Healthy soil and sustainable growing

["Tradingpost" <tradingpost@lobo.net>]

(To change your settings or unsubscribe please go to
http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/globalnetnews-summary)


Local Foods; Local Economies
John Ikerd, Professor Emeritus, University of Missouri
http://www.townandcountryrcd.org/documents/GG%20Ikerd%20Local%20Food-Local%20Economy.pdf

     (Prepared for presentation at “Going Green – Sustainable Communities and 
Farms,” Wisconsin State Conference of Resource Conservation and Development 
districts, Oconomowoc, WI, September 11-12, 2008.  John Ikerd is Professor 
Emeritus, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO – USA; Author of, Sustainable 
Capitalism, http://www.kpbooks.com , A Return to Common Sense, 
http://www.rtedwards.com/books/171/, Small Farms are Real Farms, Acres USA , 
http://www.acresusa.com/other/contact.htm,and Crisis and Opportunity: 
Sustainability in American Agriculture, University of Nebraska Press 
http://nebraskapress.unl.edu; Email: JEIkerd@centurytel.net; Website: 
http://web.missouri.edu/~ikerdj/. 2 )

Local has replaced organic as the most dynamic sector of the retail food 
market. Sales of local foods grew from $4 billion in 2002 to $5 billion in 
2007 and are projected to reach $11 billion by 2011.1 Organic food sales are 
still far larger, approaching $20 billion, but the rate of growth in organic 
foods sales seem to be slowing while sales of local foods are accelerating. 
For many people, local has become the new organic. In fact, the word 
“locavore” was chosen by the New Oxford American Dictionary as their 2007 
“word of the year.” The term was first associated with the “100-mile diet,” 
but is described more generally as someone who shows a strong preference for 
foods that are locally grown, seasonally available, and produced without 
unnecessary additives or preservatives.2

The local food movement is about far more than a search for freshness and 
flavor. The Chefs Collaborative, a network of more than 1,000 American chefs, 
promotes the “joys of local, seasonal, and artisanal cooking,” proclaiming 
that “cultural and biological diversity are essential for the health of the 
earth and its inhabitants. Preserving and revitalizing sustainable food, 
fishing, and agricultural traditions strengthen that diversity.”3 These same 
cultural and ethical values are reflected in the Slow Food movement, a 
worldwide organization with more than 80,000 members, that is committed to 
“building food communities.” Their website states, “We believe that the food 
we eat should taste good; that it should be produced in a clean way that does 
not harm the environment, animal welfare or our health; that food producers 
should receive fair compensation for their work, and that all people should 
have access to good and clean food.”4 Good, clean, and fair are becoming the 
watchwords of the local foods movement. The growing popularity of local foods 
is but the latest phase in a long-term trend that is fundamentally 
transforming the American food system. The organic and local food movements 
are simply continuations of the natural foods movement begun with the “back 
to the earth” movement of the 1960s. The “hippies” of the ‘60s produced their 
own food, started local farmers markets, and formed the first cooperative 
food buying clubs and natural food stores. They grew their foods organically 
because they were concerned about the health and environmental risks 
associated with the synthetic fertilizers and pesticides used by industrial 
agriculture. However, a deeper philosophy of organic farming was embodied in 
their communities – in their organic way of life. The natural food movement 
spread far beyond the “hippie” communities during the 1970s and 1980s, as 
more people became aware of potential health, environmental, and social 
problems associated with industrial foods.

Prepared for presentation at “Going Green – Sustainable Communities and 
Farms,” Wisconsin State Conference of Resource Conservation and Development 
districts, Oconomowoc, WI, September 11-12, 2008.  John Ikerd is Professor 
Emeritus, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO – USA; Author of, Sustainable 
Capitalism, http://www.kpbooks.com , A Return to Common Sense, 
http://www.rtedwards.com/books/171/, Small Farms are Real Farms, Acres USA , 
http://www.acresusa.com/other/contact.htm,and Crisis and Opportunity: 
Sustainability in American Agriculture, University of Nebraska Press 
http://nebraskapress.unl.edu; Email: JEIkerd@centurytel.net; Website: 
http://web.missouri.edu/~ikerdj/. 2

The natural food movement laid the foundation for the booming organic food 
market of the 1990s, during which organic food sales doubled every three to 
four years. Organic certification gave official sanction and definition to 
what had been called natural foods. Most of the early growth in organic foods 
was for vegetables, fruits, grains, and soy products, reflecting continuing 
environmental and health concerns linked to use of agricultural chemicals. 
Animal products, led by organic milk, began to break into organic markets in 
the late 1980s. Widespread use of antibiotics and growth hormones in 
industrial livestock operations were the major concerns for consumers of 
meat, milk, and cheese. The inhumane treatment of animals in large-scale 
confinement animal feeding operations (CAFOs) helped fuel demand for free 
range, pasture based, and naturally raised meat and dairy products. Concerns 
for the exploitation of family farmers and those who work in the food 
industry also grew as agricultural operations became larger and more 
geographically concentrated.

