Menu
Our panel of experts explain how collaborative regional value chains can help rebuild the missing middle in the US meat supply.
How do consolidation and concentration impact the food system?
by Phil Howard and Mary HendricksonWhat is the “missing middle in the US meat sector?
by Clifford PollardHow did consolidation and concentration impact the US meat sector?
by Kari UnderlyHow have the trends of consolidation and concentration impacted small and mid-scale producers?
by Mike WeaverHow have these trends impacted food coops, health food stores, smaller regional grocery chains?
by Allan ReetzWhat are Collaborative Regional Value Chains and how do they help address “the missing middle”?
by Mike CallicrateWhat are the roles of branding and marketing in rebuilding “the missing middle”?
by Kathryn QuanbeckAre there particular ways Collaborative Regional Value Chains can support BIPOC businesses and communities?
by Rachael StewartWhat is “appropriate scale” for producers and processors committed to advancing Collaborative Regional Value Chains?
by Will HarrisWhy are sources of breeds and feeds fundamental to mid-scale, regionally focused livestock production?
by Matthew WadiakOur panel of experts explain how collaborative regional value chains can help rebuild the missing middle in the US meat supply.
Introduction
Four large meat-packing companies control 85 percent of the beef market. In poultry, the top four processing firms control 54 percent of the market. And in pork, the top four processing firms control about 70 percent of the market.
Professor of Political Ecology
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
Professor of Rural Sociology
UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI
How do consolidation and concentration impact the food system?
Consolidation is the process of industries becoming dominated by fewer and fewer firms, which results in markets that are concentrated—a simple measure is that when four firms have a combined market share of 40% of more it may be described as concentrated. Consolidation is occurring across all sectors in the food system, and at both national and global levels.
These changes have resulted in a particular set of power relationships. This has in turn led to numerous negative impacts on farmers, workers, and their communities as well as consumers, who have experienced higher prices and less innovation. These power relationships also impact our food system democracy and are particularly concerning for marginalized voices and communities.
Crop acreage is consolidating in larger farms, while the sales midpoint for livestock has starkly increased between 1987-2017. For hogs, for example, the midpoint of sales has increased from 1,200 to 51,300 and in dairy, the median herd size has gone from 80 to 1,300 cows.
New processes of integration are also occurring. In U.S. pork production, large producers own processors and grain elevators, while supermarket behemoths Walmart and Costco are acquiring their upstream suppliers in dairy, beef and chicken. Kroger has been using this strategy for many decades in dairy but is now supplying competing retailers. In addition, asset management firms are increasing their investments in food and agriculture, potentially reducing competition via common ownership of most of the leading firms in numerous industries.
In a consolidated system, farmers, workers and the environment are interconnected, meaning that when problems hit one part, they quickly engulf others. For meatpacking, the coronavirus hit workers, and the human tragedy of over 40,000 workers with COVID-19 (189 deaths) quickly became a farm and environmental disaster. Besides the financial hit for farmers who may have euthanized between 300,000 to 800,000 hogs and 2 million chickens, the waste of the embodied resources (28,500 tons of pork, .02% of the 2018-2019 corn crop) is stunning. Another example is the inability to control the drift of the herbicide dicamba, which has divided communities, damaged livelihoods and ecologies, and illuminated the inability of agencies to regulate dominant firms.
Agrifood consolidation reduces farmer autonomy and redistributes costs and benefits across the food chain, squeezing farmer incomes and polluting disadvantaged communities. In 2018, for instance, farmers whose primary occupation was farming but with sales of less than $350,000 had a median net income of -$1,524. An agriculture system without people has depopulated rural communities causing a collapse in social relationships. Communities of color bear a disproportionate burden of exposure to excessive pesticide use or large animal confinement operations.
Consolidation obscures ownership to the point that farmers and consumers frequently have far fewer options in the market than it appears. For instance, Anheuser-Busch InBev (Belgium) has acquired 17 formerly independent craft breweries since 2011, although these ties are not indicated on the product labels. Seed companies label the same seeds under multiple brands while products from a single processing plant may be sold under as many as 40 different brands.
Because political democracy rests on economic democracy and vice versa, we must democratize the agrifood system at local, state, regional and national scales. Working together, policy-makers, farmers, workers and communities need to fashion alternatives and policies that can help to curb monopolistic tendencies in the agrifood system, to shine a racial lens in scholarship on agrifood system power and consolidation, to prioritize resilience and redundancy, to rethink core assumptions such as efficiency and property rights, and to encourage the development of alternative production and consumption arrangements.
Consistent access to food necessary for a healthy life.
More Lex Icons™
Only 4,000 small meat and poultry processing plants exist in the United States, and not all of these plants slaughter both livestock and poultry — in fact, only about 720 small establishments slaughter livestock and poultry. Many farmers and ranchers must drive significant distances to these slaughter plants, consuming up to 25% of their total working hours.
CEO & Founder
CREAM CO. MEATS
What is the missing middle in the US meat sector?
The “missing middle” describes the gap in the meat supply chain between small-to-medium scale ranchers and the behemoth multinational meat processors that control the market.
Historically, small-to-medium scale ranchers raised cattle, hogs, lamb, or poultry and sold them to local markets or regional meat processors. However, due to decades of industry consolidation and plant closures, regional food webs increasingly lack the infrastructure needed to process animals and get their meat to market within their own community. This creates broken or missing links in regional supply chains, thus the missing middle.
The “big four” – Tyson, Cargill, National Beef, and JBS – dominate the industry and have the resources to control every aspect of the meat supply chain from animal feed to meat processing to distribution. These companies receive significant government subsidies and enjoy economies of scale that allow them to keep prices low and profits high. As a result, small to medium-scale ranchers struggle to compete with the industrialized meat complex and often find themselves squeezed out of the market.
One of the biggest challenges facing small-to-medium scale ranchers is a lack of processing facilities, both for slaughter and further processing. Many local processing plants have closed in recent years, and those that remain are often out-dated or have been optimized to larger operations. These facilities are often unable to handle the volumes that small to medium-scale producers work with. This forces ranchers to travel long distances to find a processing plant that can handle their animals, adding significant costs and logistical challenges.
In addition, small-to-medium scale processors struggle with access to financing and marketing opportunities. Large meat processors have the resources to invest in marketing campaigns and secure financing at favorable rates, while small-to-medium scale processors must rely on personal savings or high-interest loans to fund their operations.
The impact of the missing middle on small-to-medium scale ranchers can be devastating. Without access to well-run and competitive processing facilities and marketing opportunities, these ranchers are often forced to sell their animals at a lower price into the industrialized meat complex. If there was greater access to professional, state-of-the-art, small-to-mid-scale processing, these same ranchers could work with regional processors and direct-market their meat at a premium. The lack of infrastructure creates an anti-competitive environment, and makes it extremely difficult for businesses operating in the missing middle to earn a sustainable income and maintain independence in their operations over the long term.
To address the missing middle, there are calls for increased investment in local processing facilities and marketing campaigns that promote locally produced meat. These would help small-to-medium scale ranchers and processors access new markets and earn a fair price for their animals. Additionally, there are calls for greater government support, including subsidies and loan programs to help folks invest in their operations and compete with larger meat processors.
In conclusion, the missing middle in the meat supply chain is a significant challenge for small-to-medium scale ranchers and processors, as well as for the long term viability of local food systems. Developing medium scale processing facilities that have been built front the ground up to service their community supply chains, and can compete with the larger meat processors, is imperative to creating resilient regional supply chains across America. Addressing this issue will require significant private and public investment in local ranchers and processing facilities, including local and federal government support.
Promoting shared knowledge and resources to prevent excessive industry consolidation.
More Lex Icons™
By the turn of the 20th century, meatpacking was America’s biggest industry by far. Its $1 billion in annual sales was more than the annual budget of the U.S. government.
Founder & Master Butcher
RANGE MEAT ACADEMY
How did consolidation and concentration impact the US meat sector?
I’ve seen firsthand how the concentration of food distribution in the meat sector can affect communities and the livelihood of small and midsize businesses. Butchery is in my DNA— my grandfather, grandmothers, dad, and I cut meat. My dad owned a small country butcher shop and ice cream parlor, dependent on small local processors, suppliers, and producers.
The introduction of boxed beef, the exodus of people from cities, the movement of small grocery chains into the suburbs, and the ongoing collapse of our regional value chain were too much for our business to survive. We had no choice but to close our doors. My dad took a job at the local grocery chain as a meat cutter, and the need for his skills decreased. The loss of this skilled trade is one example of how consolidation and concentration have impacted the US meat sector, also called the missing middle.
Our global meat economy produces local meat for a global supply chain through buyouts, consolidation in and around meat production, purchasing genetics (types of animals), and large animal feed businesses, creating a chokehold on regional slaughter and meat processing.
Cattle breed specifications required by the large meat processors, also referred to as the “big three,” started eliminating the demand for heritage breed cattle, another byproduct of consolidation and the creation of the missing middle. If producers want to sell their stock, they either sell at the local auction or contract with large meat companies to raise cattle for the commodity market. Producers must meet the demand for homogenized beef cattle that fits perfectly through these large assembly lines. The large processors purchase these cattle from different regions all over the country. The cattle are transported from a regionalized meat system to a global one, leveraging the whole value chain from gate to plate with highly centralized feedlots and meat processing facilities.
It is challenging for regional meat processors to compete against the largest meat companies in the world. Regional meat processors face challenges of attracting a well-trained workforce, access to capital for expensive equipment and packaging systems, and selling and distributing meat products to their local 24-hour (online) economy. However, these challenges can be an opportunity to bring back diversification and healthy competition among local ranchers, meat producers, and retail stores by expanding access to a high-quality local and regional meat system. It is time to bring back the middle.
A just economy is built on a foundation of stability and opportunity, where everyone has opportunities to learn, work, and grow.
More Lex Icons™
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) released a proposed rule with new regulatory requirements to better align the voluntary “Product of USA” label claim with consumer understanding of what the claim means. The proposed rule allows the voluntary “Product of USA” or “Made in the USA” label claim to be used on meat, poultry and egg products only when they are derived from animals born, raised, slaughtered and processed in the United States.
President
WEAVER FARMS
How have the trends of consolidation and concentration impacted small and mid-scale producers?
For almost a decade now, the “Big Four” meat processors (being the four largest) have controlled 85% of the meat processing in the United States. Most are partially or totally foreign-owned by huge international companies. This has given them unprecedented control over the markets for cattle and hogs and therefore the beef and pork that is sold to consumers. They also control USDA to the extent that they have been allowed to import meat, mostly beef, from several countries around the world and mark it as “Product of USA,” simply by taking it out of the package it arrives in and repackaging! What you buy at the grocery store may have indeed come from another country even when it is marked as coming from the USA. The Big Four also manipulate what they call “Forward Contracting,” wherein cattle ranchers are essentially forced to agree, sometimes months ahead of sale time, what they will be paid for their animals or else lose their buyer for their livestock.
In addition to controlling the market to the extent that they can dictate to farmers and ranchers how much they will be paid for their cattle and swine, they also set the wholesale price, which directly impacts what you pay for these products at the supermarket. A win-win for the meat packers. They have been enjoying record profits for many years– leaving the farmers and ranchers to deal with 2023 input costs while receiving 1985 prices for their livestock. The farmer receives less than $2.00 per pound of the $12-16 you pay for steak at the store!
The effect for farmers and smaller meat processors is that they must accept these low prices to compete and stay in the business. The farmer’s share of your food dollar has decreased from about $.40 cents in the 1980’s to around $.16 cents now ,and inflation has driven their costs up by at least 300-400 percent. America has lost approximately 75% of the beef cattle producers we had in the 1970’s.
Small and medium size meat processors have been surviving mostly on local sales. Those that are large enough to also provide products to retail stores accept a smaller margin than that received from local sales.
Recent experience has revealed that reliance on so few packers for the majority of our meat supply is not good business either. Sustainability of our meat supply system would be greatly enhanced by developing and expanding smaller and medium size processors regionally. It also should provide more of your food dollar to the farmers and ranchers who put 90% of the work and costs into producing the animals.
