Out of the Myriad of Problems We Are Faced With, Food Sustainability Stands out As Having

Rethinking Food Choices at McGillPage 1

RETHINKING FOOD CHOICES AT MCGILL:

Creating Sustainability Criteria for Poultry and Greenhouse Tomatoes

Client: McGill Food Systems Project – Sustainable McGill

In conjunction with McGill Food and Dining Services

Supervising Professor: Sylvie De Blois

ENVR 401 Fall 2009

Group Members

Lianne Bélanger 260178887

Drew De Panicis 260286497

Nicholas Moreau 260224266

Jessica Pelland 260289713

Sophia Scott 260216842

Kaitlin Smith 260216851

Veronique Theriault 260216500

Kerri Westlake 260145700

Executive Summary

Introduction

Client

Our client, the McGill Food System Project (MFSP) is a university endorsed, student run initiative, whose goal is to examine and revitalize the university’s relationship with the food it consumes. Our team was asked to participate in this process by investigating McGill’s food sources. We narrowed our focus to greenhouse tomatoes and chicken. In short, we choose these areas because throughout the year, MFDS orders more tomatoes than any other produce item (Oliver De Volpi, personal interview, September 2009). Meanwhile, chicken is the most commonly consumed protein source in McGill’s residence cafeterias(Oliver De Volpi, personal interview, September 2009).

Focus

Our project focuses on all the actors participating in the food supply chain: the companies; the products; the environment that cradles them; and the communities that make the links of this supply chain stronger.

Objective

Our goal was to investigate the relevant and realistic criteria that could be applied to source McGill’s food more sustainably.

Method

Based on literature review, industry meetings, and client consultation, a set of sustainability sourcing criteria was generated which will evaluate individual greenhouse producers, poultry producers, slaughterhouses and distributors.

Conclusion

The main purpose of these criteria will be to reveal the best and worst practices of the respective food industries (see Appendix A-C) and guide McGill towards the most sustainable sourcing options. These criteria will encourage dialogue between parties, including McGill’s food and dining services and its suppliers; They will help to estimate an individual source’s ‘environmental conscience’and, rather than price, they will evaluate how environmentally economical a supplier is in practice. As consumers, we need to understand the production process in order to make ethical purchasing decisions. As for producers, they need to know our consumption values and demands. A leading university such as McGill has a responsibility to make the most informed decisions possible when it comes to the food it purchases, and our project seeks to provide a basis for such decisions.

Contents

Executive Summary

Introduction

Emergence of the Sustainability Discourse

Client Description

Focusing Our Project

Greenhouse Tomato Production

Poultry Production

Objective

Research Question

Research Methodology

Analysis

Part I: Greenhouse Tomatoes

Analysis

Conclusion

Part II: Poultry

Analysis

Conclusion

General conclusions and Recommendations

General conclusions

Recommendations for future research

References

Appendix A: Greenhouse Criteria

Appendix B: Poultry Criteria

Appendix C: Shorthand Criteria

Appendix D: Contact Lists

Appendix E: Company Profiles

"Out of the myriad of problems we are faced with, food sustainability stands out as having the widest and most tangible appeal to, and impact upon, individuals. It is universally relevant because regardless of ecological awareness, social group, and political orientation, everybody eats."

- McGill Food Systems Project

Introduction

Agriculture is a rapidly changing sector in Canada and worldwide, characterized by burgeoning farm size, consolidation of farmers and retailers, vertical integration, and a disconnect between consumers and the food they eat, particularly in the last three decades (Preibisch 2007; Pollen 2006; Draper 2002; Schlosser 2002). Vertical integration, wherein one company owns or otherwise controls all of the links in its supply chain, is seen as the most efficient way to achieve uniformity as well as economies of scale (Draper 2002). Today’s vertically integrated agri-businesses require high volume production of a small number of food crops and livestock species, contributing to increasing farm size and intensity of production (Schlosser 2002). Food chains, once being local or regional scale, have become increasingly global in scale and connection. As goes the common refrain, the North American family farm is disappearing, as agri-business conglomerates gain more market control (Schlosser 2002). The family owner-operator labour force is being replaced by contracted wage employees, an increasing proportion of which are recent immigrants, people without status, or temporary foreign workers (Preibisch 2007). This consolidated, vertically integrated food system has been associated with improved efficiency and vastly increased crop yield (Trewavas 2008). However, the past half century has also witnessed increased agricultural pollution, particularly the release of excess nitrates and phosphorus into water and soil, deforestation, and other environmental destruction in the name of increased production (Pollen 2006; Draper 2002). For better or worse, agriculture, and the common person’s relationship to the food they eat has drastically changed.

In recent literature regarding food and agriculture in North America, the forces of change are often presented as monolithic and insurmountable, but people are cognizant of the myriad of concerns such a food system presents and, as this introduction will discuss, there is a long history of alternative dialogue that seeks to mitigate social and environmental degradation associated with this system (Hawken 2005).

Emergence of the Sustainability Discourse

There has been a gradual and changing trajectory of thought concerned with examining the impact of Western lifestyle and modes of production on the environment. None of the elements in this story have remained static, including conceptions of the environment, humans’ place within it, or our scientific understanding of ecological processes.ù ‘Sustainability’ as a widely recognized concept, emerged in the 1980s, although it existed more disparately long before (Draper 2002). The first internationally recognized understanding of the term comes from the World Commission of Environment and Development’s publication Our Common Future (1987), wherein ‘sustainable development’ is defined as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Brundtland 1987). The term sustainable development has since been criticized as oxymoronic because development connotes linear, unidirectional growth that may contradict the concept of sustainability. More recently ‘sustainability’, which encompasses the interactions between ecological, social and economic ‘pillars’, has largely taken its place (Adams 2006). As climate change, and the complex processes driving it, are increasingly understood, current conceptions emphasize interconnectedness and interdependency of all aspects in the physical and social environments (Draper 2002). The goal of sustainability is to understand and support the complexity of natural systems to bolster resilience for the present and future generations.

Sustainability as it pertains to agriculture is often closely linked with discussions of organic crop and livestock production. This derives principally from a concern regarding the long term detrimental effects of chemicals related to the production and application of inorganic fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides (Mäder et al. 2002). More recently, focus has shifted to the origin and distance that food travels from suppliers to users. Much North American theory and activism surrounding sustainable food proposes that food which travels the shortest distance from ‘farm to plate’ (‘local food’) will decrease fossil fuel emissions for transport, increase the ability of consumers to participate directly in the food production process, strengthen communication and social ties and preserve biodiversity (Weber and Matthews 2008; Pollan 2006). It is in this context that our research project is embedded.

Client Description

Our client, the McGill Food System Project (MFSP) is a university supported, student run initiative, whose goal is to examine and revitalize the university’s relationship with the food it consumes. In particular, the research group is working towards a food system with which the McGill community will be intimately integrated and have a clear understanding. Their past efforts involve decrypting and communicating the structure of McGill's food supply chain, observing and mapping current food sourcing decisions and establishing contacts and collaborating with many of the varied actors behind this process. They are currently working closely with McGill's Food and Dinning Services (MFDS) to evaluate their food ordering practices.

Our client asked us to analyze the sustainability of current food choices at McGill’s independently run cafeterias operated by MFDS. Our team was asked to create research- based recommendations and criteria to guide future food purchasing decisions. The purchasing guidelines set by our project will serve as a pilot in the independently run cafeterias throughout the Winter 2010 semester, and as a model for future ordering contracts.

Focusing Our Project

The challenge was clear from our first meeting: what exactly does sustainability mean to us, and how can we create criteria that both reflect this definition and are feasible in the McGill context? We found that while sustainability means many things to many people, in some senses it has become a buzz word devoid of meaning. Acknowledging the difficulty of defining a concept so fluid and context dependent, we began our project with the purpose of refining a definition that was specifically relevant to our areas of interest: food. We see an example from Yale University Sustainable Food Project’s definition in their recently released Sustainable Food Purchasing Guidelines as a working definition. It states that “a sustainable practice can continue indefinitely without degrading the systems upon which it depends” (Yale Sustainable Food Project 2008). But how can such a statement be quantitatively measured, especially considering that our environment is a dynamic and ever changing system? For the purpose of practicality, we have chosen to measure sustainability as a spectrum of practices ranging from those that have the least adverse social or environmental impact to those having the greatest adverse impact. In this context, agricultural practices doing the least environmental and social damage will be rewarded in our criteria.

Food at McGill’s independent residence cafeterias is currently ordered based on price, quality and student preference (Glencross 2009). The impact of these products’ on the social and physical environment is given little, if any, consideration. Moreover, unlike price, the environmental and social costs of goods, often externalized from producer costs, are not stamped onto the product (Hawken 2005). But this cost does vary. As our analysis will show, while the end products may be quite similar to each other, the means to get there can vary greatly. Generating sustainable sourcing criteria is an attempt to evaluate goods in a way that considers external costs in the form of degradation of water, soil and air, biodiversity loss, decrease in the quality of life of human and non-human organisms, and power imbalances in human social structure. Our project focuses on three main actors participating in the food supply chain; the producer, the transformer and the supplier.

