Building local food production by redefining CSA

For most individuals, trying to produce all your own food needs is near impossible, even for the full time farmer. Trying to source all of your food needs with locally produced goods is difficult, expensive, time consuming, and requires significant culinary skills to make that food consistently appetizing. One farming concept that has made the above more attainable is that of the CSA or Community Supported Agriculture. CSA operations across the country deserve much credit for starting the process of rebuilding local food production. Patrons of these operations, which usually pay money up front in exchange for a “share” in the harvest whether it is bad or good, get to share in the risk and bounty of farming. Patrons get to learn about seasonality of food production and very likely get to participate first hand in the actual farming thru scheduled events on the farm or via work in exchange for reduced “share” prices. Scheduled farm day events may even include seminars or social events for learning how to preserve food or to share ideas for recipes using the crops being produced. In a sense, CSA’s helps foster the development of micro-communities within a community. The patrons can be of quite diverse backgrounds, yet are brought together in a relatively weak bond via the food of the CSA farm. Some members may have a stronger bond with others in the CSA all depending on their common interests. Usually they value fresh quality produce, have a “foodie” mentality, have a distrust of large corporate farming entities, and like to know that the food they are eating does not have pesticides, herbicides, or antibiotics residues with certainty for the main reason that they know how it is that their food was produced. Another common trait amongst members is that they usually tend to be well educated and well off. Whether or not the bond amongst members and the farm to the members would be enough to get a pooling of resources to endure a significant challenge to functional society such as famine or economic collapse would bring would be interesting. To the extent that the CSA can provide enough for ones complete dietary needs to survive might be the difference between success and failure under such a situation. Considering that most CSA’s likely do not produce their own grains for animal feed or for people, due to it not being economically advantageous for them to do so, one but has to wonder to what extent most CSA’s or other farming operations are prepared to produce food with little in the way of outside inputs. How far the patrons are from the CSA may be another question as some CSA’s survive by tapping into wealthier patrons in the city or suburbia by arranging drop off times and locations away from the farm. Other patrons will drive considerable distance to get the quality of food they want. The food that most of us eat travels on average about 1500 miles. What happens if fuel gets really expensive or become unavailable? CSA’s have made a good start at building local food production, but how is it that something more complete can be built to withstand possible tough times in the future?


The answer lies within the title of CSA. It is community; like the nostalgic communities portrayed in television series such as Little House on the Prairie wherein neighbors actually know each other and help each other with things such as barn raisings. To me, the sense of community wherein the fellow man would go to great lengths to help out another fellow man in need of help is something that nowadays is still common in churches. Unfortunately, many churches do not have an agricultural mindset. Yet most churches are probably more equipped at building a local food production system then they are aware. It could be used as an incredible ministry tool for outreach, bond building, and for providing food for its flock and surrounding community.

Many small farms and CSA’s would be highly profitable and flourishing all over the country if it were not for restrictions that make it nearly impossible to compete by limiting them to just selling the raw product produced. Any kind of processing or value adding, results in the need for the farmer to have a host of licenses, inspections, specially certified kitchens, and paper work that makes it out of the reach of the small farm to even dream about. Such food safety measures are there to prevent mass food borne illnesses that can arise from improper sanitary protocols. Large food processing facilities with massive and vast distribution systems are disconnected from the people they serve and as a result profit has sometimes been made more a priority over safety and quality. Food safety laws and regulations are there for a reason, but unfortunately the laws and regulations created did not have any exemptions for the small producer that sells directly to the end customer. The risk of food borne illnesses coming from a small producer who has a direct relationship with the end user is very small and lawmakers should be lobbied to create small food producer exemptions to foster locally produced food. Although many people have the culinary skills to make use of various farm goods that are in season, many people don’t. Being able to get a medley of produce incorporated into garden chowder or other products baked into a pie, cake, casserole, or bread or some other form that is ready to eat or processed for long term storage to be eaten at a later date would facilitate local food production. Since regulatory hurdles are high and inhibitory, one must look at getting around such hurdles if local food production is to grow. The majority of hurdles which prevent from supplying such wholesome foods are bypassed by not selling such foods, but by giving them away. The laws and regulations for the most part do not apply to products that are not sold. Although such a concept would not work for a CSA or a for profit farm, it could work for a church community.

Church members could be organized into a new kind of CSA; church supported agriculture. Church supported agriculture could start off simply by organizing some members to grow food on church premises and at home to help stock the churches food pantry for the pastor, church employees, and for families in need of assistance or to supplement a church based soup kitchen or meals on wheels type program. Or it could be grown into something much larger and more complex wherein church members would get a “church share” that would include a mix of foods from other food producing members as well as some processed food made with donated goods by those in the church with culinary skills. Those that donate much more than a fair share in the way of food or time could reduce or eliminate what they give in tithes to the church. Those that feel that they receive much more than they put in, if they have the means, could give more monetarily to the church in lieu of a lower grocery bill. Church supported agriculture programs could also be used as a training tool for those looking to go on overseas missions, as an education tool for church based schools, and as an outreach program by helping to feed the hungry in the community via church based soup kitchens. Since the program would not be profit driven, it could also promote the growing of crops that could provide greater food security in the event of famine such as grains.

What are your thoughts on making a church supported agriculture program work? Please comment.