330 likes | 450 Views
E N D
1. Seattle Food System Enhancement ProjectProgram on the EnvironmentCertificate in Environmental ManagementKeystone Project
2. Community Partner City of Seattle
Food Policy Interdepartmental Team (IDT)
Department of Neighborhoods
Planning and Development
Human Services
Office of Sustainability and the Environment
Seattle Public Utilities
Seattle King County Public Health
4. Neighborhood Food System Assessment
5. What is a Food System? The food system includes all processes
involved in keeping us fed:
Production
Processing
Distribution
Access/Consumption
Disposal/Recycling
6. USDACFA Components
1. Profile of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics
2. Profile of food resources
7. USDACFA Components
1. Profile of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics
2. Profile of food resources
3. Assessment of household food security
4. Assessment of food resource accessibility
Assessment of food availability and affordability
Assessment of food production resources
The first two components involve gathering secondary dataThe first two components involve gathering secondary data
8. USDACFA Components
1. Profile of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics
2. Profile of food resources
3. Assessment of household food security
4. Assessment of food resource accessibility
Assessment of food availability and affordability
Assessment of food production resources
The last four are a proxy for community doing its own assessment of food resources - Participant Action ResearchThe last four are a proxy for community doing its own assessment of food resources - Participant Action Research
9. NeighborhoodSelection In multiple conversations with the IDT, we decided two underserved neighborhoods would be most useful to them. The City has already defined community reporting areas based on census tracts. In multiple conversations with the IDT, we decided two underserved neighborhoods would be most useful to them. The City has already defined community reporting areas based on census tracts.
10. NeighborhoodSelection In multiple conversations with the IDT, we decided two underserved neighborhoods would be most useful to them. The City has already defined community reporting areas based on census tracts. In multiple conversations with the IDT, we decided two underserved neighborhoods would be most useful to them. The City has already defined community reporting areas based on census tracts.
11. Neighborhood Food System Assessment:Findings and Recommendations
12. Findings Socioeconomic and Demographic Characteristics All these indicators are highly associated with food security.
All these indicators are highly associated with food security.
13. Findings Socioeconomic and Demographic Characteristics All these indicators are highly associated with food security.
All these indicators are highly associated with food security.
14. Findings Socioeconomic and Demographic Characteristics All these indicators are highly associated with food security.All these indicators are highly associated with food security.
15. Findings Socioeconomic and Demographic Characteristics All these indicators are highly associated with food security.All these indicators are highly associated with food security.
16. Findings Neighborhood Food Resources
17. FindingsFood Focus Groups
18. FindingsFood Focus Groups
19. FindingsFood Focus Groups
20. FindingsFood Focus Groups
21. Recommendations
Increase availability of food locations
Improve access to locally produced food
Support education programs around food and nutrition
Bring awareness to residents
22. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study Thank you Heidi. I’m going to talk about the Greenhouse Gas study and how we looked at the impact of bringing food into the city.Thank you Heidi. I’m going to talk about the Greenhouse Gas study and how we looked at the impact of bringing food into the city.
23. Project Goals
Quantify connection between GHG emissions and Seattle’s food system
Identify opportunities to lower GHG emissions
…via a Life Cycle Analysis The reason for carrying out this study is to quantify the greenhouse gas (GHG) impact of specific food items that are typical of the Northwest. It is often asserted that buying locally produced food must create fewer GHG emissions, but few studies have been done in the United States to directly quantify this relationship. This study is specific to Seattle and allows us to quantify the relationship between greenhouse gas emissions and the food system here and identify opportunities to lower emissions
To do this we are going to use a tool called a Life Cycle Analysis. A Life Cycle Analysis Internationally standardized method of studying the environmental impacts throughout a product’s life, taking a cradle-to-grave approach. The reason for carrying out this study is to quantify the greenhouse gas (GHG) impact of specific food items that are typical of the Northwest. It is often asserted that buying locally produced food must create fewer GHG emissions, but few studies have been done in the United States to directly quantify this relationship. This study is specific to Seattle and allows us to quantify the relationship between greenhouse gas emissions and the food system here and identify opportunities to lower emissions
To do this we are going to use a tool called a Life Cycle Analysis. A Life Cycle Analysis Internationally standardized method of studying the environmental impacts throughout a product’s life, taking a cradle-to-grave approach.
24. Comparing local and imported food
Apple, Asparagus, Potato, Salmon
Two plates: Washington State vs. Imported
Cultivate, harvest and deliver food to Seattle To accomplish this, we are going to compare the greenhouse gas impact of locally produced and imported food. We will compare two plates of food made up of items that are easily available in Washington: an apple, asparagus, potato, and salmon. One of these plates will be made up of items that are grown in Washington State, and the other plate will be all imported items: the apple is from New Zealand, the asparagus is from Peru, the potato is from Idaho, and the salmon is Norwegian farmed salmon.
The scope of this study is to examine all of the impacts from cultivating and harvesting the food (so looking at all of the fertilizers, herbicides, etc applied and all of the fuel used to run farm equipment, like diesel fuel in a tractor) and then transport the food to Seattle to the point-of-sale. There are a few things that are not within the scope of this study and these are things like making the buildings to store and package the food, or building the roads for trucks to travel on. To accomplish this, we are going to compare the greenhouse gas impact of locally produced and imported food. We will compare two plates of food made up of items that are easily available in Washington: an apple, asparagus, potato, and salmon. One of these plates will be made up of items that are grown in Washington State, and the other plate will be all imported items: the apple is from New Zealand, the asparagus is from Peru, the potato is from Idaho, and the salmon is Norwegian farmed salmon.
