1

EVENT REPORT

2

SYMPOSIUM OVERVIEW: Initiated by a grant from the Real Estate Foundation of BC, a shared event hosted by community philanthropic organizations and the BC Food Systems Network was delivered March 7th, 2014. The event included a broad range of participants from grassroots food organizations, community groups, farmers, policy makers, food distributors, foundations, food businesses, regional health authorities, the BC Ministry of Health, indigenous food systems representatives, and academics. The Symposium Leadership Team included the BC Food Systems Network, Community Foundations of Canada, the Real Estate Foundation of BC, Tides Canada, the Vancouver Foundation and the Victoria Foundation. The goals for the one-day Symposium were to:  

• Provide opportunities for experiential and peer learning, while exploring how food organizations and food funders can work together towards shared goals and sense of direction;

• Identify such critical factors as interest, readiness, barriers, opportunities, priorities and resources related to working together;

• Use network strategies and systems thinking to increase engagement and impact; and

• Demonstrate leadership and innovation by building on existing efforts and assets, and using “networks of networks” to build capacity and increase impact at multiple levels;

3

4

FOOD SYSTEMS THINKING In the opening presentation, Brent Mansfield, Co-Chair of the BC Food Systems Network provided an overview of “food systems thinking”, and showed examples of systems-based approaches to engaging with food issues. Three raconteurs provided their insights into areas for strategic leverage in food systems: Linda Geggie, Board Member, BC Food Systems Network; Herb Barbolet, Associate, Centre for Sustainable Community Development, SFU; and Kevin McCort, President & CEO, Vancouver Foundation. Live graphic recording of the session was done by Aftab Erfan, wholepicturethinking.com. A PDF of the powerpoint is also available for Symposium participants.

5

MAPPING THE FOOD SYSTEM: SECTOR STRENGTHS AND SHADOWS

For collaboration to thrive across sectors, relationships and trust must be developed. In cross-sectoral tables, we explored some of the different perceptions people have about their sectors and their sector’s impact on others. We did this through a process of mapping the strength/contribution of each sector to BC’s food system, as well as some of their shadows - which can take the form of unintended consequences, sector “blind spots”, weaknesses, or areas of challenge. While some of these shadows may seem stark, what also becomes evident is how one sector’s strengths can complement another’s shadow area. In each of the shadows or stereotypes a sector may have associated with it is a grain of truth, which, if understood, can help strengthen their contribution to collaborative efforts, and illuminate new pathways for positive change.

Sector Strengths/Contributions Shadows Farming ! Producers

! Business oriented ! Food production and passion ! Knowledge keepers ! Pragmatic

! Stereotype: farming doesn’t make money ! Farmers are too busy ! Lack of access to land ! Lack of buyer education? ! Distrust of change

Farmers Markets/ Community Dev.

! More than just food ! Education and advocacy ! Farm to plate connection

! Limited capacity to capitalize on opportunities ! Saturation? ! Stereotypes

Urban Food Producer

! Often 1st intro to food ! Inspirational models ! Relationship-builders ! Connections to earth/farmers

! Not much food produced

Rural Non-profit ! Proximity geographically and relationally ! Relationships ! Responsiveness ! Impact and economic capital

! Burn out ! Rural/urban divide ! Tension between policymakers and voices of

pockets of community Community Group

! Vehicles for collective place-based culture

! Show where focus needs to go ! Foster strong relationships

! Reflect on-the-ground values

! Cause exclusive ! Undemocratic (not elected) ! Can be high-jacked ! Lack of credibility

! “folksy” not serious Indigenous Food ! Power is inherent in sector

! Knowledge and traditional knowledge ! Too radical

! Cultural Hierarchy

6

Sovereignty Network

! Wellness lens ! Resilience model

Grassroots NGO/ Community Advocate/ Activist

! Strong baseline of knowledge ! Individual and community engagement ! Food literacy ! Doers ! Collaborative, many relationships ! Building viable alternatives ! Boots on the ground ! Insights into on-the-ground change ! Translate academia into action ! Justice ! Innovation /small untapped markets ! Policy opportunity around farmland and

farming ! Advocacy for farmers ! Multi-stakeholder convening ! Trusted liason ! Flexible/nimble/quick/responsive ! Universality of food ! Community-building ! Most ‘in tune’ with city needs ! Have ‘the pulse’ of community issues ! Alliances can be applied broadly to

other related issues ! Accessible ! Independent voice ! Creative ! Articulating the utopian ideas ! Holistic and positive ! Expertise

