way to go in ensuring a prosperous, secure, and economically viable local food system.

In the United States, the number of individual farms peaked nearly 80 years ago. According to Ferdman (2017), 'The number of farms in the country has fallen by some 4 million between then and now…Meanwhile, the average farm size has more than doubled, and the amount of total land being farmed has, more or less, remained the same. ” The country is seeing 'growing numbers of very small and very large farms and declining numbers of mid-sized farms. '

The decline of mid-sized farms in the United States has a few very important consequences for small farms. This decline has left room in the market for smaller farmers to emerge since they do not have to compete with both mid-sized and large farms. The decline has also encouraged the sales of locally grown produce due to dissatisfaction with large farm operations. From animal cruelty issues to environmental concerns, to health considerations, there are many reasons why local produce is increasingly seen as a superior option.

When large-scale farm operations began to stock both in and out of season produce consistently, this was a significant advantage to their smaller counterparts. However, now, consumers are more knowledgeable about the process these goods must be taken through to sit on a shelf hundreds of thousands of miles away from where they were grown. The “so called cardboard tomato” is an example of this, “an infamous fruit; a tomato picked for durability but not for taste, picked green and shipped vast distances, ripened artificially with exposure to certain chemicals and sold in mid-winter, far from its point of origin”. Consumers want to have better knowledge of the food they eat, where it has been, how it has been grown, and who has grown it. All questions which can be answered by a farmer selling the goods, but presumably not by a supermarket employee.

In Alaska, specifically, there is a real opportunity for local farmers to thrive because of a few unique economic factors. Not only is the cost of living higher in Alaska, meaning that people have less disposable income to spend buying groceries, but the cost of groceries is higher as well, sometimes prohibitively so. Many stores do not stock produce consistently, especially in rural areas, and the products that they do stock is of inferior quality. In rural Alaska, small farmers may even be able to produce goods that are cheaper than the existing products or may be able to provide products that larger companies view as too cost prohibitive to ship in. Department of Health and Social Services research supports a connection between access to healthy food and increased consumption of fruits and vegetables, which can lower the risk of developing chronic diseases (like diabetes, heart disease, and high blood pressure) and help maintain a healthy weight. In Alaska, 3 of every 4 adults eat less than the recommended 5 or more servings of fruits and vegetables per day. In rural Alaska, this is even less. “Rural Alaskans are significantly more likely to eat less than 5 servings of fruits and vegetables daily than residents in Anchorage, Southeast and Fairbanks”. Hopefully, with the rise of locally grown produce, this will change.

In a state where one-third of children and two-thirds of adults are above normal weight, combatting this issue should begin with increased and secure access to affordable fruits and vegetables. This can take many forms, access to farmers’ markets, home and community gardens, and farm-to-institution programs have all been shown to increase consumption of fruits and vegetables. This is more than a public health issue, but an economic issue as well. “In some areas of Alaska, more than 31% of the population is obese, among the highest rates in the nation. ” The medical cost incurred on the state of Alaska by obesity is $477 million per year. In the coming years, more research will need to be conducted to see if the rise of locally grown products in Alaska contributes to a decrease in obesity or obesity-related medical costs.

According to 2016 United States Department of Agriculture data, there are approximately 760 farm operations in Alaska and more than 830,000 acres operated for farming. There were 55 farmers markets and 5 u-pick farms around the state featured in 2017 on the Alaskan Grown Website. There are many varied and unique ways in which the local food system is growing.

The number of CSAs which stands for “Community Supported Agriculture” has risen, now about 40 in number, along with farm operations. Community Supported Agriculture allows individuals to have direct access to high quality, fresh produce grown locally by a small farm operation. Urban gardens have also sprung up like those run through the Municipality of Anchorage. For a season fee, small plots of city land are reserved for members of the community to use as gardens. This allows people living without access to space to garden, to grow produce for commercial use or their own consumption. Many other community gardens exist, some requiring a time commitment rather than a monetary commitment and all goods produced are split between members.

The use of ways to obtain local foods is significant in Alaska. According to a 2011 DHSS Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey, of the 6,125 Alaskan respondents, in the last year, 65% of respondents had harvested wild foods by gathering, hunting or fishing at least one time. 50% purchased fresh produce from a farmers’ market, farm stand, U-pick farm or Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) and 34% of respondents ate produce from their own garden.

Although there has been an increase in small farms in recent years, there are still significant challenges they face to begin operations and continue making profits. Namely, small farms have difficulty dealing with inclement weather, pest infestations, quality consistency, and fluctuating input prices because a bad year caused by these or any number of other factors can be detrimental to their business. For small operations looking to branch out from direct farm to consumer sales, meeting intermediary demands for volume, consistent quality, timely deliveries, and out of season availability are all hurdles they must overcome. Proper food safety practices and a good food safety record are extremely important. “While the smallest operations are exempt from most of the FDA’s new rules and requirements, intermediated marketing channels such as restaurants, grocery stores, schools, hospitals, or regional food aggregators are increasingly demanding that local suppliers meet food safety regulations. ” Also, buyers like schools might not have the facilities to process foods delivered directly from farms like whole carrots, potatoes, and chickens. “The local food supply lacks mid-scale aggregation and distribution systems that move local food into mainstream markets in a cost-effective manner”.