Implementation of farming operations, management and trading that impact positively to farmers productivity and profitability.
More Lex Icons™
Spending at independent retailers generates 3.7 times more direct local economic benefit than spending at national chain stores.
Director of Public & Governmental Affairs
HANOVER CO-OP FOOD STORES
How have these trends impacted food coops, health food stores, smaller regional grocery chains?
Trends for small, independent grocery stores, chains, and food co-ops point highest in regions that also have independent livestock producers and processors. These stable producer-retailer collaborations earn consumer loyalty and strengthen food security across regional food sheds.
The 2020 Coronavirus Pandemic proved local livestock producers are nimble and able to pivot, keeping small stores supplied with meat and poultry when national supplies faltered.
Nevertheless, that resilient, independent business model is threatened by excessive industry consolidation.
The frailty of the consolidated food system in the United States was laid bare by the pandemic. It buckled under its own weight when basic failures in some areas rocked the entire industry.
In today’s grocery landscape, most small retailers source from consolidated meat channels. For many, the relationship will never feel like a partnership, or be a system they can fully rely on.
A case in point is a small retail chain that sources through both national and regional channels. This business sold $5.5 million of fresh meat and poultry in 2022. Of those sales, $1.3 million was sourced through small, independent channels and direct from livestock producers.
Pre-pandemic
Navigating the world as a meat buyer tasked with setting fair prices, developing a regular promo schedule, and selecting quality options for customers is always a challenge. Keeping a close eye on pricing for commodity meats and working with distributors to set up regular promos is usually a gamble based on pricing and availability. Fortunately, it was just the opposite with local/regional producers and suppliers. Those independent partners proved reliable week-to-week and held their deliveries and prices consistent.
During the Pandemic
A couple of months into the pandemic, this retailer experienced increasing fulfillment issues and dramatic price swings from national sources. Strategically, the chain’s lead buyer deals with three to four mainline distributors which allows his store meat managers to secure cuts where available. But, because of severe supply chain issues, not only was it tough to get the primal cuts they needed, the prices kept increased each week. The chain’s category manager said “When it comes to dealing with large distributors, we communicate with their sales representatives regularly to discuss what’s available, what price we can expect to pay, and learn of issues with production, etc. Those sales reps were doing their best, but the concentrated model they work within is not designed to serve small, independent retailers. In contrast, we received high-priority service from our local and regional producers and processors. They held their pricing and were there for us week after week delivering quality meats, offering phone support, and helping with custom cutting/packing when store staffing levels were a real concern due to COVID-19. These partners kept our meat cases well-stocked. We saw firsthand the value they delivered when global food systems took a major hit.”
In places where independent retailers have access to independent producers and processors, consumer food security grows stronger. But in the face of consolidation, the question becomes, for how long?
Livestock, feed, and/or meat products sourced within 100 miles.
More Lex Icons™
Food hubs—one type of regional food value chain—passes on 75 to 85 percent of wholesale revenues back to their suppliers.
Owner
RANCH FOODS DIRECT
Farmers should be able to farm, and ranchers should be able to ranch, but today, they can no longer sustain their livelihoods with the low income they receive from the highly concentrated and consolidated marketplace.
There are precious few options for the most ideal regenerative producers to sell into today’s concentrated marketplace, dominated by the big food cartel, always seeking higher and higher volumes at below cost-of-production prices.
At no time in history have consumers paid so much for food, with so little going to the people who grow, and do the work of producing our food.
Ranch Foods Direct was formed twenty-three years ago to provide Callicrate Cattle Company more direct access to the end consumer, a way around the meatpacking cartel and their big retail and food service partners. Ranch Foods Direct and the Peak to Plains Food Hub, have developed a collaborative value chain for the Colorado region, working with other regional food hubs to provide better farm and ranch income through more direct access to consumers and sales to discriminating owner-operated wholesale and institutional accounts.
Considering the lack of antitrust law enforcement, deceptive and misleading labeling, and the absence of local/regional food infrastructure, new pathways from production to consumption, must be built. Through replicating models like Ranch Foods Direct, and exposing the unfairness of current farm and ranch income, we feel the larger volume-based market can be forced to pay a higher percent of the food dollar to producers and workers, especially producers in the missing-middle, which is most farmers and ranchers. Middle sized farms and ranches are too big to sell direct to consumers, and too small to meet the high volumes and low prices of large companies.
It’s clear a shift to more local, resilient, and sustainable food systems will better meet the needs of people, animals, communities, and the environment. Until the food system can be more fully transformed away from the extractive industrial model of production and distribution, consumers need to be able to choose how to better spend their food dollar. Fair market access for the very best regenerative producers is paramount.
Community involvement when working with government and private sectors to build strong communities, industries, and markets.
More Lex Icons™
66% of Americans and 80% of young Americans (ages 18-34) are willing to pay more for sustainable products versus less sustainable competitors. However, 78% of Americans say they don’t know how to identify environmentally friendly companies, despite wanting to buy from them. To confirm a company’s environmental friendliness, 50% agree that clear language on products is important.
Consultant
NICHE MEAT PROCESSOR ASSISTANCE NETWORK
What are the roles of branding and marketing in rebuilding “the missing middle”?
“Values-based food supply chains distribute significant volumes of high-quality, differentiated food products and share the rewards equitably. Farmers and ranchers function as strategic partners rather than easily replaced input suppliers. All participants in these business alliances recognize that creating maximum value for the product depends on significant interdependence, collaboration and mutual support. These supply chains attach importance to both the values embedded in the production of the food products AND the values that characterize the business relationships.” (CIAS, UW Madison).
Brands give your product a personality or identity. A brand conveys information to a shopper: product attributes, your company’s mission and values, price point, intended audience and more. Your brand helps customers distinguish your product from similar substitutes and tells a story about what makes your products and your company unique. Marketing is an extension of branding – marketing is all the activities you engage in to promote your brand and encourage consumers to buy your products. Traditionally, marketing has been thought of as “The Four Ps” (product, price, place, and promotion), but nowadays with digital marketing it is so much more than that and includes activities like storytelling and collaboration on social media, search engine optimization (SEO), and more.
