In this New York Times opinions article, Mark Bittman discusses the current system of agricultural subsidies in the US, highlighting its economic and social consequences. A differential allotment of subsidies have shaped the food market and, as a result, the food most Americans consume. Those that benefit the most from subsidies are not small farmers, but rather large-scale, industrial agribusiness. This certainly has adverse effects on the environment, as huge industrial monocultures reduce biodiversity and promote the excessive use of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, among many other harmful social and even nutritional repercussions.
In contrast with this "bigger is better" push, various initiatives around the country are aiming to do just the opposite: bolster small communities while simultaneously bettering the environment. Here is one such program: Evergreen Cooperatives in Cleveland, Ohio, a worker-owned cooperative "committed to local, worker-owned job creation; sustainable, green and democratic workplaces; and community economic development." Considered a "laboratory for a new kind of economic development," this initiative contrasts with the stress on big industry that Bittman's article discussed.
What do you think about about our current agricultural system? Do small-oriented initiatives like Evergreen Cooperative stand a chance? Please share your thoughts with us.
Is this similar to the buy-local movement?
ReplyDelete