! Divisions/factions have luxury to explore and address vs. poverty

! Forget powers that frame the work ! Contextualizing work in bigger pic. ! Too much time fundraising ! Lack of funder relationships ! Lack of buy-in from community ! Groups lacking or not on same page ! Lack of understanding of funder direction

and/or interest ! Many unknowns for whole (defined)

“community” ! Supply unknown ! Limited opp. to shift systems ! Difficult to fund “community building” ! Don’t speak to ethnic populations ! Capacity limitations ! ‘Turfdom’ or lack of time to collaborate ! Not enough rigorous data ! Not enough time for strategy ! Silos ! Dealing with city priorities ! A lot of talk/ moralistic ! Limited action/ability to take action ! Life cycle of org/funding ! Reliance on funders ! High staff turnover ! Inefficient ! Mission gets lost in institutional survival ! Not politically savvy enough ! Not engaging the right people ! Lack of traction with existing system ! Difficulty getting involved at gov. policy level ! No business language ! Food justice work not connecting to climate

change issues ! Hard to develop projects ! Protectionism ! Inherent mistrust of $ or business ! Uncomfortable with success

Food access/justice NGO

! On the ground advocating for food justice

! Local connections

! Obsessed with anti-poverty ! Poverty trumps all issues (environment) ! Inability to work largely

Food Provision NGO

! Providing food directly and consistently to vulnerable populations

! Leverage in a new way ! Long history with public support

! Food industry dumping ground ! Short term solutions ! Self-serving industry

Food Waste Reduction /Recovery/Access

! Abundance of food and real food ! High need for food ! Food recovery infrastructure has long

history

! Charity model ! Food waste (upstream & downstream) ! Food quality & nutrition? ! Access issue for local food/farmers due to

cost Cultural Engagement Org. (and Cross-Cultural Dialogues)

! Creates food support dialogue and culturally appropriate food

! Strategizing re: food security between cultures

! Multiple communities

! Time to bridge cultural groups ! Growing food from other cultures/locations

difficult ! Can be divisive ! Need to link to the context of First Peoples ! Lack of access to cultural foods ! Food preservation challenges

Public Health ! Advocacy/Influence/Legitimacy ! Funding

! Rigid financial accountability ! Food has low profile in wider health system

7

! Community experts ! Passionate people ! Local/regional food systems change:

policy/plans to address food security ! Influence with local and prov. gov’t. ! Policy influence (and spending) ! Community development ! Education &Programming ! Recognize interconnections ! Continuity over long-term/longevity ! Leadership: affect policy, big picture,

values, provide framework ! Bridge between government and

community ! Early intervention ! Experiential learning ! Solving for pattern ! Connecting schools with local food

systems ! Increasing access to fruits and

vegetables

! Need for systematic evaluation so work can be shared and valued

! Very acute/focused 97% acute care ! Lack of funding upstream ! Multi-tasking ! Reactive/‘band-aid’ solutions ! Slow uptake & bureaucracy ! Unpredictable ! Big systems not nimble ! “what is healthy” who defines? ! Bully ! Ask a lot of communities without offering

support ! Confusion in the sector ! Challenging to access in rural/remote

communities ! Illusion of evidence-based decision-making

(but research lag)

Provincial Health ! Expertise: food security core program ! Healthy eating as part of health

! Politics ! Partisan values ! Lack of lever in larger gov. politics ! Separation of ministries and silos ! Gov. (agriculture) is a commodity sector ! 9-4 workers/cushy jobs! ! Out of touch ! No research/evaluation ! Overlay of political will: short term and shifting

Government ! Standards ! Democratic values ! Networks ! Leverage points and influence/high

reach for collective action ! Innovative use of gov’t space ! Horticultural education (influence) ! ALR administrators ! Advocacy for farmers ! Opportunities to share policy ! Foster positive environment ! Broad view to ID patterns ! Creating efficiency ! Universal solutions ! Large-scale impact possible ! Passion for public safety ! Resources and information ! Continuity

