Finding Our Way to Food Democracy: Lessons from US Food Policy Council Governance

Karen Bassarab,Raychel Santo,Jill K Clark,Anne Palmer

doi:10.17645/pag.v7i4.2092

Karen Bassarab, Raychel Santo + Show 2 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v7i4.2092

Copy DOI

Abstract

Food policy councils (FPCs) are an embodiment of food democracy, providing a space for community members, professionals, and government to learn together, deliberate, and collectively devise place-based strategies to address complex food systems issues. These collaborative governance networks can be considered a transitional stage in the democratic process, an intermediary institution that coordinates interests not typically present in food policymaking. In practice, FPCs are complex and varied. Due to this variety, it is not entirely clear how the structure, membership, and relationship to government of an FPC influence its policy priorities. This article will examine the relationship between an FPC’s organizational structure, relationship to government, and membership and its policy priorities. Using data from a 2018 survey of FPCs in the United States by the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future paired with illustrative cases, we find that an FPC’s relationship to government and membership have more bearing on its policy priorities than the organizational structure. Further, the cases illustrate how membership is determined and deliberation occurs, highlighting the difficulty of including underrepresented voices in the process.

Highlights

Food policy councils (FPCs) are promoted as an expression of food democracy, creating a space for professionals, business, government, and community members to learn together and to galvanize collective action around policy strategies to address complex food systems issues
Using data from a 2018 survey of FPCs by the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future (CLF), we explore the relationship between the form and policy priorities of FPCs across the United States (US)
Survey responses were received from 321 FPCs, but only responses from 222 FPCs were analyzed for this article

Summary

Introduction

FPCs work at scales not dominated by powerful global institutions (Sonnino, 2013) and challenge corporate hegemony in food and agriculture (Hassanein, 2003). They tend to tackle “wicked problems” that require boundary-spanning relationships among stakeholders across sectors based on trust, interdependence, and a need for new norms and approaches (Williams, 2002). FPCs provide a forum for a diversity of stakeholders to express their values and deliberate about how to change the food system These fora reflect the unique history, political culture, and socioeconomic characteristics of a place, which is why no two FPCs are identical in form (Dahlberg, Clancy, Wilson, & O’Donnell, 1997)

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion