| Dirty Work: Racial Injustice in the US Food Production System | https://www.english.udel.edu/arak-journal-sub-site/Arak Journal Entries/Arak 2021 Essay 2 KD066 Donohoe Dirty Work Header.png | 37 | Dirty Work: Racial Injustice in the US Food Production System | | <p>​When it comes to farming, many may imagine a tranquil, pastoral scene in which a lone farmer harvests goods from his land as a small herd of cattle graze silently nearby. In reality, most modern day farming consists of contracted facilities filled to the brim with livestock that excrete hundreds of pounds of manure each day, along with industrialized fields of crops that stretch for miles, slowly denaturing the fertile soil that had originally brought them to fruition. This reality was not something I was aware of until taking an animal and food science course, during which the process of swine production and the detrimental effects of swine facilities on community members and the environment were examined. The most unsettling information discovered within this lab was the fact that the populations most affected by the dangers of large-scale food production were those of the Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC) community who are already predisposed to numerous racial injustices in the United States of America. The question then arises: how exactly did farming get to this point of industrialization, and at what price to BIPOC?</p><p>In an ever-growing world population of over 7.8 billion people, the demand for one of life's most essential products, food, is constantly increasing. Today, the United States is the world's top food exporter, shipping over $139.5 billion in agricultural products across the globe and domestically standing as a $1.109 trillion industry (Kassel and Morrison 1). With this global need for food comes the constant need for more land, and those that are the first to be affected by the expansion of food production are the members of the BIPOC population of the United States. Peter Beech, writer for the World Economic Forum, explains how this practice of disproportionately burdening BIPOC with health hazards through policies and practices that force them to live in toxic environmental conditions is known as environmental racism, a term coined in 1982 by African American civil rights leader Benjamin Chavis (Beech 1). Many, including University of Michigan law professor Amy C. Kantor and urban geography professor John D. Nystuen, have identified the connection between environmental racism and redlining, a process tracing back to 1930 color codes in the U.S. that prevented loans to residents in neighborhoods populated mostly by Black individuals out of the fear that housing value would decline (Kantor and Nystuen 2). The land and its occupants are already viewed as having lower worth, putting the residents of these communities at serious physical and mental health risks. In comparing the history of unjust practices in the U.S. to the issues in modern day food production, it is apparent that there is a connection between historic oppression of BIPOC populations and the food industry's placement of food animal facilities in low income, BIPOC neighborhoods. By placing food production facilities in these communities, BIPOC are forced to live and work in squalor while many White populations are prioritized with access to a clean, healthy living environment. With the growth of family farms into contracted, fully functioning farming facilities, environmental hazards as a result of greater food animal populations have only increased, disproportionately affecting BIPOC who continue to fall victim to the vicious cycle of redlining and environmental racism that holds them hostage in these dangerous locations for generations.</p><p>Farming was not always the industrialized production seen today. Research conducted by Dan Allosso, a professor with an interest in rural and environmental history at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, traces a timeline of American farming from pastoral dream to commercial burden. In America's history, farming began as a familial tradition where past, present, and future generations would come together to maintain the fruits of the labor of their ancestors. In the late 1700s, farming was a necessity more than a career path, as food production was the responsibility of the family (Allosso 3). Horses were pastured, dairy cows milked, and a handful of chickens and hogs raised for eggs and meat. Only a few decades later, in 1840, the farming population was steadily decreasing with the rise of urbanization (Allosso 3). Enslaved people were used as cheap labor, and families started to depend less on their own farming ability for food with the introduction of commercialized farming. As America's population continued to grow into the late 1800s and early 1900s, the farming population continued to decrease, while farm size itself began increasing to hundreds of acres of land (Allosso 10). Cities began to rely on agricultural trade for food, and farming unions were formed as the political power and economic potential of food production rose to the surface. New technologies, such as tractors and commercial fertilizers, were created to increase farming efficiency, and seasonal crops began to be planted year after year rather than being rotated in the pasture. Greater quantities of food animals, such as beef cattle, dairy cows, chickens, and pigs, were added to herds to increase product yield, as demands continued growing higher each year (Allosso 10). The family farm fell victim to foreclosure, as commercial food production facilities took over and began leasing out Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) to farmers with a desire to join what is now referred to as the food production industry (Allosso 11).</p><p>Today, CAFOs, which are considered smaller farming units of food-producing corporations, are an average of ten acres filled with up to ten thousand hogs or one hundred and twenty-five thousand chickens (Allosso 11). With these large quantities of animals comes, as one would assume, large amounts of manure. In North Carolina alone, hog confinement operations produce twenty-million tons of waste each year (Allosso 15). There are detailed health and safety protocols in place when it comes to the disposal of human manure; however, the disposal of animal waste has no such regulation. The high amount of animal feces leads to the pollution and toxicity of land and groundwater, in turn contaminating the air, water, and land of nearby inhabitants. Who would choose to live and work in such conditions? Unfortunately, this is not necessarily a choice for many BIPOC in America. Rather, it is a systemically inflicted expectation of marginalized communities in order to maintain white superiority. </p><p>To truly understand how those of the BIPOC community were the perfect target for the expanding food production industry, one does not need to look further than the history of America itself. Dorceta E. Taylor, an environmental sociologist known for her work in the field of environmental justice and racism, helps to establish the connection between colonial America and modern-day environmental racism. As far back as the colonization of the United States, Native American populations were forced out of their rightful land in order to make room for white colonists, leaving the earth they had poured their care and their souls into for generations behind (Taylor 7). With this past in mind, it is no surprise that the government found the removal of Native people from their land an easy solution to expanding farming plants. In African American history, Jim Crow laws prohibited the purchase of land under Black ownership, and sharecropping reinforced the idea that Black success would always be controlled by the white puppet master above (Taylor 8). Today, contracts made in the development of CAFOs keep Black farmers in a cycle of strained labor within food production (FIC Staff 2) while the wealthy, white, and powerful reap the benefits of Black labor in the form of food (Wilson and Wilson 4). In the early 1800s, the Mexican land presently known as Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California was colonized (Taylor 8), demonstrating once again how the colonial mindset sees land as something of value, and the minority groups that populate said land as devaluing the property. To this day, Mexican populations are abused by the American food production system by working in hazardous environments for unlivable wages. Asian immigrants have been continually exploited in a similar way by the contracted sharecropping agreements that involve paying a rent and food fee while making two-thirds of the salary of a white farmer in the same work (Taylor 9).</p><p>The histories of marginalized groups in America, although distinct, unite to serve as the possible foundation and explanation for the systemic racism seen in today's food production industry. Race has been and continues to be forcibly linked to property value. Jesus Hernandez, professor of Sociology at the University of California at Davis, defines housing discrimination, specifically in the form of redlining, as the limitation and exclusion of nonwhite property owners from financing options that would allow adequate housing conditions (6). Examples of this unjust practice include landowners renting out single family homes as multi-unit properties; the lack of maintenance on homes to reduce property value, and the lack of opportunity for mortgage applications to those other than white (Hernandez 15). These landowners purposely degrade properties available for lower-middle class BIPOC populations in a way that BIPOC themselves are viewed as less valuable. Meanwhile, white suburbia is able to prosper in a well-maintained community of high financial worth, in turn, making the white occupants regarded as highly valuable (Hernandez 15). Historically, the majority white population of the United States has never had a problem with stripping BIPOC of their land, which is why invading the backyards of those who American society continues to value least through the placement of commercial food facilities became the simple solution to expanding modern farming. In addition to housing discrimination, the devaluing of nonwhite individuals is further exhibited by the low wages universally given to BIPOC populations (Taylor 7-10), preying on those under the palm of an oppressive society that aims to eradicate opportunity by offering the false promise of life with housing, food, and income. With present-day contract agreements from the nation's top food production companies, many minorities are unknowingly drawn into a toxic cycle of drudgery who's end goal is to keep BIPOC living in squalor, in debt to the corporation, and questioning their own sense of power and importance (Jacques 6).