The sustainability of the food system is at the forefront of academic and policy discussions as we face the challenge of providing food security to a growing population amidst environmental uncertainty and depletion, social disruptions, and structural economic shocks and stresses. Crafting a sustainable and resilient food system requires us to go beyond disciplinary boundaries and broaden critical and creative thinking skills. Recent literature calls for examples of pedagogical transformations from food systems courses to identify successful practices and potential challenges. We offer a recipe for what to teach by framing systems thinking concepts, then discuss how to teach it with five learning activities: deductive case studies, experiential learning, reflective narrative learning, system dynamics simulations and scenarios, and inductive/open-ended case studies, implemented with collaborative group learning, inter/trans-disciplinarity, and instructor-modeled co-learning. Each learning activity is animated with concrete examples from our courses at Oregon State University, University of Minnesota, and University of Vermont, USA. We discuss opportunities and challenges implementing these strategies in light of student, instructor, and institutional expectations and constraints. But the challenge is worth the effort, because food system transformation requires active learners and systemic thinkers as engaged citizens, food system advocates, entrepreneurs, and policy makers.
22 November 2011 in American Journal of Agricultural Economics
Purpose: The USDA’s Risk Management Agency (RMA) made several changes to the crop insurance products available to organic growers for the 2014 crop year. Most notably, a 5 percent premium surcharge was removed and organic-specific transitional yields (t-yields) were issued for the first time. The purpose of this paper is to use farm-level organic crop yield data to analyze the impact of these reforms on producer insurance outcomes and compare the insurance options for new organic growers.Design/methodology/approach: This study uses a unique panel data set of organic corn and soybean yields to analyze the impact of organic crop insurance reforms. Actual Production History values and premium rates are calculated for each farm and crop yield sequence. Producer loss ratios and subsidized premium wedges are compared for yield, revenue and area-risk products before and after the instituted reforms.Findings: Results indicate that RMA succeeded in improving the actuarial soundness of the organic insurance program, though further refinement of organic t-yields may be necessary to accurately reflect the yield potential of organic producers and avoid reductions in program participation.Originality/value: This paper provides insight into the effectiveness of reforms intended to improve the actuarial soundness of organic crop insurance and demonstrates the effect that the reforms are likely to have on new and existing organic farms. Because this analysis uses data collected independently of RMA and includes farms that may or may not have purchased crop insurance, it avoids the self-selection problems that might affect analyses using crop insurance program data.
3 October 2016 in Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics