Exploring the ecology of food choice.

Abstract

The current food system is complex and dynamic. Daily food choices have local to global impacts on the environment. A "perspectives approach" was developed to assist students in analyzing the ecology of food choice. The perspectives approach adapts cosmology, ethnography and systems analysis to assist in the critical analysis of the food system. Application of the perspectives approach has been successful in discussing current food topics such as sustainability, genetic modification of foods, fast food culture and industrialized agriculture.

Introduction

The food system determines the type of food available to consumers and may be examined from farm to kitchen table. It is a complex system involving many communities not only on the local level but also increasingly on the global level. Critically evaluating the impact of food choice is valuable because consumers are supporting a particular ecosystem each time they purchase a food. Choosing to buy food from a farmer, an ethnic grocery store, a food cooperative or a nationally owned "superstore" have different consequences and support different food systems. Current food choices include organic, processed, factory-farmed, shade-grown, sustainable, imported or subsidized, and are often confusing decisions in our society. The ability to examine the impact of daily food choices on multiple levels helps students make an association between knowledge and action.

To assist students in exploring the food system and evaluating the impact of food choices, the perspectives approach was developed. The perspective approach adapts three methods of examination: worldview recognition (cosmology), key player identification and systems analysis. These three methods are first explored individually and then combined in various ways to enable students to critically examine the system. The perspective approach is then applied in an analysis of food system issues from a community level. I will briefly describe the framework of the perspectives approach as it is used in the Ecology of Foods class and then give examples of its application in the classroom.

Framework of the Perspectives Approach

The worldview is an awareness of the cultural and/or spiritual view that each individual uses to interpret the world. (Gardner, 2002). This describes the person's relationship to other people and to the world. Worldviews may describe attitudes towards Earth's resources, the role of technology in society, mastery over nature, concepts of time, community versus individuality, spirituality, etc. It has been used to characterize technical (industrialized) and non-technical (non-industrialized) cultures (Kittler and Sucher, 2001). It also has been used to describe dominant versus minority traditions (Devall and Sessions, 1985). Thus, the worldview is the personal perspective that each individual has toward his surroundings. As an example, one Iroquois worldview concept is that in every deliberation we must consider the impact of our decisions on the next seven generations. This concept is different than the worldview that gives priority to immediate consequences for the current generation. In the class, students explore their own worldview and become familiar with differing views of the world.

Beginning the perspectives approach with an examination of worldviews helps students recognize their bias in approaching a food system issue. Within class discussion, students are encouraged to talk about their experiences and how this helped shape their worldview. Students talk of growing up in a rural versus urban setting. Students relate stories about their acclimatization, whether from another region of the United States or from another country. Differing perceptions of time are reflected in the rise of fast food restaurants and the Slow Food movement which celebrates home meal preparation and extended meal times (Petrini, 2001). Examples of national and international debates over resources such as water or genetic material help focus attention on the worldview of nature. Explorations of local to global experiences provide validity of their own experiences and worldviews as well as a flexibility to explore other views. The students also begin to challenge their assumptions about the world and the environment.

Characteristics of ethnography such as recognition of key players and their perspective in examining a food system issue are included in the perspectives approach. (Kuhnlein and Pelto, 1997). Key players are those that are involved directly or indirectly in the system. Key players are identified for each issue within the food system. The issue is then considered from the perspective of each key player. Key players are people or groups who influence or are affected by the system. It is important for the students to recognize that each issue in the system involves many groups. Identification of key players is important to understand the diversity of groups and their interdependence. Then the relationships that the key players have with each other can be explored. To be able to discuss the changes within a system objectively, we recognize each key player as having equal value and possessing wisdom necessary to the sustainability of the system.

Key players may be intentional or unintentional. For example, when examining food pantry use within a community, we would identify the following as intentional key players: the people receiving the food, the workers at the food pantry, the organizations who operate food pantries, the food manufacturers and grocery stores which donate food to the food pantries and the Department of Health and Human Services that may refer people to the food pantry. An unintentional group would be the City Planning Commission who determines the bus routes but may not have considered access to the food pantries. Successful solutions to problems within the system identify and involve all the intentional and unintentional key players.

The systems theory promotes examination of the relationship of the parts of the system to each other and to the whole (Audi, 1999). I adapt the systems theory to describe "areas of impact". These areas include agricultural, economic, ecological, health, political and social/cultural impact. Areas of impact can be examined in a number of ways. The extent and severity of impact can be explored in each area. Students may also prioritize the impact within and across the food system. Learning to explore the impact from the view of various key players encourages discussion and creative problem solving.

Application of the perspectives approach

This framework is used in the classroom to achieve the following overall objectives. First, the students would have an increased awareness of their own bias in their analysis. Second, the students challenge assumptions of key players within the food system. Third, the students examine an issue within the system in increasing complexity. Last, students are able to suggest solutions which consider the interplay of all three methods in the perspectives approach.

Various education techniques are used with the perspective approach. Techniques have been adapted from the 1-2-3-4 approach described by Steams (1994). This approach uses a four-step process: (1) lecture, (2) individual learning, (3) small group learning and (4) large group learning. Other integrated approaches include the concept of the community of truth by Palmer (1999), the jigsaw method of role-playing (Brislin, 1995) and use of knowledge maps (Danserau and Newbern, 1997).

Lectures and outside readings introduce students to the perspective approach and provide definitions, and foundation knowledge of the food system. Emphasis is placed on the multicultural, local to global community. Time is given at the beginning of each class for questions and current events. By mid-semester, students are aware of food issues in the media and regularly contribute two or three current events per week.

