Demand for Local at Hartwick [REVISED]

We’ve all recently heard people publicizing the many benefits of local food and how we must shift our habits as a society towards more local and less imports. One supporter of local, Michael Shuman, talks about our spending patterns in his article “Going Local: New opportunities for Community Economies”. The primary spending patterns recognized are LOIS and TINA. LOIS stands for Local Ownership and Import Substitution, and the other less favorable alternative (in the eyes of Shuman) is TINA, meaning There Is No Alternative (to a global economy). He describes the circular flow model and multiplier effects, intrinsic parts of LOIS, though they are nonsensical terms to the average consumer.

The circular flow model in economics shows the flow of money in an economy. Here is a simplified version of the model showing the flow of money within the internal economy. The economy in question can either be the local economy such as the Otsego economy, the New York economy or even the US economy. According to Daniel Purdy, co-owner of Purdy & Sons, the reference frame for local food is bound to the state economy (Purdy). When spending and purchasing is done primarily within the local economy it generates more wealth. Spending money at your local farmers market will generate disposable income for these farmers which they will spend locally creating more income for another producer, and so on, these are injections within the local economy. This is called the economic multiplier effect (Shuman). When businesses outsource production to workers outside the local economy or when consumers buy produce which is not of the local economy then this circular flow loses money and these are referred to as leakages. This decreases the multiplier effect.

One barrier to local food at Hartwick is the lack of consistent demand for it within the student body. Despite the demand for local/organic food existing within the students, the demand can be inconsistent and is therefore viewed as a fad by some providers when the demand increases. Another barrier to local food is the difference in price between local and non-local. Non-local foods produced by industrial farms are heavily subsidized by the US government, and so this issue comes from the top down (Riedl). Therefore, companies like Aramark are less enthused about buying from local farms due to how much more expensive local food is.

The simplest way to increase demand for local food is to demand it. Hopefully, work being done by the students of Davies and Ficano will increase the demand for local food in the students at Hartwick, which will then be taken into consideration by Aramark. With Aramark's progressive attitude regarding the increased implementation of local foods, increasing demand is a viable opportunity, though it is not the only step that should be taken. The price of local food can be alleviated through demand-based intermediary companies such as Purdy & Sons. Purdy & Sons in particular serves many colleges and other organizations in the north-east area. They manage to charge the lowest amount of money possible through a series of loans and other risk-minimization activities, including determining what exactly a customer wants to buy, then procuring and shipping those goods.

Research done by the USDA (Martinez, et al.) highlights benefits of local food markets. First and foremost, there is the benefit of the multiplier effect. Secondly, it highlights the fact that non-local food has to be transported from far places to reach you and thus the greenhouse gas emissions due to this cannot be ignored and are a major contributor to the global gas emissions and global warming. To the average consumer, these facts might not seem as a decisive point in making the shift to local but the article goes on to show the benefits the average consumer can look forward to. Local food is healthier and contains more nutrients than non-local food because of the primarily organic production processes and the reduced amount of food miles. Food miles are the distance the food travels from the point it is produced to the point it is consumed. Local food travels less time, and therefore both doesn't need preservative chemicals and wilts less as it travels. It is also harvested at the right, seasonal time, whereas non-local food has to be harvested earlier due to the large distances the food has to cover before reaching the nearby supermarkets. It is better for you, both nutritionally and taste-wise. (Ackerman-Leist).

As part of my project for my First Year Seminar, my colleague Nicholas Ryan and I interviewed a local business owner. Purdy Foods is a processor of local food and supplies to local colleges, fine dining establishments and institutions. They are fulfilling the vision on the “Farm to Fork” initiative and sustainable interests of our community. Purdy himself believes strongly in the local food vision, and states that local foods are healthier and taste better. He thinks that, in ten or so years, we should be calling local food just food (Purdy).

Aramark is trying hard to implement more local food into its production services at the Commons, and is willing to work with the student body to do so. As such, our project's salient purpose is to present possible solutions to barriers preventing increased local food integration to Aramark.