Mid-scale, values-based meat and poultry brands are critical in the development and expansion of Collaborative Regional Value Chains. Brands allow multiple producers to work together, raising their animals in alignment with a shared set of production practices (e.g. grassfed, organic, regenerative, etc.) and marketing the finished goods under a single brand.
Working together under one brand, farmers and ranchers can produce and market year-round which greatly increases their likelihood of success in retail and food service market channels. Mid-scale branded meat programs are also often better aligned with the needs of processors: processors need year-round, steady throughput to support their businesses. A brand that has consistent, year-round supply and demand is better able to access processing services than seasonal, smaller-scale businesses. In surveying the local and sustainable meat and poultry landscape, you won’t find too many examples of folks who “go it alone.” Working together under one brand is often the best path forward in building viable, durable meat businesses, the cornerstone of any Collaborative Regional Value Chain.
Organizations and businesses such as retailers and institutional buyers are responsible for telling the story and communicating the social, environmental and economic benefits of their products.
More Lex Icons™
“Today, just 1.4 percent of farmers identify as Black or mixed race compared with about 14 percent 100 years ago. Out of this number, 48 percent are focused on cattle and dairy farming.”
CEO & Founder
STEWART PASTURES
Collaborative Regional Value Chains can effectively support BIPOC farms, businesses and communities through mutually beneficial marketing, responsible purchasing, growth partners and access to resources.
For many years BIPOC farmers and businesses have been redlined or completely locked out of markets. Small minority farmers can build value to big brands, as well as the big brands building value in their small farming operations. These transactions go hand in hand when built on a foundation of mutual respect. The beautiful part of the relationship is it all builds value to the meat/end product with each party benefiting from the livestock, the farmer, the purchaser and the consumer.
Collaborative regional value chains also allow for sourcing diversification and minimize risk for purchasers. It allows for lower entry points and opens the market to available farmers. Building a collaborative farming mentality can be the biggest way to effectively support BIPOC farms. A collaborative mentality de-escalates competition for contracts while focusing on product quantity and quality. Sourcing from multiple farmers allows for larger orders to be purchased and fulfilled within one region.
Responsible purchasing and sourcing creates true economic development. Building actual relationships with BIPOC farmers puts their food and products into circulation. The revenue from sales go to the local BIPOC businesses and BIPOC communities.
Growth partners should start with low attainable goals allowing room to grow capacity. Temperature checking to see how the farmer is doing and what they need assistance with. Treat them the same as other farmers, but please explain processes with patience. Building a solid foundation of trust creates mutual respect, supporting the farmers to provide quality meat.
Access to resources is the ultimate gate keeper in farming. The collaborative regional value chain may provide access to equipment, distribution, storage, or more to meet the necessary standards the market requires of them. This can look differently in each situation, but the requirements to meet the standard should always be taken into consideration.
Healing BIPOC farmers’ connection to land will yield positive results for food, production, communities, economic development and future generations. Food is more than an output. Each phase of the process matters including the farmers’ relationship with the land. Turning back to traditional less industrial methods means honoring the people who were the original herders and caretakers of the land. Leaving out the past will continue to dehumanize our relationship to food, because it is still dehumanizing the people. Respecting customs, ancestors, ways of life, traditions and the return to land stewardship will heal the land. Harvesting and farming are about giving and taking. Understanding these principles will bring unity, trust and success to the collaborative regional value chains.
Prioritizing and committing to a diverse group of stakeholders, scales, and products throughout the value chain, between businesses and locations.
More Lex Icons™
The US Department of Agriculture reported in 2020 that the average funds generated by farm operators to meet living expenses and debt obligations, after accounting for production expenses, have been negative for nine out of the last 10 years. In 2017, for instance, median net-cash farm income was $1,035 in the red per farm household in the country.
Owner
WHITE OAK PASTURES
No facet of a producer’s (or processor’s) business model is more important than- “What is the appropriate scale for me?” It is the life or death question.
Unfortunately, no decision that the producer must face has more complexity than this 7-word question. The Valley of Death between being too small and being too big is enormous, and it is treacherous.
It ain’t comforting when a life-or-death question is horribly complex.
This is because all of the following considerations must be explored-
Local Economy – be in the right zip code.
Local Ecosystem -know what Nature wants done where you are farming.
Producers Expertise -you will not be able to read enough ‘How-to-Farm’ books.
Available Capital -there is never enough.
Cash Flow -it will take a lot longer than you thought.
Administration functions -all of the painful office stuff has got to get done.
The producer must also consider the Series of 4 Hills that must be climbed, remembering that he cannot see the next hill from the foot of the most immediate hill-
Hill 1- Learn how to produce without dependence on industrial agriculture’s tools of technology. [This is the fun part].
Hill 2- Figure out how to make his production monetizable. Consumers don’t buy hogs and cows and sheep. They buy pork and beef and lamb].
Hill 3- Find market access. How to find the customer. They are not likely to be your friends and neighbors.
Hill 4- How to get the product to the customer.
Getting 3 out of the 4 ain’t good enough. And for God’s Sake, sell directly to the consumer and not through a wholesaler.
Stay flexible. What makes sense today is not the right thing to do next year. If you ain’t humble when you start, you will be.
A socioeconomic system that reflects a specific community, typically geographically defined, that is advanced through a variety of entities sharing common values and aspirations that are rooted in the community.
More Lex Icons™
In 2020, 174 million acres were used exclusively to plant corn and soybeans in the US, which accounts for 56% of the US’s 310 million total cropland acres. Much of it goes to produce animal feed.
CEO & Founder
EVEERYBODY CLEANUP
Over the last fifty years, the American poultry industry has come to rely on a singular breed: the Cornish Cross chicken, bred for industrial hyper growth.
Thanks to decades of selective genetics, these chickens grow unnaturally quickly, bred for fast feed conversion over their own bone, organ, and immune system development.
As a result, 99% of modern industrial breeds are only able to consume industrial row crops, lacking the necessary gut biome to process traditional, low density grains. The majority of industrial poultry are therefore unable to support the regenerative farming systems that would benefit local economies.