Several recent books have documented a growing list of important ecological, 
social, and economic concerns that are driving the organic and local food 
movements. Best-selling books, particularly Fast Food Nation5 and Omnivore’s 
Dilemma,6 have awakened mainstream society to the dramatic changes in the 
ways their foods have been produced, processed, distributed, and marketed 
over the past few decades. These books vividly portray a food system that has 
not only compromised food quality and safety but also has helped homogenize 
the landscape, widen the chasm between rich and poor, fueled an epidemic of 
obesity, and promoted American cultural imperialism around the world. These 
best-sellers sparked the interests of other investigative authors, resulting 
in books such as The End of Food7 and America’s Food8 which covers virtually 
all aspects of today’s food system. These books are filled with statistics 
and facts and are extensively referenced and they all tell the same basic 
story. The natural-organic-local food movement is about a demand for 
fundamental change in the American food system. As we look to the future, 
still greater challenges confront the current food system. Declining 
availability of fossil energy, mounting evidence of global climate change, 
and growing social and economic inequity are raising additional concerns. The 
concept of “peak oil” refers to the fact that once a new oil field is 
discovered, it takes about 30 to 40 years to bring it into peak production.9 
At that point, about half of the total quantity of recoverable oil remains in 
the ground, but that remaining half is more difficult and costly to retrieve. 
Equally important, production inevitably declines after peak production has 
been reached. U.S. oil discoveries peaked in the late 1930s and 1940s, with 
major discoveries in Oklahoma and Texas. U.S. oil production peaked in 1971 
and has been declining ever since. The peak in global oil discoveries 
occurred in 1962, indicating a peak in global production sometime in the 
early 2000s, with estimates ranging from 2005 to 2025. Even the major oil 
companies, such as BP, Exxon-Mobil, and Chevron-Texaco, have begun to focus 
on alternative energy sources for their future.

Kelly Cain of the University of Wisconsin-River Falls refers to “peak oil” 
and global climate change as the “evil twins.” The buildup of carbon dioxide 
and other greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere is a direct consequence of the 
release of stored energy from fossil fuels. Fossil  energy is stored in the 
bonds that connect molecules of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and other elements 
from the air with nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium and other  
elements from the soil in forming the tissues of living organisms. When the 
energy is released, these bonds are  broken and the various chemical 
elements, including carbon dioxide and other greenhouse 3 gasses, are 
released into the environment. This problem is intrinsic for all fossil 
energy sources and particularly for coal. We cannot replace declining 
supplies of petroleum by relying on any other fossil energy sources without 
exacerbating the risks of global climate change. There may not yet be a 
scientific consensus regarding peak oil and global climate change but the 
predominance of scientific evidence clearly validates the legitimacy of 
growing public concerns. Growing economic and social inequities have received 
less public attention but are no lesser threats to the long run 
sustainability of society. The disparity in incomes between the wealthy and 
the rest of us in the United States has reached unprecedented levels. The 
poorest one-half of Americans currently lives on only one-eighth of total 
U.S. income while the top one percent takes in more than one-fifth. In the 
words of Alan Greenspan, former Federal Reserve Chairman, “The income gap 
between the rich and the rest of the U.S. population has become so wide, and 
is growing so fast, that it might eventually threaten the stability of 
democratic capitalism itself.”10 A similarly growing gap between the rich and 
poor nations of the world is an even greater threat to global stability and 
sustainability.