The scope of this study is to examine all of the impacts from cultivating and harvesting the food (so looking at all of the fertilizers, herbicides, etc applied and all of the fuel used to run farm equipment, like diesel fuel in a tractor) and then transport the food to Seattle to the point-of-sale. There are a few things that are not within the scope of this study and these are things like making the buildings to store and package the food, or building the roads for trucks to travel on.
25. Findings 1. Local plate of food emits 33% less GHGs
2. Fuel use at the farm/boat is the biggest source
3. Salmon dominates the emissions for each plate
4. Each food item tells a slightly different story The main findings from this study are listed below. The first is that the local plate emits about 1/3 as many greenhouse gases as does the imported plate, so locally produced food does have less of a greenhouse gas impact. The second is that the largest source of emissions of these plates is from burning fuel at the farm or on the boat. This comes from burning fuel to run the tractors and the boats. Third, for each plate, the salmon represents over 90% of the total emissions, so it is by far the dominant source of emissions. So, as number four says, it’s important to examine each of the four items because they each tell a different story.
The main findings from this study are listed below. The first is that the local plate emits about 1/3 as many greenhouse gases as does the imported plate, so locally produced food does have less of a greenhouse gas impact. The second is that the largest source of emissions of these plates is from burning fuel at the farm or on the boat. This comes from burning fuel to run the tractors and the boats. Third, for each plate, the salmon represents over 90% of the total emissions, so it is by far the dominant source of emissions. So, as number four says, it’s important to examine each of the four items because they each tell a different story.
26. Findings:1. Local plate of food emits 33% less GHGs Let’s look at these findings in a little more detail. First, the local plate emits about 2100 grams of carbon dioxide equivalents and the imported plate emits about 3100 grams of carbon dioxide equivalents. For a comparison, burning one gallon of gasoline in a passenger car emits just over 9,000 grams of carbon dioxide equivalents, so we can say that the local plate emits about as many greenhouse gases as burning a quarter of a gallon of gas, and the imported plate is like burning a third of a gallon of gas. So, the environmental impact of these plates is equivalent to driving a passenger car a few miles.Let’s look at these findings in a little more detail. First, the local plate emits about 2100 grams of carbon dioxide equivalents and the imported plate emits about 3100 grams of carbon dioxide equivalents. For a comparison, burning one gallon of gasoline in a passenger car emits just over 9,000 grams of carbon dioxide equivalents, so we can say that the local plate emits about as many greenhouse gases as burning a quarter of a gallon of gas, and the imported plate is like burning a third of a gallon of gas. So, the environmental impact of these plates is equivalent to driving a passenger car a few miles.
27. Findings:2. Fuel use at the farm/boat is the biggest source If we look at the sources of emissions for these plates, we can see that producing the chemicals like the fertilizers and herbicides is a very small amount of the total emissions, and the fuel used to transport the food to Seattle is a little bit larger. The largest source of the emissions from these plates is clearly burning fuel in the tractors at the farm and on the fishing boats.If we look at the sources of emissions for these plates, we can see that producing the chemicals like the fertilizers and herbicides is a very small amount of the total emissions, and the fuel used to transport the food to Seattle is a little bit larger. The largest source of the emissions from these plates is clearly burning fuel in the tractors at the farm and on the fishing boats.
28. Findings:3. Salmon dominates the emissions for each plate However, it’s important to note that the salmon fishing is the dominant source of all of the emissions for the plate. The fruits and vegetables all emit less than 50 grams of carbon dioxide equivalents, but the salmon are emitting 2 to 3 thousand grams. So, it is important for us to take a closer look at the emissions.
However, it’s important to note that the salmon fishing is the dominant source of all of the emissions for the plate. The fruits and vegetables all emit less than 50 grams of carbon dioxide equivalents, but the salmon are emitting 2 to 3 thousand grams. So, it is important for us to take a closer look at the emissions.
29. Findings:4. Each food item tells a slightly different story
30. Recommendations 1. Promote local food
2. Educate about the environmental benefits of local food
3. Examine how people get their food
31. Acknowledgements Special thanks to:
Faculty Mentor: Branden Born, PhD, Urban Design and Planning
City of Seattle: Laura Raymond, Department of Neighborhoods
Food Policy IDT Members
Pam Emerson, Office of Sustainability and the Environment
Community Partners: Joyce Cooper, University of Washington
Horizon House, First Hill
Neighborhood House, First Hill and New Holly
Co Lam Pagoda, South Beacon Hill
First Hill Improvement Association
Yesler Terrace Community Council
South Beacon Hill Community Council
Tammy Morales, Seattle Food Policy Council
Graciela Gonzales, El Centro de la Raza
32. Questions
33. Focus GroupMethodology
Thematic Coding: A methodology for transforming qualitative information by way of thematic analysis and code development.
Codes Defined:
Availability
Quality
Affordability
Access
Food Security
Other
34. What is a CommunityFood Assessment? An approach to assessing community food security…