Slow-growth breeds, like the Cooks Venture Pioneer, have measurably superior gut health and diverse grain digestibility because these breeds are selected for a variety of traits beyond rapid growth— including the ability to thrive on biodiverse pasture and promote perennial and annual ecosystems.
With healthier alternative breeds, regional economies and ecologies can benefit from the growth of healthier rotational crops like milo, rye, oats, kernza, and pea or lentil. By introducing cover crops, grown in regenerative systems as feed for diverse breeds, small-scale farmers could not only access the substantial poultry feed market—expected to surpass $264.4B by 2030— but improve the quality of their own land and soil, ensuring future economic and environmental benefits.
Furthermore, because industrial breeds saturate the national and global landscape, integrators are currently forced to import corn, conventional wheat, and soy beans to feed their livestock. For every acre of land it takes to raise poultry, an additional 47-70 acres of land is required to grow feed grains for the chicken industry— while many parts of the country and world do not have the climate, or soil type to grow these monocrops, but are reliant on them due to industrial breeds of poultry.
A change to this model would allow other global communities to reset their own regionally specific agricultural systems: traditional regenerative crop rotations, local economies and food security in areas where they are most critically lacking today. As an example, African countries currently import grain from South America or Eastern Europe for poultry production. By introducing breed diversity, these populations would have the ability to grow their own crops, better suited to their own climate, and build their own circular systems. The clear path ahead: reintroduce breed diversity, (re)building regional and global circular economies and reducing reliance on a currently unsustainable poultry system.
New systems can be developed to have the same variable efficiency as modern integrated systems, which would provide affordable meat from healthier animals to more people in scale. This type of full-life cycle responsibility, marrying the biology of the animals with the biology of the land, can—and must—become the status quo in order to create agricultural systems that function symbiotically with the planet and its people.
Local and regional feed sources are prioritized, sought out, and used for animal feed. (Local is 100 miles or less; regional is between 100-750 miles).
More Lex Icons™
85% of consumers trust independent, third-party certification organizations to verify product claims.
US Head of Food Business
COMPASSION IN WORLD FARMING
In the United States, the marketplace is flooded with claims and certifications that may not mean as they appear. Humane, for example, does not have a federal definition, so it can be arbitrary or even meaningless when it comes to animal care. That is why certifications in the food system allow greater transparency for all stakeholders: consumers, purchasers, processors, transport workers, farmers, and corporate executives. By leveraging the reputation and trust of meaningful third-party certifications, we can advance and support collaborative regional value chains. Certifications play a unique role in advancing the “conscientious middle” – the actors involved in livestock transport and processing.
For the animals in the middle of the supply chain, certifications allow for greater accountability and general welfare practices. The middle of the chain – between producer and purchaser – is often a hidden element of the food system. Welfare certifications such as Certified Humane, Animal Welfare Approved, Global Animal Partnership (G.A.P.), and Regenerative Organic Certified (ROC) provide high standards that should be set for on farm conditions, transport, and processing.
Not all third-party auditing standards are created equal. Especially for the conscientious middle, several top certifications do not have meaningful standards for on-farm treatment of livestock or slaughter methods. For example, American Humane Certified permits the routine use of antibiotics for livestock, gestation crates for pigs, and cages for laying hens. Animal Welfare Approved, Certified Humane, and G.A.P. not only prohibit all of those on-farm components, but also have guidelines around transportation limits.
Slaughter methods play an integral role in the welfare of animals and processing workers. While on-farm slaughter can be achievable for many farms, thus reducing transport stress for the animals, transitioning slaughter methods is an effective way to drastically increase animal welfare is paramount. Particularly for chicken processing, shifting away from live-shackled electrical stunning methods is highly preferred, not only for improved animal welfare but a better environment for workers.
Acknowledging that the pursuit of third-party certifications may be more accessible to some farms than others, we encourage all producers, processors, and purchasers to consider the integral role certifications play in advancing our food system and educating consumers. Working in collaboration with others across the regional value chain, we can collectively partner to ensure certifications are promoting high-quality products and rewarding farmers for higher welfare and more regenerative practices, building a better and more transparent food system from the soil up.
Assessment of the conformity of farming practices and management against a set of standards and regulations that are verified through an independent third-party auditor and certifier, ideally with an embedded traceability system to ensure transparency.
More Lex Icons™
94 percent of consumers are likely to be loyal to a brand that offers complete transparency, and 39 percent of consumers are willing to switch to a brand that is more transparent
Director of Ecological Benefits
THE LEXICON OF SUSTAINABILITY
What is the importance of “soft infrastructure” and tools such as the Meat OS platform in advancing and sustaining Collaborative Regional Value Chains?
Connective tissue. For those of us who work with livestock and meat, it’s not a metaphor. Bones and organs have no real form or function without it. It’s what holds everything together. In the end, it’s also what guides the knife. For a chef, it holds a secret key to retaining the flavor and succulence an eater expects.
Similarly, the “operating system” of a meat sector created by collaborative design depends upon the connective tissue that not only links together the necessary hard infrastructure but also connects people, place, and values. Some call it the “soft infrastructure” of a collaborative regional value chain. All of the best infrastructure in the world can create the skeleton of a shiny, sanitized meat supply chain, but without the connective tissue of community and common cause, it will never form a value chain rooted in regional aspirations and needs.
Embedding values in a meat supply chain transforms it into a relational enterprise, one that depends upon the soft infrastructure that weaves together livestock, landscapes, and livelihoods with intentionality. Sometimes, that connective tissue comes in the form of local networks and regional markets, or it can appear as digital platforms, social media, skilled labor, and cross-sector relationships. It is what binds us in our common pursuits for a more regenerative and resilient livestock sector, but it’s also what untethers us from the highly consolidated and concentrated supply chains that place minimal value on the welfare of workers or animals, not to mention healthy ecosystems.
The building of a collaborative regional value chain begins with conversations, not bricks. Those conversations are the first building blocks in sussing out the strategies needed for producers, processors, and purchasers to create a resilient and profitable regional meat sector that is regenerative rather than extractive. The lack of adequate infrastructure and systems for small- and mid-scale producers, processors, and independent retailers is real. And so is the risk. The largest players in the livestock industry and retail sector not only squeeze the margins for the boots on the ground doing the real work, but also put almost all of the risk on those smaller players.