Case studies are used to foster increasingly complex cognitive skills while using the perspectives approach. The case studies help students identify key players and investigate the impact from their perspective. The first case study requires mapping the route of a food from field production to kitchen table, including identifying the intermediaries and the number of mile for the route (between each intermediary and the total). Mapping is a useful tool to provide clarity of complex issues and encourage cooperative learning (Danserau and Newbern, 1997). Each group presents their work to the class. Students discuss the variation in key players and the relationship between a food, key players and impact.

Students had the following insights from completing the first case study. The more local the food, the easier it is to know where the food was grown. It is increasingly more difficult to know who produced the food as the system includes more key players. In the past four years, companies have become less cooperative in giving information about the specific area where the food is produced. The distance food travels is not always related to the distance between farm and grocery store but between distribution points, processing plants, etc. Unintentional key players are involved in the food supply since food prices are not reflective of distance traveled or number of intermediaries. The remaining two case studies explore the perspective approach in greater complexity.

Alternate Friday class discussions combine the use of structured controversy and debate with role-playing (Watters, 1995/6). Topics are listed on the syllabus and discussion occurs after the students become familiar with the topic through lecture, class activities and readings. The class is divided into key player groups, usually five to six groups for a class size of 55-60 students. These groups change for each Friday discussion. Thus, the students have an opportunity to role-play from a variety of perspectives during the semester. Students gain empathy from examining an issue from the interest of a particular group and practice in a structured debate about the topic. Most discussion topics include a consumer or community group, government group, farmer and industry as well as other interests. Previous discussion topics have included organic farming, multinational corporations in the food system, beef consumption and genetic engineering. Before the first discussion, the class decides on the ground rules for discussion (i.e. no interruptions, respect, etc.) and these are maintained throughout the semester. The discussion is a role-play of the key player group. A statement is given about the current event surrounding the topic and each group must respond with a position statement regarding the event. Then, other groups respond to the position statements, which opens the class discussion. Each group has 5-7 minutes to reach a consensus on the position statement. A number of objectives are accomplished. Students learn to view the problem from another perspective, areas of impact and severity of impact differs for each key player, assumptions can be challenged, small groups foster discussion about the perspective and students reach a consensus with a position statement.

Guest speakers include local key players who encourage change in the food system. These speakers offer a personal account of the areas of impact and make the issues "come alive". Two recent guest speakers have been a local coffee roaster who has started his coffee roasting business in the area and a Community Supported Agriculture farmer who owns an organic farm in which members pay for a share in early spring and receive a box of produce each week during the harvest season. The local coffee roaster talked of the local, national and international economic, ecological, political and social impact of shade-grown, fair-trade coffee. Both speakers could address the areas of impact which were affected by their business choices.

The perspectives approach has been used in the Ecology of Foods class for four years. Students report positively about the perspective approach; that the case studies and discussions helped clarify, "put it all together" and helped "utilize" information. They found the discussion from other viewpoints valuable. The variety of small and large group activities were perceived as more meaningful learning experiences than lecture. Although the workload was perceived to be "more than other classes", they did not suggest eliminating any specific activity

There are observable results from this approach. As the semester progresses, students become more comfortable with the perspectives approach and demonstrate critical thinking skills. By mid-semester, students are able to comment insightfully on current news events. Friday discussions become livelier as students are able to analyze new problems quickly. Questions became more pointed and flaws in logic were easily discussed. By the end of the semester, students are able to design an "ideal" food system. The food system is creative, innovative and unlike the current system which they are familiar with. Impacts on key players are considered and the local community is the priority. The final exam and group project also reflects improved critical thinking as students are able to describe an unfamiliar food system in a detailed, comprehensive manner using creative, dramatic avenues.

The perspectives approach has given the students a framework to analyze a complex system such as the food system. The perspectives approach has provided a framework for students to develop critical thinking skills and examine the impact of their daily food choice. Each day consumers "vote" for a particular ecosystem with their food choice; the perspectives approach helps students make this choice consciously.

References

Audi, R. (Ed). (1999). Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Brislin T. (1995). Active learning in applied ethics instruction. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 6(3), 161-167.

Danserau D.F., & Newbern, D. (1997). Using knowledge maps to enhance teaching. In W.E. Campbell, & K. A. Smith (Eds.), New paradigms for college teaching (pp. 127-147). Edina, MN: Interaction Book.

Devall, B & Sessions, G. (1985). Deep ecology: Living as if nature mattered. Salt Lake City: Gibbs Smith. (pp. 18-22).

Gardner, G. (2002). Invoking the spirit: Religion and spirituality in the quest for a sustainable world (Worldwatch Paper 164). Washington, DC: Worldwatch Institute.

Kittler, P.G., & Sucher, K.P. (2001). Food and culture (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth-Thomson Learning.

Kuhnlein, H.V. & Pelto, G.H. (1997). Vitamin A and food: The current situation. In H.V. Kuhnlein & G.H. Pelto (Eds.), Culture, environment, and food to prevent vitamin A deficiency (pp. 3-9). Boston: International Nutrition Foundation for Developing Countries.

Palmer, P.J. (1998). The courage to teach. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Petrini, C. (Ed.). (2001). Slow food. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green.

Stearns, S.A. (1994). Steps for active learning of complex concepts. College Teaching, 42 3), 107-108.

Watters, B. (1995/6). Attacking ideas, not people: Using structured controversy in the college classroom. Teaching Excellence, 7(7), 1-4.

Jasia Chitharanjan, University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point 

Chitharanjan is an assistant professor of nutritional science in the School of Health Promotion and Human Development. Her interests include sustainable food systems, international nutrition, food security issues and problem-based learning.