Alaska’s seafood markets are a prime example. “Alaska provides 50-62% of all U. S. seafood and the fishing industry is the third biggest economic driver in the state. ” More than 2 billion dollars of seafood is exported to foreign markets, yet the Alaskan sourced seafood seen in most grocery stores has most likely been processed, packed, and frozen in a plant in Seattle before being shipped back to Alaska. With the rise of local agriculture, there is more need than ever for mid-scale aggregation and distribution systems to take Alaskan grown products and encourage their distribution within the state, stimulating our own economy rather than foreign economies.

Alaska, however, has specific challenges for farmers to meet. Higher living costs and wages make it difficult for small businesses to grow. There is a unique need to ship in basic materials like fertilizer, greenhouses, tractors, seed, rootstock or breeding stock, and even infrastructure. Shipping costs are significantly higher in Alaska and Alaska produces very little factory-made goods including any packaging needed for the products. Cold weather, permafrost, and a short growing season are also unique barriers to overcome in Alaska.

No one governmental department oversees food. Federal, state, and local policies all help to govern local food policy as well as various private organizations. The Department of Health and Social Services, the Department of Natural Resources: Division of Agriculture, and the United States Department of Agriculture are the main entities that provide grants to small operations to buy equipment, low interest loans, incentives for people benefiting from programs like food stamps to buy local foods, assistance with farmer education programs, and grants to outside organizations supporting locally grown produce. Many Alaskans are taking advantage of these opportunities. For example, four of the five top counties receiving discounted high tunnel greenhouses from the Natural Resource Conservation Service are in Alaska.

One program making a difference in Alaska is the USDA Farm to School Program, a program providing grants for schools to improve access to local foods. 76% of Alaska school districts surveyed by USDA say they participate in farm to school activities and 11% of districts surveyed plan to start Farm to School activities in the future, with the average school district spending 6% of their budget on local products. 32 school gardens are now growing in Alaska due to this grant.

Farm to School census data indicates that schools across the U. S. purchased nearly $790 million in local food from farmers, ranchers, fishermen, food processors, and manufacturers in the school year 2013-2014. This represent a 105% increase over the school year 2011-2012 when the first USDA Farm to School Census was conducted.

If every Alaskan spent $5 a week on local products, it would contribute 188 million dollars to Alaska’s economy. Small steps can have large impacts, but if Alaska’s local food system is to keep growing, the unique economic and environmental challenges will need to be met. Meter and Goldenberg (2013), suggest that fostering subsistence harvesting and related skills, building personal capabilities in agriculture, building infrastructure which supports local food production, as well as adopting more state policies in support of local food production and focusing consumer attention on staying loyal to the Alaskan grown foods movement are the key ways in which Alaska will be able to build more food security within the state. More food security supports more local products which in turn support a healthy and prosperous state.

References

1. Alaska Districts. (2015). Retrieved February 10, 2018, from https://farmtoschoolcensus. fns. usda. gov/find-your-school-district/alaska
2. Alaska Grown. (2017, April 28). Retrieved February 05, 2018, from http://buyalaskagrown. com/learn/Alaska
3. Obesity Facts: Local Foods [PDF]. (2013, September). State of Alaska Department of Health and Social Services Obesity Prevention and Control Program.
4. Department of Health and Social Services. (2011). Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey. Retrieved from http://dhss. alaska. gov/dph/Chronic/Documents/brfss/pubs/BRFSSsum11-12. pdf
5. Farm to School Census 2015. (2015). Retrieved February 10, 2018, from https://farmtoschoolcensus. fns. usda. gov/overview-farm-school-census-2015
6. Ferdman, R. A. (2014, September 16). The decline of the small American family farm in one chart. The Washington Post. Retrieved February 05, 2018, from https://www. washingtonpost. com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/16/the-decline-of-the-small-american-family-farm-in-one-chart/?utm_term=. 86683440207a
7. Food in Alaska: food systems, security, and policy in the 49th state [PDF]. (2012, July 11). Alaska: Alaska Food Policy Council.
8. Helfferich, D. (2010, May). The Local Food Movement In Alaska [Editorial]. The Statewide Voice. Retrieved February 05, 2018, from https://www. alaska. edu/voice/2010/May_2010/announcements/local-food/
9. Langlois, K. (2017, September 18). Farming in Alaska is Increasingly Possible. High Country News. Retrieved February 05, 2018, from http://www. hcn. org/issues/49. 16/agriculture-farming-in-alaska-is-increasingly-possible
10. Martinez, S. (2016, August 31). Policies Supporting Local Food in the United States [PDF]. MDPI.
11. Meter, K. , & Phillips Goldenberg, M. (2014, July 28). Building Food Security In Alaska. Retrieved February 05, 2018, from https://akfoodpolicycouncil. files. wordpress. com/2013/07/14-09-17_building-food-security-in-ak_exec-summary-recommendations. pdf
12. Obesity Facts: Fruit and Vegetable Intake in Alaska [PDF]. (2010, September). State of Alaska Department of Health and Social Services Obesity Prevention and Control Program.
13. Phu, L. (2016, September 8). Alaska only grows 4 percent of its food. Can we do better? Juneau Empire. Retrieved from http://juneauempire. com/local/2016-09-08/alaska-only-grows-4-percent-its-food-can-we-do-better