The risks facing those small- and mid-scale players are best mitigated by the support provided by others in their value chain who understand that risk should be mutually shared just as success is. To a degree, a collaborative regional value chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Hard infrastructure is hard won–and easily lost. Without the connective tissue, there are few if any regional wins, and without trust and transparency, there is no connective tissue.
Consumer transparency mechanisms (i.e. QR codes on labeling) that allow businesses to make information available to consumers so they can observe and validate the business' values.
More Lex Icons™
About
Lexicon of Food is produced by The Lexicon, an international NGO that brings together food companies, government agencies, financial institutions, scientists, entrepreneurs, and food producers from across the globe to tackle some of the most complex challenges facing our food systems.
Team
Meat OS was developed by an invitation-only food systems solutions activator created by The Lexicon with support from Food at Google. The activator model fosters unprecedented collaborations between leading food service companies, environmental NGOs, government agencies, and technical experts from across the globe.
This website was built by The Lexicon™, a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt nonprofit organization headquartered in Petaluma, CA.
Check out our Privacy Policy, Cookie Policy, and Terms of Use.
© 2024 – Lexicon of Food™
Professionals at universities and research institutions seeking scholarly articles, data, and resources.
Tools to align investment and grant making strategies with advances in agriculture, food production, and emerging markets.
Professionals seeking information on ingredient sourcing, menu planning, sustainability, and industry trends.
Chefs and food industry professionals seeking inspiration on ingredients and sustainable trends to enhance their work.
Individuals interested in food products, recipes, nutrition, and health-related information for personal or family use.
Individuals producing food, fiber, feed, and other agricultural products that support both local and global food systems.
This online platform is years in the making, featuring the contributions of 1000+ companies and NGOs across a dzen domain areas. To introduce you to their work, we’ve assembled personalized experiences with insights from our community of international experts.
Businesses engaged in food production, processing, and distribution that seek insight from domain experts
Those offering specialized resources and support and guidance in agriculture, food production, and nutrition.
Individuals who engage and educate audience on themes related to agriculture, food production, and nutrition.
Nutritional information for professionals offering informed dietary choices that help others reach their health objectives
Those advocating for greater awareness and stronger action to address climate impacts on agriculture and food security.
Professionals seeking curriculum materials, lesson plans, and learning tools related to food and agriculture.
We have no idea who grows our food, what farming practices they use, the communities they support, or what processing it undergoes before reaching our plates.
As a result, we have no ability to make food purchases that align with our values as individuals, or our missions as companies.
To change that, we’ve asked experts to demystify the complexity of food purchasing so that you can better informed decisions about what you buy.
The Lexicon of Food’s community of experts share their insights and experiences on the complex journey food takes to reach our plates. Their work underscores the need for greater transparency and better informed decision-making in shaping a healthier and more sustainable food system for all.
Over half the world’s agricultural production comes from only three crops. Can we bring greater diversity to our plates?
In the US, four companies control nearly 85% of the beef we consume. Can we develop more regionally-based markets?
How can we develop alternatives to single-use plastics that are more sustainable and environmentally friendly?
Could changing the way we grow our food provide benefits for people and the planet, and even respond to climate change?
Can we meet the growing global demand for protein while reducing our reliance on traditional animal agriculture?
It’s not only important what we eat but what our food comes in. Can we develop tools that identify toxic materials used in food packaging?
Explore The Lexicon’s collection of immersive storytelling experiences featuring insights from our community of international experts.
The Great Protein Shift
Our experts use an engaging interactive approach to break down the technologies used to create these novel proteins.
Ten Principles for Regenerative Agriculture
What is regenerative agriculture? We’ve developed a framework to explain the principles, practices, ecological benefits and language of regenerative agriculture, then connected them to the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.
Food-related chronic diseases are the biggest burden on healthcare systems. What would happen if we treated food as medicine?
How can we responsibly manage our ocean fisheries so there’s enough seafood for everyone now and for generations to come?
Mobilizing agronomists, farmers, NGOs, chefs, and food companies in defense of biodiversity in nature, agriculture, and on our plates.
Can governments develop guidelines that shift consumer diets, promote balanced nutrition and reduce the risk of chronic disease?
Will sustainably raising shellfish, finfish, shrimp and algae meet the growing demand for seafood while reducing pressure on wild fisheries?
How can a universal visual language to describe our food systems bridge cultural barriers and increase consumer literacy?
What if making the right food choices could be an effective tool for addressing a range of global challenges?
Let’s start with climate change. While it presents our planet with existential challenges, biodiversity loss, desertification, and water scarcity should be of equal concern—they’re all connected.
Instead of seeking singular solutions, we must develop a holistic approach, one that channel our collective energies and achieve positive impacts where they matter most.
To maximize our collective impact, EBF can help consumers focus on six equally important ecological benefits: air, water, soil, biodiversity, equity, and carbon.
We’ve gathered domain experts from over 1,000 companies and organizations working at the intersection of food, agriculture, conservation, and climate change.
The Lexicon™ is a California-based nonprofit founded in 2009 with a focus on positive solutions for a more sustainable planet.
For the past five years, it has developed an “activator for good ideas” with support from Food at Google. This model gathers domain experts from over 1,000 companies and organizations working at the intersection of food, agriculture, conservation, and climate change.
Together, the community has reached consensus on strategies that respond to challenges across multiple domain areas, including biodiversity, regenerative agriculture, food packaging, aquaculture, and the missing middle in supply chains for meat.
Lexicon of Food is the first public release of that work.
Over half the world’s agricultural production comes from only three crops. Can we bring greater diversity to our plates?
In the US, four companies control nearly 85% of the beef we consume. Can we develop more regionally-based markets?
How can we develop alternatives to single-use plastics that are more sustainable and environmentally friendly?
Could changing the way we grow our food provide benefits for people and the planet, and even respond to climate change?
Can we meet the growing global demand for protein while reducing our reliance on traditional animal agriculture?
It’s not only important what we eat but what our food comes in. Can we develop tools that identify toxic materials used in food packaging?