Our current food system is a major contributor to all these problems. For 
example, today’s industrial food system accounts for about 17% of all fossil 
energy used in the United States and requires more than 10 kcals of fossil 
energy for each kcal of food energy it produces.11 U.S. agriculture accounts 
for an estimated 22.5% of all greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S., with 
livestock production contributing more than 80% of that total.12 With respect 
to income disparity, farm laborers and food industry workers are among the 
lowest paid workers in the U.S. and most receive few if any additional 
benefits, leaving many without health care. In addition, the poor suffer from 
more diet related illnesses, including obesity, diabetes, and heart disease – 
obvious reflections of a nation that is simultaneously overfed and 
undernourished. Recent scientific studies documenting the nutrient deficiency 
of industrial foods may provide a logical explanation for this apparent 
paradox.13

Ultimately the issues of food quality, peak oil, global warming, and economic 
inequity are all issues of food security. No individual, community, or nation 
that depends solely on the economic marketplace for their basic food needs 
can ever be food secure. The markets will produce foods that are most 
profitable, not necessarily foods that are the safest or highest in quality. 
In addition, the markets cannot and will not ensure long run food security, 
because economic value in individualistic in nature, and thus places a large 
premium on the present relative to the future. Economic value must be 
expected to accrue at least during the lifetime of the individual decision 
maker, and the closer in time, the higher in value. Those of future 
generations cannot express their food needs and preferences in today’s 
marketplace. The local food movement today is being driven by growing 
concerns about the inherent lack of sustainability of the industrial food 
system – its inability to meet the real food needs of the present without 
compromising the food opportunities for those of the future. These concerns 
are logical and well-grounded in reason. The fundamental question confronting 
society today is whether an alternative food system can be developed that 
will address these ecological and social concerns. The answer is a 
resounding, yes! Thousands of farmers all across America and around the world 
are already showing the way. They may label themselves organic, biodynamic, 
ecological, natural, holistic, practical, innovative, or nothing at all; but 
they are all pursuing the same basic purpose. They 4 are creating an 
agriculture that is capable of meeting the real needs of the present while 
leaving equal or better opportunities for the future. They are creating a 
sustainable agriculture.

A number of studies have indicated that farmers pursuing various organic and 
sustainable farming strategies are able to reduce their fossil energy use by 
30% to 60%.14,15 A shift from industrial to organic farming – restoring the 
organic matter to levels needed for healthy, productive organic soils – could 
more than offset the current net emissions of CO2 by U.S. agriculture, 
according to a recent study by the Rodale Institute.16 When beef animals are 
finished on pastures rather than finished in feed lots, kcal of protein can 
be produced using less than onethird as much fossil energy.17 Furthermore, 
CO2 emissions from beef production could be cut by 80% by shifting from 
grain-fed to grass-fed beef, on pastures rather than CAFOs, according to 
Animal science professor, David Tisch.18 Grass-fed and pasture-based 
production of meat, milk, and eggs are some of the most common and most 
profitable examples of sustainable agriculture.

Farmers are proving that organic, local and other approaches to sustainable 
agriculture can produce high-quality food while addressing the ecological 
challenges of the twenty-first century. Questions of social and economic 
equity and opportunity are at the very heart of sustainable agriculture. In 
sustainable agriculture, the farmer does the thinking and the farmer has the  
opportunity to reap the economic rewards. Industrial agriculture, on the 
other hand, transforms farms into factories, fields and feed lots in 
biological assembly lines, and farmers into little more than low-skilled, 
low-paid assembly line workers. With industrial agriculture, particularly 
contract agriculture, someone other than the farmer does most of the 
thinking. Someone other than the farmer developed the seeds, fertilizers and 
pesticides for industrial farming and developed the breeds, feeds, and 
confinement facilities of industrial animal agriculture. In many cases, 
someone other than the farmer make the important decisions concerning 
planting, harvesting, breeding, feeding, medicating, and marketing. As a 
result, someone other than the farmer quite logically reaps the economic 
rewards.

Sustainable farmers work with nature, rather than attempt to conquer nature. 
They fit the farm to their land and climate rather than try to force nature 
to fit the way they might prefer to farm. Their farming operations tend to be 
more diverse and complex because nature is diverse and complex. Diversity may 
be expressed through a variety of crop and animal enterprises, crop rotations 
and cover crops, or in multi-species livestock grazing systems. By managing 
diversity, farmers are able to reduce their dependence on the pesticides, 
fertilizers, and other commercial inputs that threaten the environment and 
squeeze farmers’ profits. Working with nature requires knowledge and 
understanding of nature – it requires thinking – but it yields both 
ecological and economic rewards.