</p><p>As mentioned previously, CAFOs are the primary production facilities for manufacturing animal products used for food. These streamlined facilities contain a large number of animals packed together in constant production, resulting in negative environmental and social impacts. The danger of living and working in such close proximity to CAFOs is due to the lack of regulation of the waste and maintenance of the facilities. Members of nearby communities are susceptible to many health risks as a result of chemical exposure, groundwater threats, hazardous waste, and impaired bodies of water from the mass amount of waste produced by food animal operations, as described by public health advocate Magali Flores Núñez (3). The American Medical Association itself has stated that the healthcare system is overburdened with disease caused in part by the unhealthy food production system, as referenced by associate director of education and associate professor at Tuskegee University Dr. Wylin Dassie Wilson along with associate professor Dr. Norbert L.W. Wilson of Auburn University in their scholarly article discussing the health of African American women in the 21st century after the establishment of the farm bill (5). </p><p>A study by Michelle Larkins Jacques and her agents of sustainability student team at Pacific University found that working farmers of West Michigan, described as being mostly Hispanic, were interviewed in a study of CAFOs and their effects on the surrounding community (Jacques 1). Despite the risks of being exposed to manure and the possible antibiotic-resistant infections that can stem from the mass amounts of animal excrement, the low living wages and job “perks" are prioritized in a community that is both financially and socially considered less valuable (Jacques 6). The hope of turning a low-income area around and assimilating into white suburbia is what keeps these farmers laboring in circumstances that many would not subject themselves to. On the opposite side of the study, community members, or those not employed by the CAFO, were questioned about the presence of an industrial food facility in their backyard. A distinct difference was noted between the responses of women and minority groups and the responses of white males, as the former minimized risks of mass food production while the latter stressed their concerns for their health and wellbeing in addition to concerns about property value (Jacques 5). This fixation on economic benefit translates into the mentalities of the farmers themselves, as they often forgo personal protection in order to continue to provide a source of income to their family while unknowingly escalating their risk of illness. There is a significant dependency, both psychologically and economically, from the employee to the employer, as most of the workers performing the “dirty work" of providing our nation and our world with the fundamental necessity of food have been the sufferers of suppressed opportunity for decades. Additionally, constructing these facilities in close range to oppressed communities shows the intent of environmental racism, which seeks to force those seen as insignificant in the eyes of a white society into the areas deemed unfit for adequate life, in this case in neighborhoods exposed to the dangers of food production. </p><p>The dependency of minority groups on government and business leaders who, in turn, refuse to better the environmental harms and degradation of communities within commercial food production zones has been pegged as the root cause for the environmental justice movement (Jacques 2). The concept of environmental justice began being explored in the 1970s, but only recently has environmental injustice begun being explored with respect to specific races and ethnicities (Jacques 4). Studies involving geographic pinpointing and toxicology reports of areas surrounding industrial farms have proven the existence of a link between race and high levels of pollution, specifically that the populations in the vicinity of CAFOs happen to be mostly BIPOC. Furthermore, evidence suggests another link between race, class, and environmental hazards, with those in the low class/income level having a larger population near highly polluted areas when compared to those belonging to middle and high class/income levels (Jacques 3). These results, along with other studies, have been used as the foundational argument for seeking justice against environmental racism. </p><p>If there appears to be multiple studies establishing a direct correlation between race and residency within the radius of food production facilities, why does the problem still exist at the level that it does today? The answer: there are solutions in the works, but not for those who need it most desperately. The truth is that there is research being conducted in search of improving conditions of communities within short distances of CAFOs, but the process of developing these solutions happen