! Silos/unaware ! Co-opted by business interests ! Slow uptake & bureaucracy ! Bully ! Unpredictable ! Short attention span ! Land prices and climate change (role) ! Confused definition of policy ! Lack of comprehensiveness ! “we know best” ! Not accessible to all ! Actively resistant to change ! Corporate lobbyists ! Influenced by $ behind the vote ! Artificial structures and boundaries ! Obsession with consistency ! History of over-enforcement ! Unyielding/not helpful ! Lonely ! Often avoided

Local Government

! Brings legitimacy ! Voice and vehicle for food issues ! Closer to the ground ! Openness to including food on the

agenda ! More nimble and responsive

! Lots of rules and bureaucracy blocking innovation

! Threatened by change ! Decisions - sensitive to politics ! Election cycle orientation

Academia/ Community Planning and Development

! Influence future policy-makers ! Conduct community-based research ! Perspective ! Legitimacy ! Research and measurement capacity ! Passion and knowledge ! Systems thinking

! ‘Dine and dash’ research ! Silos/elitism ! Disconnected from community or reality ! Navel gazing ! Question relevance ! System that needs to change too ! Pulled into economic/private sector support role

8

! Collaborative nature ! Spur innovation ! Credibility and rigour of ideas ! Brings together different perspectives ! Embedded/deep connection ! Creative ! Accountable

! Academic or irrelevant to day-to-day lives of people

! $ behind research questionable ! “we know best” ! Ivory tower ! Competition internally ! Can have tunnel vision

Community Development

! Supporting community agencies ! Strengthen farmers, processors, families ! Nimble ! Solution-oriented ! Hands can do stuff that is relevant ! Relationship-builder

! Elitist and for white wealthy folks ! Disorganized ! Too radical, not realistic, bleeding heart lefties ! Removing government from responsibility ! Narrow in focus and loud - excludes general

public ! ‘Poverty pimps’

Consultant ! Research (action-oriented) ! In touch ! Additional capacity ! Filling gaps ! Allies ! Specialized knowledge

! Costly ! Whose interest?

Education and Connection to Food

! Raise awareness and connections ! Preserving food skills ! Focus on local food sustainability ! Empowerment model ! Community and individual engagement ! Changing understanding of food through

literacy ! Demand from teachers for programming ! High interest/engagement from students ! Legitimacy ! Credentials for inclusion in curriculum

! Work is in silos ! Lack of common language ! Struggling for funds

NGO/Food Security Network

! Food capacity-building ! System thinking ! On the ground connections ! Experiential knowledge/grounded ! Passion ! Grassroots ! Face to the movement/Visible ! Nimble/Ability to respond ! Influence across sectors and levels ! Connections x-people and issue

! Low capacity to address systemic change ! Not focused ! Fighting for funding ! Funding-dependent ! Lots of hidden agency ! Not linked into larger system ! Disconnected from communities ! “Fluffy” ! Lacks capacity ! Financial challenges

Community Farm + Food Hub

! Community self-reliance ! Dedicated people ! Well-accepted idea in principle

! Organization structure/finance ! Change is a threat ! Capacity to implement? ! Realistic model?

Community Development/ Funder

! Money to service providers ! Community capacity and development ! Policy advocacy, training, mobilization

! Role re: procurement: Lack of environmental knowledge Don’t have relationships with corporate food Don’t understand relationships outside spheres, not systemic thinkers

Funder ! Funding, resources ! Support ! Mobilizing and stewarding capital ! Convening ! Connecting research to programs ! Vision/Big picture “bird’s eye” view ! Steer policy ! Support of innovation ! Mobilize communities ! Convener ! Brings attention ! Neutrality ! Local solutions to local issues

! Limited funds ! Lack of knowledge ! Removed from reality ! Not in tune with community ! Controlled ! Controlling/Top-down/“We know best” ! Passive ! Risk-averse for real cutting edge (but...) ! Always wants the ‘new’ or innovative ! Short-term project-based ! Funding cycles incongruent with

electoral/political change ! Need to move to collective impact but feand

9

systems block this ! Can be inaccessible/ gatekeepers ! Linear/rigid/closed approach at odds with

emergent program needs ! Data/evaluation ‘proving’ value focus ! Self-interested (elevating to sector-focus) ! Lack of transparency or comm.engagement ! Not always strategic ! Lengthy process for shifting policy ! Don’t invest in people ! Artificial structures and boundaries ! Lack of sustained funding ! Lack of coordination/collaboration ! Lack of knowledge of existing organizations

Economic Development

! Identify community assets ! Raise awareness around gaps ! Liase with various levels of gov. and biz.