Based on client meetings and literature review, we decided to narrow our focus to poultry and greenhouse tomato production. Throughout our research, we attempted to critically examine both the current modes of production and the ‘pastoral fantasy’ to come up with criteria which balance ideals and practicality, immediate action and long term change. The result is a set of criteria for poultry and greenhouse tomatoes which allocates points in an ascending scale from least to most sustainable practice in a number of relevant facets of production. Given the complexity of our criteria and the human resources required to apply it, we have also provided ‘shorthand’ criteria for immediate use. The distilled version of the full document can hopefully be used by current administrators, and where possible, incorporated in food provider contracts. Additionally, we have designed the criteria to require only information that could be accessible to the interviewee or student researcher to ensure no criterion would be left unanswered due to lack of information. The following sections will provide background information into both of our focus industries, elaborate on the important domains to evaluate within each, and provide justification for the ‘best and worst practices’. The points-based criteria can be found in Appendix A, and the 'shorthand' guidelines in Appendix B. As this project is part of a movement which will be expanded and built upon, we conclude with recommendations for future research.

Greenhouse Tomato Production

Any attempt to evaluate the environmental impact of produce ordering in Québec will have to consider the viability of winter ordering practices. Due to environmental conditions dictated by its geographical location,Québec residents have limited local options for unprocessed food during the winter. Because the climatic constraints inherent in Québec potentially conflict with any local food strategy, and because our project’s pilot will occur in the winter, our team felt it pertinent to evaluate whether or how greenhouses could fit into MFDS sustainable food purchasing strategy.

Throughout the year, MFDS orders more tomatoes than any other produce item (Oliver De Volpi, personal interview, September 2009).Moreover, outside of the province’s growing season, these tomatoes are ordered primarily from Québec-based greenhouses (specifically Savoura).We will provide an account of how greenhouse production works and the varying impacts of greenhouse tomato production.Understanding this is seminal to creating a criteria document which highlights the range of environmental and social impacts a greenhouse operation can have.This document can then be used to identify and rank operations based on best and worst practices.

All greenhouses consist of an enclosed structure, usually plastic, designed to trap more incoming solar radiation than it lets out, creating a warmer internal climate.However, the environmental impact of greenhouses can vary enormously depending on their scale, design, water usage and energy inputs (Olfosson et al. 2006).For instance, a small-scale greenhouse may use overhead irrigation, contain no artificial fertilizers and use solar heating, while maintaining average yield and high prices.Meanwhile, a large-scale greenhouse (some in Québec are as big as fifty football fields), may use natural gas as a heating source and rely on groundwater irrigation.The impact and degree of sustainability between such producers will vary, as will the associated costs and product prices (Papadopoulos 2002). Therefore, a method for evaluating the various practices and their environmental impact is needed to provide a broader picture to evaluate the most sustainable one and to be able to compare across scales. The study of greenhouse tomato production is only a start and much more research will need to be done in the future to build upon the research presented in this document and on other methods of production, such as imports, to compare best practices. These criteria need to be ever evolving and adaptive to ensure that the best practices are prioritized as new technologies and methods of production are put into practice.

Poultry Production

Chicken is the most commonly consumed protein source in McGill’s residence cafeterias (and in Canada as a whole), and as such, research into the industry is particularly compelling (Oliver De Volpi, personal interviews, September 2009; Chicken Farmers of Canada 2008). Since chicken product shows up on every menu at the independent residences at least once a day and consists of more than 85% of the meat protein served in an average month, it seemed a logical starting point to understand the meat industry supply chain. In addition, given that 80% of our current poultry orders consist of fresh products, we did not examine poultry processing industry in depth but focused our attention on fresh poultry production.

The majority of our research has concentrated on on-farm poultry production, but we have also included criteria evaluating the slaughterhouse, transformation and distribution phases of the chain. We focused on the farm level because the greatest potential for impact reduction exists there. The literature examining current poultry production points to many problems associated with trends in increasing farm size, mechanization, and density of poultry. With growing broiler houses and flock size, bird health and welfare has become a prominent concern, especially regarding feather pecking and cannibalism, access to food and water and air quality concerns. Within broiler house production, changes can be made which mitigate adverse effects on bird health. The large scale of production necessitates that new solutions and partnerships be made for litter removal to avoid eutrophication attributed to excess nitrate and phosphorus in agricultural run-off. The production methods which mitigate adverse effects on birds, humans and their surrounding environment are privileged in our criteria. In many cases, this means rewarding organic production, as regulations regarding bird health and waste treatment are more stringent than conventional production guidelines.