to be taking place mostly near white communities (Núñez 3). These developing solutions trace back to World War II when the University of California at Davis and the University of California at Berkeley began introducing new farming technologies, including fertilizers, pesticides, genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and equipment advances, with the goal of presenting white policy makers with an opportunity for economic growth and promoting environmentalism, rather than improving safety for marginalized communities (Núñez 1). </p><p>Environmentalism has been another market, in a sense, for whiteness. White populations do not have the same reliance on industrial farming plants as the farmers working in food production, as was previously demonstrated in Jacques' study of worker versus community perception of CAFOs in West Michigan. It is recognized that BIPOC do not have the same privilege of rejecting modern food production due to environmental dangers, as farming jobs offer a source of income while the neighboring communities of the facilities offer a place to live. Whiteness does not have to exist in food production spaces in the same way that BIPOC are forcibly mandated to exist, as more environmental and economic solutions are presented to those of the white upper class. This disparity is confirmed in Núñez's research, where solutions are heavily researched for the protection of the white upper class without the inclusion of BIPOC workers facing the same environmental dangers with zero defense (Núñez 4). Until the focus shifts from supporting those in power, the wealthy white man, to helping those in distress, minority groups, the focus of resolving environmental pollution will continue to concentrate on improving financial and environmental conditions for those in power rather than providing solutions for the marginalized groups enduring constant exposure to the hazards of mass food production. Systemic financial oppression traps marginalized communities in these spaces in proximity to CAFOs while white individuals are presented with a way out in the name of environmentalism.</p><p>In the end, decades of systemic oppression are what have provided the foundation of today's housing crisis with regards to minorities living in proximity to massive food production facilities. From having chronic high blood pressure and higher rates of asthma, to having to board their houses in order to prevent the intrusive odor of animal waste, BIPOC have suffered at the hands of America's agricultural processes (Núñez 3). There has to be a way to improve the practice of food production in the United States, one that prioritizes the health and safety of our people, not the protection of the elite and powerful. Forget the pastoral image of farming we were fed to believe and replace it with the image of manure splattering on walls and water tinted with fecal bacteria: this is the reality of the modern-day farming industry for too many. Yes, food production is undoubtedly one of the most important jobs for the sustenance of human life, but in forcing populations of people to live in deplorable conditions, the process of sustaining life comes at the cost of destroying human life itself.<br></p> | <p>​Kassel, Kathleen, and Rosanna Mentzer Morrison. “Ag and Food Sectors and the Economy." <em>USDA ERS - Ag and Food Sectors and the Economy, 20 Oct. 2020, www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistics-charting-the-essentials/ag-and-food-sectors-and-the-economy/. </em></p><p>Hernandez, Jesus. "Race, Market Constraints, and the Housing Crisis."<em> Kalfou, vol. 1, no. 2, 2014, pp. 29-58. ProQuest, https://login.udel.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/2017355533?accountid=10457, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.15367/kf.v1i2.31</em></p><p>Jacques, Michelle L., et al. "EXPANDING ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE: A CASE STUDY OF COMMUNITY RISK AND BENEFIT PERCEPTIONS OF INDUSTRIAL ANIMAL FARMING OPERATIONS."<em> Race, Gender & Class, vol. 19, no. 1, 2012, pp. 218-243. ProQuest, </em><a href="https://login.udel.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/1269656844?accountid=10457"><em>https://login.udel.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/1269656844?accountid=10457</em></a><em>.</em></p><p>Taylor, Dorceta E. "American Environmentalism: The Role of Race, Class and Gender in Shaping Activism 1820-1995."<em> Race, Gender & Class, vol. 5, no. 1, 1997, pp. 16. ProQuest, </em><a href="https://login.udel.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/218809443?accountid=10457"><em>https://login.udel.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/218809443?accountid=10457</em></a><em>.</em></p><p>Allosso, Dan. “Farmers and Agribusiness." <em>American Environmental History, mlpp.pressbooks.pub/americanenvironmentalhistory/chapter/chapter-11-farmers-agribusiness/. </em></p><p>Núñez, M. F. (2019). Environmental racism and latino farmworker health in the san joaquin valley, california.<em> Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy, 31, 9-14. Retrieved from </em><a href="https://login.udel.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/2316723312?accountid=10457"><em>https://login.udel.