|
Showing 1 - 3 of
3 matches in All Departments
Sales of locally produced foods comprise a small but growing part
of U.S. agricultural sales. USDA estimates that farm-level value of
local food sales totaled about $4.8 billion in 2008, or about 1.6%
of the U.S. market for agricultural products. An estimated total of
107,000 farms are engaged in local food systems, or about 5% of all
U.S. farms. There is no established definition of what constitutes
a "local food." Local and regional food systems generally refer to
agricultural production and marketing that occurs within a certain
geographic proximity (between farmer and consumer) or that involves
certain social or supply chain characteristics in producing food
(such as small family farms, urban gardens, or farms using
sustainable agriculture practices). Some perceive locally sourced
foods as fresher and higher in quality compared to some other
readily available foods, and also believe that purchasing local
foods helps support local farm economies and/or farmers that use
certain production practices that are perceived to be more
environmentally sustainable. A wide range of farm businesses may be
considered to be engaged in local foods. These include
direct-to-consumer marketing, farmers' markets, farm-to-school
programs, community-supported agriculture, community gardens,
school gardens, food hubs and market aggregators, and kitchen
incubators and mobile slaughter units. Other types of operations
include on-farm sales/stores, internet marketing, food cooperatives
and buying clubs, pick-your-own or "U-Pick" operations, roadside
farm stands, urban farms (and rooftop farms and gardens), community
kitchens, small scale food processing and decentralized root
cellars, and some agritourism or other types of on farm
recreational activities. The 2008 farm bill (P.L. 110-246, Food,
Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008) contained a few program
provisions that directly support local and regional food systems.
However, many existing federal programs benefiting U.S.
agricultural producers may also provide support and assistance for
local food systems. These include farm support and grant programs
administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and may
be grouped into several broad program categories: marketing and
promotion; business assistance; rural and community development;
nutrition and education; agricultural research and cooperative
extension; and farmland conservation. Examples include USDA's
farmers' market programs, rural cooperative grants, and selected
child nutrition programs, among myriad other grant and loan
programs, as well as USDA's research and cooperative extension
service. Farm bill proposals debated in the 112th Congress would
have expanded several of these programs. The 113th Congress will
likely consider reauthorization of the 2008 farm bill and may
reconsider proposals debated in the 112th Congress to address
expiring farm bill provisions, including provisions that either
directly or indirectly support local food systems. Although the
2008 farm bill contained few specific programs that directly
support local and regional food systems, many community and farm
advocacy groups have been arguing that such food systems should
play a larger policy role within the next farm bill, and that laws
should be modified to reflect broader, more equitable policies
across a range of production systems, including local food systems.
The 112th Congress introduced legislation, including several
comprehensive marker bills, which would have expanded the benefits
for local and regional food systems. These issues may continue to
be of interest in the 113th Congress.
Throughout the history of social assistance programs,
administrators have attempted to limit access only to those
families considered "worthy" of assistance. Policies about
worthiness have included both judgments about need-generally tied
to income, demographic characteristics, or family circumstances-and
judgments about moral character, often as evidenced by behavior.
Past policies evaluating moral character based on family structure
have been replaced by today's policies, which focus on criminal
activity, particularly drug-related criminal activity. The existing
crime and drug-related restrictions were established in the late
1980s through the mid-1990s, when crime rates, especially
drug-related violent crime rates, were at peak levels. While crime
rates have since declined, interest in expanding these policies has
continued. The three programs examined in this report-the Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant, the Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly Food Stamps), and
federal housing assistance programs (public housing and Section 8
tenant and project-based assistance)-are similar, in that they are
administered at the state or local level. They are different in the
forms of assistance they provide. TANF provides cash assistance and
other supports to low-income parents and their children, with a
specific focus on promoting work. SNAP provides food assistance to
a broader set of poor households including families with children,
elderly households, and persons with disabilities. The housing
assistance programs offer subsidized rental housing to all types of
poor families, like SNAP. All three programs feature some form of
drug- and other crime-related restrictions and all three leave
discretion in applying those restrictions to state and local
administrators. Both TANF and SNAP are subject to the statutory
"drug felon ban," which bars states from providing assistance to
persons convicted of a drug-related felony, but also gives states
the ability to opt-out of or modify the ban, which most states have
done. Housing assistance programs are not subject to the drug felon
ban, but they are subject to a set of policies that allow local
program administrators to deny or terminate assistance to persons
involved in drug-related or other criminal activity. Housing law
also includes mandatory restrictions related to specific crimes,
including sex offenses and methamphetamine production. All three
programs also have specific restrictions related to fugitive
felons. Recently, the issue of drug testing in federal assistance
programs has risen in prominence. In the case of TANF, states are
permitted to drug-test recipients; however, state policies
involving suspicionless drug testing of TANF applicants and
recipients are currently being challenged in courts. SNAP law does
not explicitly address drug testing, but given the way that SNAP
and TANF law interact, state TANF drug testing policies may affect
SNAP participants. The laws governing housing assistance programs
are silent on the topic of drug testing. The current set of crime-
and drug-related restrictions in federal assistance programs are
not consistent across programs, meaning that similarly situated
persons may have different experiences based on where they live and
what assistance they are seeking. This variation may be considered
important, in that it reflects a stated policy goal of local
discretion. However, the variation may also be considered
problematic if it leads to confusion among eligible recipients as
to what assistance they are eligible for or if the variation is
seen as inequitable. Proposals to modify these policies also
highlight a tension that exists between the desire to use these
policies as a deterrent or punishment and the desire to support the
neediest families, including those that have ex-offenders in the
household.
|
You may like...
Loot
Nadine Gordimer
Paperback
(2)
R398
R330
Discovery Miles 3 300
|