balancing food safety and sustainability - bianchi
TRANSCRIPT
Balancing Food Safety and Sustainability
Co-management for Conservation and Production Goals in Fresh Produce Systems
Mary Bianchi, University of California Cooperative ExtensionDr. Karen Lowell, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
Adaptive Management of Agricultural, Conservation, and Food Safety Practices
1) Stakeholder participation2) Define the problem(s), set objective(s)3) Acknowledge assumptions and predictions4) Identify uncertainty based on experience5) Implement practices while learning6) Monitor impacts7) Formal, shared learning and revisions8) Repeat Steps 1 - 7
Rist, et al. 2013
An approach to minimize microbiological hazards associated with food production while simultaneously conserving soil, water, air, wildlife, and other natural resources.
Leafy Green Handlers Marketing agreement 2013
“Co-management”
The Fundamental Question
“Do we know enough about the dynamic processes (uncertainty)
to manipulate them (controllability) without messing them up (risk)?”
Craig and Ruhl, 2014
Stakeholders – Growers and their food safety professionals, Buyers and their auditors, Third Party Certifiers and their auditors; Conservation professionals, Food safety and water quality regulators; Consumers, Lawyers
Diagram from Irene Stumpf, Willamette NF
Pressures:Water Quality RegulationsFood Safety Modernization ActMarketing agreementsPrivate contracts with buyersStrict Liability
Food-borne illness
UC ANR Co-management efforts
• Online outreach and extension materials that – demonstrate robust and informed conversations among stakeholders, – increase knowledge of conservation practices within and adjacent to
fresh produce production– Examine implications of practices for food safety.
• Paired with a practices tool about co-management decisions in the field– benefits and hazards of conservation practices in addressing
conservation and food safety goals. – Producer defined or research-based strategies for co-management in
the production environment.
Practices in production fields
IrrigationCover CropsSoil Amendments
Practices adjacent to the production field
Vegetated PracticesSediment BasinsConstructed wetlandsWindbreaks/HedgerowsWildlife Habitat
Natural Area/Vegetative Buffer/Riparian Buffer
Industrial AreaResidential Area
Farming Area
http://class.ucanr.edu/
Title
Hoar, et al, 2013. California Agriculture
“Our results indicate that sheep grazing on alfalfa in the Imperial Valley have a low prevalence of these pathogens in their feces and that these bacteria are rarely found in soil from fields with grazing sheep.
The California Leafy Green Products Handler Marketing Agreement guideline of 30 feet between grazing lands or domestic animals and the crop edge is adequate to minimize potential contamination of nearby crops.”
“Animals of Significant Risk”as an example of formal learning
• Risk of Contamination– Initial focus on specific wildlife species “of
significant risk”– Cattle, sheep, goats, pigs (domestic and wild) and deer– Decision based on predicting likelihood of pathogen contaminated
feces
– Current focus on contamination events– Evidence of fecal contamination, feeding damage, animal
intrusion into produce fields– Decision based on evidence of intrusion or presence of feces
Why land-grant universities matterUncertainty, controllability, risk
• Research community– create an open and integrated
approach to interpretation and implementation of research results surrounding contamination, transport and survival of pathogens in the production environment.
• Agricultural, food safety and conservation scientists– keep pace with co-management
questions supporting food safety and the environment.