! Seen as government ! Move slowly

Supply Chain/ Local Distribution

! Connect food to people ! Understanding supply chain network ! Understand challenges, inputs/outputs

in public sector/NGO environment ! Healthier communities ! Economic development/impact ! Flexibility ! Connections

! Identifying and bringing shareholders/decision-makers to walk the talk

! Need strategy and long-term visioning ! Lack of lands ! GAP/HACCP ! Perception and reality of high cost of local

food ! Infrastructure needs are challenging ! Distribution focused on industry ! Big gap between living wage and food

Business ! Driven ! Long-term programs and innovation ! Money focus ! 80% of business is small business ! Big reach for collective action (rotary) ! Economic and social collaboration ! Consumer and cultural influence

! Tight focus hard to broaden ! Strict rules re: outcomes but flexible

approaches ! Money focus ! Different values influencing policy ! Perception that all business is bad ! Need deeper understanding of market forces

(?) Small Business/ Social Enterprise

! Mission-driven business ! Potluck “food from the hood” ! Business system thinking ! Practical customer-focused ! Keeping money circulating ! Create employment ! High retention ! Reflective of community

! Are we serving low-income people? (or even middle class?)

! Is market culturally diverse enough? ! Contradiction between earning and desire for

change ! Lots of emerging competition ! Undercapitalized ! Not as agile as traditional business ! Competing not collaborating ! Better facilities needed ! Lack of resources

Community Co-op

! Model of alternative ! On the ground ! Community connections ! Shared ownership ! Volunteer base/passion

! No big picture ! Funding-dependent ! Volunteer-dependent ! Influence on community (and strength) ! Time-consuming ! Fragile ! Question sustainability?

Citizen Convenor ! Action/policy interventions ! Based on community informants

! Too scattered ! Too many demands & areas to work on

Eaters ! Many: power of the masses ! Action - decision-making ! Autonomy ! Connections ! Advocacy

! Lacking knowledge ! Disenfranchised ! Shaped by dominant paradigms ! Lack of systems thinking/connections

10

Identifying Innovation Bright Spots, Big Picture Trends, and System Changes Twelve small groups used a 3-level template to identify innovation bright spots, but also institutional openings/blockages, and macro-level influences that influence the possibility of policy change, and create or catalyze institutional openings.

Synthesis Image:

The raconteurs discussed innovation bright spots, leverage-points and patterns in the twelve images and the synthesis map. They discussed the following: ! Community ownership is a leverage point ! Linking food security and justice/equality conversations ! Need for common language and framing - balancing engagement and action words with attractive/compelling narratives (positive shock doctrine and capitalizing on crises e.g. California) ! How is it different from 20 years ago?

o Used to be individual models inspiring each other

11

o Now food activities are cross-sectoral and braoder o We need to get to (and are getting to) “flipping” the system and focusing

on institutional change mechanisms ! Growing food in hubs, infrastructure, shifting the food bank model: we need more research and partnering opportunities. ! Bees as metaphor connecting local to global issues in people’s minds: opening for engagement ! The importance of the ‘meso’ level of institutions and system: these are the key to enabling or stopping innovations

o E.g. new financial, health or legal mechanisms o Need to develop interventions for this level

! Storytelling: inclusive, cross-cultural, historical context, some alarmism OK, need champions ! Important to recognize roles in phases of changemaking: shared mobilization strategies but respecting different roles for people and organizations at different times ! Need to build capacity at all levels (micro-meso-macro) and actively link to policy openings and policy-making activities.

Open Space: Leverage Points for Collective Impact The final session of the day was Open Space, where participants offered topics. Eleven small groups met and discussed issues of shared strategic concern, and reported out on key discussion areas and their next steps.