Explore The Lexicon’s collection of immersive storytelling experiences featuring insights from our community of international experts.
The Great Protein Shift
Our experts use an engaging interactive approach to break down the technologies used to create these novel proteins.
Ten Principles for Regenerative Agriculture
What is regenerative agriculture? We’ve developed a framework to explain the principles, practices, ecological benefits and language of regenerative agriculture, then connected them to the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.
Food-related chronic diseases are the biggest burden on healthcare systems. What would happen if we treated food as medicine?
How can we responsibly manage our ocean fisheries so there’s enough seafood for everyone now and for generations to come?
Mobilizing agronomists, farmers, NGOs, chefs, and food companies in defense of biodiversity in nature, agriculture, and on our plates.
Can governments develop guidelines that shift consumer diets, promote balanced nutrition and reduce the risk of chronic disease?
Will sustainably raising shellfish, finfish, shrimp and algae meet the growing demand for seafood while reducing pressure on wild fisheries?
How can a universal visual language to describe our food systems bridge cultural barriers and increase consumer literacy?
This game was designed to raise awareness about the impacts our food choices have on our own health, but also the environment, climate change and the cultures in which we live.
First, you can choose one of the four global regions and pick a character that you want to play.
Each region has distinct cultural, economic, historical, and agricultural capacities to feed itself, and each character faces different challenges, such as varied access to food, higher or lower family income, and food literacy.
As you take your character through their day, select the choices you think they might make given their situation.
At the end of the day you will get a report on the impact of your food choices on five areas: health, healthcare, climate, environment and culture. Take some time to read through them. Now go back and try again. Can you make improvements in all five areas? Did one area score higher, but another score lower?
FOOD CHOICES FOR A HEALTHY PLANET will help you better understand how all these regions and characters’ particularities can influence our food choices, and how our food choices can impact our personal health, national healthcare, environment, climate, and culture. Let’s Play!
The FOOD CHOICES FOR A HEALTHY PLANET game allows users to experience the dramatic connections between food and climate in a unique and engaging way. The venue and the game set-up provides attendees with a fun experience, with a potential to add a new layer of storytelling about this topic.
Starting the game: the pilot version of the game features four country/regions: Each reflects a different way people (and the national dietary guidelines) look at diets: Nordic Countries (sustainability), Brazil (local and whole foods instead of ultra-processed foods); Canada (plant-forward), and Indonesia (developing countries).
Personalizing the game: players begin by choosing a country and then a character who they help in making food choices over the course of one day. Later versions may allow for creating custom avatars.
Making tough food choices: This interactive game for all ages shows how the food choices we make impact our health and the environment, and even contribute to climate change.
What we eat matters: at the end of each game, players learn that every decision they make impacts not only their health, but a national healthcare system, the environment, climate and even culture.
We’d love to know more about you and why you think you will be a great fit for this position! Shoot us an email introducing you and we’ll get back to you as soon as possible!
Providing best water quality conditions to ensure optimal living condition for growth, breeding and other physiological needs
Water quality is sourced from natural seawater with dependency on the tidal system. Water is treated to adjust pH and alkalinity before stocking.
Producers that own and manages the farm operating under small-scale farming model with limited input, investment which leads to low to medium production yield
All 1,149 of our farmers in both regencies are smallholder farmers who operate with low stocking density, traditional ponds, and no use of any other intensification technology.
Safe working conditions — cleanliness, lighting, equipment, paid overtime, hazard safety, etc. — happen when businesses conduct workplace safety audits and invest in the wellbeing of their employees
Company ensure implementation of safe working conditions by applying representative of workers to health and safety and conduct regular health and safety training. The practices are proven by ASIC standards’ implementation
Implementation of farming operations, management and trading that impact positively to community wellbeing and sustainable better way of living
The company works with local stakeholders and local governments to create support for farmers and the farming community in increasing resilience. Our farming community is empowered by local stakeholders continuously to maintain a long generation of farmers.
Freezing seafood rapidly when it is at peak freshness to ensure a higher quality and longer lasting product
Our harvests are immediately frozen with ice flakes in layers in cool boxes. Boxes are equipped with paper records and coding for traceability. We ensure that our harvests are processed with the utmost care at <-18 degrees Celsius.
Sourcing plant based ingredients, like soy, from producers that do not destroy forests to increase their growing area and produce fish feed ingredients
With adjacent locations to mangroves and coastal areas, our farmers and company are committed to no deforestation at any scale. Mangrove rehabilitation and replantation are conducted every year in collaboration with local authorities. Our farms are not established in protected habitats and have not resulted from deforestation activity since the beginning of our establishment.
Implement only natural feeds grown in water for aquatic animal’s feed without use of commercial feed
Our black tiger shrimps are not fed using commercial feed. The system is zero input and depends fully on natural feed grown in the pond. Our farmers use organic fertilizer and probiotics to enhance the water quality.
Enhance biodiversity through integration of nature conservation and food production without negative impact to surrounding ecosysytem
As our practices are natural, organic, and zero input, farms coexist with surrounding biodiversity which increases the volume of polyculture and mangrove coverage area. Farmers’ groups, along with the company, conduct regular benthic assessments, river cleaning, and mangrove planting.
THE TERM “MOONSHOT” IS OFTEN USED TO DESCRIBE an initiative that goes beyond the confines of the present by transforming our greatest aspirations into reality, but the story of a moonshot isn’t that of a single rocket. In fact, the Apollo program that put Neil Armstrong on the moon was actually preceded by the Gemini program, which in a two-year span rapidly put ten rockets into space. This “accelerated” process — with a new mission nearly every 2-3 months — allowed NASA to rapidly iterate, validate their findings and learn from their mistakes. Telemetry. Propulsion. Re-entry. Each mission helped NASA build and test a new piece of the puzzle.
The program also had its fair share of creative challenges, especially at the outset, as the urgency of the task at hand required that the roadmap for getting to the moon be written in parallel with the rapid pace of Gemini missions. Through it all, the NASA teams never lost sight of their ultimate goal, and the teams finally aligned on their shared responsibilities. Within three years of Gemini’s conclusion, a man did walk on the moon.