Sustainable farmers build relationships rather than exploit short run market 
opportunities. They have a sense of personal connectedness with their 
customers and realize that each person values things differently because each 
has different needs and preferences. They must have a deep sense of respect 
for people and an understanding of the needs and preferences of their 
particular customers in order to produce the things that their customers 
value most. They market to likeminded people who care where their food comes 
from and how it is produced – locally grown, organic, natural, humanely 
raised, hormone and antibiotic free – and, they receive 5 premium prices for 
their products. Relationship marketing requires a knowledge and understanding 
of people – it requires thinking – but it yields both social and economic 
rewards. Sustainable agriculture is a knowledge-based approach to management. 
Peter Drucker, a time-honored consultant to twentieth-century industry, 
writes of a post-industrial, knowledgebased society in his book, 
Post-Capitalist Society. "In the knowledge society into which we are moving, 
individuals are central,’ he writes. “Knowledge is not impersonal, like 
money. Knowledge does not reside in a book, a databank, a software program; 
they contain only information. Knowledge is always embodied in a person, 
carried by a person; created, augmented, or improved by a person; applied by 
a person; taught by a person, and passed on by a person. The shift to the 
knowledge society therefore puts the person in the center."19 Industrial 
agriculture is centered on capital and technology; sustainable agriculture is 
centered on people. Industrial agriculture is of the past; sustainable 
farming is the future.

Sustainable agriculture and local foods are typically associated with farmers 
markets and community supported agricultural organizations or CSAs. USDA 
statistics indicate the number of farmers markets in the United States has 
increased from 1,755 to 4,385 between 1994 and 2006, increasing two and a 
half times in just over a decade. Current unofficial estimates of numbers of 
CSAs range from 1500 to 2000 nationwide compared with less than 100 in 1990. 
However, the local foods movement is probably most accurately defined by a 
growing commitment of discriminating restaurants and natural food stores to 
sourcing as much food as possible from local growers.

One of the pioneers in developing this new “higher-volume” local food system 
is New Seasons Market in Portland, Oregon, which currently operates nine 
stores and has plans to open two more in 2009.20 New Seasons’ stores look 
pretty much like other modern supermarkets, with delis, bakeries, and other 
amenities American food shoppers have come to expect. Their stores are 
typically located in areas bordering lower and higher income neighborhoods, 
drawing their loyal customers from both, and helping to strengthen both 
communities. They offer both organic and conventional foods in their store 
and virtually every item in the store is labeled with respect to not just the 
country but the “farm of origin.” They promote local-grown products and have  
long-term commitments with hundreds of local and regional farmers which 
ensure that everyone shares in their success.

Another local foods pioneer is Good Natured Family Farms, a cooperative of 
thirty-plus farmers in southeastern Kansas and southwestern Missouri.21 They 
have teamed up with Hen House Markets, a 13-store supermarket chain operated 
by Ball Foods Inc., a family corporation with a long history and strong 
commitment to the Kansas City community. The cooperative owns and manages 
their own Good Natured brand, which now includes an expanding line of branded 
food products, including beef, chicken, eggs, milk, and sausages. The 
cooperative also serves as marketing liaison for other local producers. The 
Good Natured-Hen House “Buy Fresh, Buy Local” campaign has grown in retail 
sales of local products by 35% per year over the past several years, with 
sales topping $10 million in 2007. Some of their local products are organic, 
but customers rely most on the integrity of local producers. 6

However, the model for the sustainable, local food system of the future may 
resemble more closely organizations that are called multi-farm CSAs or local 
food buying clubs, depending on whether farmers or consumers take the 
organizational initiative. Grown Locally,22 Idaho’s Bounty,23 and the 
Oklahoma Food Cooperative,24 provide some insights into the future potential 
for sustainable, local food systems. Most such organizations offer a variety 
of vegetables, fruits, meats, eggs, cheese, baked goods, flowers, soaps, and 
herbs. Many items are available as CSA shares, standing orders, or for 
week-by-week purchases. Customers may have the option of onfarm pick-up, 
local delivery points, or delivery to the door for an added charge. Different 
products and different delivery schedules are provided for different seasons. 
Organizational websites allow producers to post what they have available each 
week, ensuring that products sold are available for delivery, and allowing 
customers to place or revise their orders on the website. In the not too 
distant future, virtually everyone in the United States will have access to 
the internet. Community-based food associations could establish local 
assembly and distribution systems to pick up products at local farms and 
assemble customer orders. Existing retail delivery system networks, such as 
UPS and Fed-Ex, are already making deliveries into most neighborhoods on a 
daily basis and will become even more frequent as internet sales for all 
products increase in the future. A local food association could help 
establish and maintain personal connections between farmers and their 
customers through local food events, scheduled farm visits, and “dinners at 
the farm.”25 Healthy farms, healthy foods, healthy communities. The local 
food movement is just one aspect of a far larger economic relocalization 
movement. As in the case of food, the movement is being driven by growing 
concerns about the ecological and social sustainability of the increasingly 
global economy. Economic relocalization is not being driven solely, or even 
primarily, by high and rising transportation costs. In general, 
transportation makes up a relatively small percentage of the total costs of 
producing and  distributing most consumer products. The concentration of 
economic activities in large urban centers is a reflection of the need to 
bring together large amounts of resources to accommodate large, industrial 
organizations. The economic efficiency of such organizations is inherently 
dependent of cheap fossil energy, as was the whole industrial era. 
Relocalization is essentially
deindustrialization.

