This Abstract and Introduction are some of what Terrell will talk about on Saturday, January 14th.
Abstract
In light of increasing popular interest in sourcing locally-grown food, a model was developed to determine the potential for Kentucky’s ecoregions to feed their existing populations. A complete diet model was applied to the seven level III ecoregions in Kentucky to determine the theoretical food production potential of those geographic areas. Two diets, each providing 2,300 Kcal day-1 and less than 60 g fat day-1 were developed for the model; one vegetarian, including dairy products, and another including an 8 oz. daily ration of meat and eggs. Both diets exceeded USDA minimum daily requirements. Both diets included only food commodities grown in Kentucky with the exception of sugar. USDA soil survey data and land cover imagery were analyzed using a geographic information system to determine the area of agricultural land available for food production. Qualified soil ranged from a low of 4% of the total area in the Central Appalachian Ecoregion to 50% in the Interior Plateau. Carrying capacity was limited by the potential yield of diet commodities produced on the qualified agricultural land in each ecoregion. The results suggest that six of seven Kentucky ecoregions could be net exporters of food after the vegetarian diet is used to feed the existing population regionally-grown food. The regionally-grown diet including meat could feed the existing populations of four of the seven ecoregions, but only three would have potential for significant food exports after satisfying their own needs.
Introduction
The people of Kentucky, like nearly everyone in the world, participate in a complex and interconnected global food system. For practical economic reasons, Kentucky primarily produces commodities used as feedstock and ingredients in food products for processing elsewhere, but produces relatively little market ready food (Kentucky Agricultural Statistics 2009 – 2010 Bulletin). Concerns about the nutritional value of processed foods, loss of family farms and the associated lifestyle, the inherent risks in a global food system of disruption of food supplies caused by distant political, economic and climate-related events, volatile fuel prices and environmental impacts attributed to the global food system have inspired a wide spread conversation about the need and demand for local food production. It is a conversation not without controversy (Hendrickson and Heffernan 2002, Feagan 2007, Desrochers and Hiroko 2008, DeLind 2010).
This analysis examines the potential for local food production using Level III Ecoregions in Kentucky as the geographic context. The ecoregions in Kentucky differ in geo-physical, ecological and demographic qualities. Forested hills and mountains dominate the eastern ecoregions and population density is low. The primary population centers, home to 56% of Kentucky’s population, are located in the north east half of the Interior Plateau Ecoregion. The western ecoregions vary from wooded hills and river valleys to lowland plains and floodplains. The western ecoregions contain the highest concentration of prime farmland in the state (Soil Thematic Data Layer 2005) and several smaller population centers. These differences make analysis of food production potential relevant to land use decisions that require balancing competing interests from region to region. An ecoregion approach also encourages inter-county cooperation for managing, in an ecological context, shared geo-bio-physical resources that cross political boundaries.
The food system involves more than just agricultural production and operates at many spatial and temporal levels (Dahlberg 1993). Several large international corporate “food chain clusters” dominate the global food system (Hendrickson and Heffernan 2002) and employ reductionist economic analyses that assume the food system is closed and “unaffected by evolutionary processes” or disturbances (Dahlberg 1993). On annual time scales this may be appropriate but as the global food system matures and more capital (social, physical and natural) is required for its maintenance, it becomes less resilient against disturbances (Holling and Meffe 1996). A robust and diverse local food system may increase local resilience in the same way greater biodiversity increases resilience in ecosystems (Steffen, et al 2011, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005). [Emphasis mine] An inventory of food system resources at all scales is consistent with that view. This analysis is intended as a quantitative analysis of agricultural land resources with the objective of determining the theoretical human carrying capacity at the ecoregional level. It is a status report of available land resources at a time when food insecurity is a growing concern and anthropogenic pressure on many resources is increasing both locally and globally (Summary – OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2011). A second but equally important objective is to identify the level of dependence of populations in Kentucky’s ecoregions on imported food and thus identifying where limited agricultural land is a potential vulnerability to disruptions of that supply.
===========================