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/2316723312?accountid=10457</em></a></p><p>Wilson, Wylin D., and Norbert L. W. Wilson. "AFRICAN AMERICAN HEALTH ACTIVISM IN THE 21ST CENTURY: BLACK WOMEN AND THE FARM BILL."<em> Race, Gender & Class, vol. 20, no. 1, 2013, pp. 232-243. ProQuest, </em><a href="https://login.udel.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/1464754017?accountid=10457"><em>https://login.udel.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/1464754017?accountid=10457</em></a><em>.</em></p><p>Written by Peter Beech, World Economic Forum writer. “What Is Environmental Racism and How Can We Fight It?" <em>World Economic Forum, 31 July 2020, </em><a href="http://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/07/what-is-environmental-racism-pollution-covid-systemic/"><em>www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/07/what-is-environmental-racism-pollution-covid-systemic/</em></a><em>. </em></p><p>Kantor, Amy C., and John D. Nystuen. “De Facto Redlining a Geographic View." <em>Economic Geography, vol. 58, no. 4, 1982, pp. 309–328. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/143457. Accessed 6 Nov. 2020.</em></p><p>FIC Staff. “Racial Injustice: The Truth about Industrial Agriculture." <em>Food Integrity Campaign, </em>18 June 2020, foodwhistleblower.org/racial-injustice-the-truth-about-industrial-agriculture/. <br></p> | Kathleen "Kassy" Donohoe | <img alt="" src="/arak-journal-sub-site/PublishingImages/2021/Kassy%20Donohoe%20KD066%20Headshot.png" style="BORDER:0px solid;" /> | <p></p><p>Throughout my ENGL110 course on identity, race, and rhetoric, I was intrigued by how so of much one's personal identity is connected to race and the modern rhetoric surrounding said race. I found that these themes seemed most apparent in humanities and culture, but where I did not expect to see the connection between identity, race, and rhetoric was in one of my animal science labs. In a unit on swine and their production into a prominent food source, the professor provided some information on the disparity of where swine production facilities are often placed, which happens to be in low-income communities mostly populated by members of the Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) community. </p><p>I decided to investigate the broader world of food production in the US in relation to the newly discovered conflicts regarding swine production. Shocked and disgusted by my findings, I wanted to learn more about how and why BIPOC communities were being disproportionately affected by the negative environmental, financial, and health effects that come with living near industrialized farms. I decided to focus on this violation of human rights, specifically through connecting the American history of BIPOC oppression, the perspectives of working farmers and citizens surrounding industrialized farmland, and research on the environmental damages caused by food production facilities. As I accumulated more and more information and perspectives, it became obvious that food production was yet another industry to further oppress marginalized groups in America. </p><p>I wrote my paper to raise awareness about an additional sector of American culture that tears down vulnerable communities to provide an essential resource for life, in this case food, to the privileged of our nation. I intend for this paper to serve as a call to action that fractures the ignorance that exists towards the reality of how our food is made. My hope is that one day sustainable, humanitarian practices will replace the horrific actions taken by the modern-day American food industry.<br><br></p> | Brett Seekford | <img alt="" src="/arak-journal-sub-site/PublishingImages/2021/Instructor%20Headshot%20Brett%20Seekford%20KD066%20and%20DT056.png" style="BORDER:0px solid;" /> | <p>​The theme of the assignment that led to this essay was creative protest, meaning the strategic and novel means a particular marginalized community adopts to get their voices heard and propel meaningful change. I take a blend of genre studies and writing process approach in my writing pedagogy. So for this project writing advanced in stages: starting with topic idea presentation, submission of preliminary research, carrying out genre analysis through a specific questionnaire (in this case the genre was academic research essay), rough draft, student conference, peer feedback, setting of revision goals, and final draft. Audrey chose to write about the #MeToo movement in Japan after deliberating over her own deep interests. She followed this with exceptional work on genre analysis and extensive preliminary research. Audrey's strength as a writer was her clear understanding of what constitutes an academic argument; hence, she was in hunt for a nuanced and refreshing claim. During the student conference, through dialogue and mutual brainstorming, she gravitated toward the insight that Japan's #MeToo movement is qualitatively different from the rest of the world because the Japanese sexual assault survivors had to adapt the movement to their own traditions and cultural sensibility. She executed that spark of idea with further research, rigorous revision, and compelling writing. ​<br></p> | <p>​Now that we have a solid foundation for using and analyzing sources after