Contrary to popular belief, large cities are not energy efficient; they are 
just more efficient than the “sprawl” that typically surrounds them. Mass 
transit among smaller population clusters could be much more energy efficient 
that individual travel into large urban centers. Smaller, geographically 
dispersed communities, with their own scale-appropriate sources of employment 
and employees, have the potential for reducing the use of fossil energy and 
the associated emissions of greenhouse gases. Relocalization is driven 
primarily by concerns about the negative environmental and social 
consequences of the large-scale, industrial operations associated with the 
geographic concentration of production.

Local economies can be more environmentally sound because the concentration 
of too much production in one place, whether industrial or agricultural, 
invariably results in concentration of more wastes that natural ecosystems 
can assimilate. The inevitable result is pollution of the air, water, and/or 
soil. There is some truth to the statement, “the solution to pollution is 
dilution,” but even more truth in, “the preventer of pollution is 
dispersion.” The more localized the production, 7 the more dispersed the 
production and the greater the ability of nature to assimilate the waste and 
mitigate the pollution.

Local economies can provide greater economic security. A community that 
relies on outside investment for local employment security can never be 
economically secure. Outside investors will relocate their business 
operations anytime they see an opportunity to earn a greater economic return 
elsewhere. The recent “offshoring” of millions of jobs has disseminated the 
economies of hundreds of American communities. As in the case of food, a 
community need not be economically self-sufficient, but the greater their 
reliance on outside capital and technology, the less able the community will 
be to cope with economic adversity – the less secure. A number of specific 
programs are available to assist communities in localizing their economies. 
The Natural Step is a nonprofit organization founded in 1989 by Swedish 
scientist, Karl-Henrik Robèrt.26 The Natural Step seeks to minimize the 
accumulation of wastes from both naturally occurring and manufactured 
substances while maintaining the productivity of natural ecosystems and 
sustaining a healthy, productive local society. A number of 
eco-municipalities across Canada and the United States are working to develop 
“ecologically, economically, and socially healthy communities for the long 
term.”

The Business Alliance for Local Living Economies is an international alliance 
of more than 50 independently operated local business networks dedicated to 
building local living economies.27 A living economy is defined as one in 
which economic power resides locally, for the purpose of sustaining healthy 
community life and natural life as well as long-term economic viability. 
There is no shortage of programs to guide development of sustainable local 
economies. The challenge is to convince people of the advantage and necessity 
of investing their time, energy, and money locally.

Perhaps the most important motivation for creating local food systems and 
local economies is the need to reconnect locally. The industrial era, with 
its emphasis on specialization, standardization, and consolidation of 
control, has been driven by the pursuit of individual material 
self-interests. This competitive quest for financial independence has 
weakened our sense of connectedness to each other and to the earth. Humans 
are no less dependent on each other and on the earth than when we were 
hunters and gatherers; the connections are just more complex and less direct. 
However, we have lost our sense of commitment to the “common good” and to the 
“good of the commons.” Local food systems reconnect consumers with farmers, 
and through farmers, with the earth. Local economies do much the same thing 
by creating a common commitment to the long run economic wellbeing of the 
community, which depends on local people and local natural resources. 
Economic localization empowers people to express their social and ethical 
values by considering the ecological and social consequences of their 
economic decisions.