FACT is a food systems solutions activator that assesses the current food landscape, engages with key influencers, identifies trends, surveys innovative work and creates greater visibility for ideas and practices with the potential to shift key food and agricultural paradigms.
Each activator focuses on a single moonshot; instead of producing white papers, policy briefs or peer-reviewed articles, these teams design and implement blueprints for action. At the end of each activator, their work is released to the public and open-sourced.
As with any rapid iteration process, many of our activators re-assess their initial plans and pivot to address new challenges along the way. Still, one thing has remained constant: their conviction that by working together and pooling their knowledge and resources, they can create a multiplier effect to more rapidly activate change.
Co-Founder
THE LEXICON
Vice President
Global Workplace Programs
GOOGLE
Who can enter and how selections are made.
A Greener Blue is a global call to action that is open to individuals and teams from all over the world. Below is a non-exhaustive list of subjects the initiative targets.
To apply, prospective participants will need to fill out the form on the website, by filling out each part of it. Applications left incomplete or containing information that is not complete enough will receive a low score and have less chance of being admitted to the storytelling lab.
Nonprofit organizations, communities of fishers and fish farmers and companies that are seeking a closer partnership or special support can also apply by contacting hello@thelexicon.org and interacting with the members of our team.
Special attention will be given to the section of the form regarding the stories that the applicants want to tell and the reasons for participating. All proposals for stories regarding small-scale or artisanal fishers or aquaculturists, communities of artisanal fishers or aquaculturists, and workers in different steps of the seafood value chain will be considered.
Stories should show the important role that these figures play in building a more sustainable seafood system. To help with this narrative, the initiative has identified 10 principles that define a more sustainable seafood system. These can be viewed on the initiative’s website and they state:
Seafood is sustainable when:
Proposed stories should show one or more of these principles in practice.
Applications are open from the 28th of June to the 15th of August 2022. There will be 50 selected applicants who will be granted access to The Lexicon’s Total Storytelling Lab. These 50 applicants will be asked to accept and sign a learning agreement and acceptance of participation document with which they agree to respect The Lexicon’s code of conduct.
The first part of the lab will take place online between August the 22nd and August the 26th and focus on training participants on the foundation of storytelling, supporting them to create a production plan, and aligning all of them around a shared vision.
Based on their motivation, quality of the story, geography, and participation in the online Lab, a selected group of participants will be gifted a GoPro camera offered to the program by GoPro For A Change. Participants who are selected to receive the GoPro camera will need to sign an acceptance and usage agreement.
The second part of the Storytelling Lab will consist of a production period in which each participant will be supported in the production of their own story. This period goes from August 26th to October 13th. Each participant will have the opportunity to access special mentorship from an international network of storytellers and seafood experts who will help them build their story. The Lexicon also provides editors, animators, and graphic designers to support participants with more technical skills.
The final deadline to submit the stories is the 14th of October. Participants will be able to both submit complete edited stories, or footage accompanied by a storyboard to be assembled by The Lexicon’s team.
All applicants who will exhibit conduct and behavior that is contrary to The Lexicon’s code of conduct will be automatically disqualified. This includes applicants proposing stories that openly discriminate against a social or ethnic group, advocate for a political group, incite violence against any group, or incite to commit crimes of any kind.
All submissions must be the entrant’s original work. Submissions must not infringe upon the trademark, copyright, moral rights, intellectual rights, or rights of privacy of any entity or person.
Participants will retain the copyrights to their work while also granting access to The Lexicon and the other partners of the initiative to share their contributions as part of A Greener Blue Global Storytelling Initiative.
If a potential selected applicant cannot be reached by the team of the Initiative within three (3) working days, using the contact information provided at the time of entry, or if the communication is returned as undeliverable, that potential participant shall forfeit.
Selected applicants will be granted access to an advanced Storytelling Lab taught and facilitated by Douglas Gayeton, award-winning storyteller and information architect, co-founder of The Lexicon. In this course, participants will learn new techniques that will improve their storytelling skills and be able to better communicate their work with a global audience. This skill includes (but is not limited to) how to build a production plan for a documentary, how to find and interact with subjects, and how to shoot a short documentary.
Twenty of the participants will receive a GoPro Hero 11 Digital Video and Audio Cameras by September 15, 2022. Additional participants may receive GoPro Digital Video and Audio Cameras to be announced at a later date. The recipients will be selected by advisors to the program and will be based on selection criteria (see below) on proposals by Storytelling Lab participants. The selections will keep in accordance with Lab criteria concerning geography, active participation in the Storytelling Lab and commitment to the creation of a story for the Initiative, a GoPro Camera to use to complete the storytelling lab and document their story. These recipients will be asked to sign an acceptance letter with terms of use and condition to receive the camera.
The Lexicon provides video editors, graphic designers, and animators to support the participants to complete their stories.
The submitted stories will be showcased during international and local events, starting from the closing event of the International Year of Fisheries and Aquaculture 2022 in Rome, in January 2023. The authors of the stories will be credited and may be invited to join.
Storytelling lab participation:
Applicants that will be granted access to the storytelling Lab will be evaluated based on the entries they provided in the online form, and in particular:
Applications will be evaluated by a team of 4 judges from The Lexicon, GSSI and the team of IYAFA (Selection committee).
When selecting applications, the call promoters may request additional documentation or interviews both for the purpose of verifying compliance with eligibility requirements and to facilitate proposal evaluation.
Camera recipients:
Participants to the Storytelling Lab who will be given a GoPro camera will be selected based on:
The evaluation will be carried out by a team of 4 judges from The Lexicon, GSSI and the team of IYAFA (Selection committee).
Incidental expenses and all other costs and expenses which are not specifically listed in these Official Rules but which may be associated with the acceptance, receipt and use of the Storytelling Lab and the camera are solely the responsibility of the respective participants and are not covered by The Lexicon or any of the A Greener Blue partners.
All participants who receive a Camera are required to sign an agreement allowing GoPro for a Cause, The Lexicon and GSSI to utilize the films for A Greener Blue and their promotional purposes. All participants will be required to an agreement to upload their footage into the shared drive of The Lexicon and make the stories, films and images available for The Lexicon and the promoting partners of A Greener Blue.