drafting the Close (Racial) Reading, this paper asks that you extensively <strong>research a topic that interests you and adheres to the course theme of racial identity</strong>. There is an endless array of topics that you can choose, but your selection must focus on an issue that affects a specific racial population in a unique way. After developing a topic and conducting meaningful research on it, you will need to<strong> form an argument about the nature of the issue under analysis and its consequences for the associated community</strong>. In other words, you should try to address several questions: Why does (or did) this issue exist? In what way does it either influence the way people of a certain racial status are seen in society or affect how these people see themselves? Put differently, how does your topic shape the American consciousness when it comes to a specific form of racial identity?</p><p>To successfully complete this assignment, it is again essential that you <strong>narrow</strong> <strong>the scope of your project</strong> and adopt a particular focus rather than writing on broad topics. For instance, if you are interested in music as it relates to the Black community, you would not want to talk about every single musical genre and the connections between them and Black people. Rather, you might study the relationship between African Americans and one musical genre. Even more effectively, you could think about that genre's connection to Black women or Black people from a specific region of the country. Above all, you are encouraged to bring your unique interests to this paper and put them in conversation with the course themes of race, identity, and rhetoric. Just as was the case with the first paper: If you can offer justification for studying any community that you want to know more about, use your proposal to defend your choice.<br><br></p><p><span lang="EN" style="text-decoration:underline;"><strong>REQUIREMENTS</strong></span></p><p>Since your topic will be largely unfamiliar to you, extensive research will be necessary. For this paper, you need <span lang="EN" style="text-decoration:underline;">at least </span><span lang="EN" style="text-decoration:underline;"><strong>four scholarly, peer-reviewed</strong></span><span lang="EN" style="text-decoration:underline;"> academic sources</span>, although you will likely want to incorporate a few more texts as well. In that vein, <strong>after you've satisfied the scholarly research requirement, feel free to consult an array of nonscholarly sources</strong>, ranging from newspaper articles to credible blogposts or tweets. In order to meaningfully engage with your sources, though, you should avoid using more than ten sources in this paper since an extensive bibliography of outside voices can be difficult to incorporate without distracting from your original argument. </p><p>Other than the change in prompt and number of required sources, the other major requirement for this paper is that you use secondary sources more strategically and <strong>synthesize</strong> them throughout your writing, a practice we will explore at length in class. Therefore, academic synthesis—in addition to argumentation, organization, and source use—will be the fourth major component of your grade with this paper. As you will see, it is incredibly important to show your intervention in a larger conversation by using a range of sources that support, complicate, and even expand your main idea. </p><p>As always, while your sources should inform your argument, they should not dominate. It can be difficult to strike the balance between asserting your voice and allowing your sources to take over, and for that reason, your papers will undergo a broad-based writing process featuring three drafts, peer workshops, instructor conferences, and even a week of in-class revision stations. As always, <strong>you will need to complete all aspects of the writing process to receive a passing grade</strong>, but I hope you find a topic that motivates you and inspires a sense of passion. By the time you submit this paper, my hope is that you will discover an opportunity for building your scholarly identity while improving your approach to writing.</p><p>The following is a checklist of basic requirements that must be met to earn a passing grade on this assignment:</p><ul><li>A paper proposal and three drafts (including the final draft)</li><li>Participation in peer workshops and submission of peer letters </li><li>Attendance during student-instructor conference</li><li>8-10 <span style="text-decoration:underline;">full</span> pages in length</li><li>Paper topic relevant to the course theme of racial identity and rhetoric</li><li>A <span style="text-decoration:underline;"><strong>narrowly framed argument</strong></span> pertaining to an issue or concern affecting a specific racial population</li><li>At least<strong> </strong><span style="text-decoration:underline;"><strong>four</strong></span><strong> </strong>scholarly,<strong> peer-reviewed </strong>secondary sources</li><ul><li>Additional scholarly or nonscholarly sources will likely be needed in addition to this basic requirement. (No more than ten sources.)</li></ul><li>Meaningful synthesis of sources throughout the paper<br><br></li></ul> | | |