Some people question whether local food systems can ever replace the 
industrial food system of today. Fifty years ago, however, most food in 
America was locally grown. Construction on the interstate highway system had 
just begun and supermarkets and franchise restaurants were just beginning to 
catch on. In an ever-changing world, it seems logical to assume that changes 
in the food system over the next fifty years will be at least as great as in 
the past fifty years. With 8 growing challenges of ecological, social, and 
economic sustainability, including national and global food security, it is 
obvious that future changes must be in a direction fundamentally different. 
The natural/organic/local/sustainable food movement is at least as advanced 
today as the industrial food movement was fifty years ago. There is no 
logical reason to expect anything other than the relocalization of America’s 
food. There is quite simply no logical alternative. By the same basic logic 
and reasoning, there is no reason to expect anything other than the 
relocalization of the American economy. Relocalization is not an option; it 
is a necessity.

End Notes
1Packaged Facts, “Local and Fresh Foods in the U.S.,” May 1, 2007. 
http://www.packagedfacts.com/Local-Fresh-
Foods-1421831/
2 UOP Blog, Oxford University Press, USA, “Oxford Word of the Year: Locavore,”
<http://blog.oup.com/2007/11/locavore/>
3 Chefs Collaborative website: <http://www.chefscollaborative.org/>
4 Slow Foods International website, 
http://www.slowfood.com/about_us/eng/philosophy.lasso
5 Eric Schlosser, Fast Food Nation: The Dark Side of the All-American Meal 
(Boston & New York: Houghton
Mifflin Co., 2001).
6 Michael Pollan, The Omnivore’s Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals 
(New York: The Penguin Press,
2006).
7 Paul Roberts, The End of Food (Boston & New York: Houghton Mifflin Co, 
2008).
8 Harvey Blatt, America’s Food: What You Don’t Know About What You Eat 
(Boston: The MIT Press, 2008).
9 Patrick Murphy, Plan C: Community Survival Strategies for Peak Oil and 
Climate Change (Gabriola Island, BC:
New Society Publishers, 2008).
10 Alan Greenspan, as quoted in “Rich- Poor Gap Gaining Attention,” Christian 
Science Monitor,
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0614/p01s03-usec.html , June 14, 2005.
11 David and Marcia Pimentel, Food, Energy, and Society (Niwot, CO: 
University Press of Colorado), 1996.
12Wikipedia, “greenhouse gas”, and “Climate Change and Agriculture,”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas and 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_and_agriculture .
13 For a list of peer review scientific studies documenting the health and 
nutritional benefits or natural foods, see The
Organic Center, http://www.organic-center.org/.
14 David Pimentel, Paul Hepperly, James Hanson, David Douds, and Rita Seidel, 
2005,“Environmental, Energetic,
and Economic Comparisons of Organic and Conventional Farming Systems,” 
BioScience, 55, No. 7: 573–582.
15 Helena Norberg-Hodge, Todd Merrifield, and Steven Gorelick. Bringing The 
Food Economy Home: Local
Alternatives to Global Agribusiness. (Bloomfield , CT : Kumarian Press. 
2002), 45.
16 Laura Sayre, “The New Farm Field Trials,” Rodale Institute, October, 2003.
http://www.newfarm.org/depts/NFfield_trials/1003/carbonsequest.shtml
17 Pimentel, Food Energy and Society.
18 David Tisch, in an interview with Bruce Gellerman, host of radio program, 
“Living on Earth, February 8, 2008,
Tisch is a Professor in the College of Agriculture and Technology, State 
University of New York, Cobleskill, NY,
http://www.loe.org/shows/shows.htm?programID=08-P13-00006#feature4
19 Peter Drucker, Post-Industrial Society (New York; HarperCollins 
Publishers, 1993).
20 Visit the New Seasons Market website, <http://www.newseasonsmarket.com/>
21 Visit the Good Natured Family Farms website, <http://goodnatured.net/>
22 Visit the Grown Locally website at <http://www.grownlocally.com>
23 Visit the Idaho’s Bounty website at< http://www.idahosbounty.org/>
24 Visit the Oklahoma Food Cooperative website at< 
http://www.oklahomafood.coop/
25 Visit website, “Dinners” at <http://www.plateandpitchfork.com/>
26 Sarah James and Torbjorn Lahti. The Natural Step for Communities: How 
Cities and Towns Can Change to
Sustainable Practices (Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers, Inc., 
2004).
27 BALLE, Business Alliance for Local Living Economies, “Mission and 
Principles Statement,”
<http://www.livingeconomies.org/aboutus/mission-and-principles-1>.