Presentation on theme: "Measuring Food System Structure and Performance: 1997-2007 Project Team: Robert King, Department of Applied Economics, University of Minnesota; Molly Anderson,"— Presentation transcript:
Measuring Food System Structure and Performance: Project Team: Robert King, Department of Applied Economics, University of Minnesota; Molly Anderson, Consultant, Food Systems Integrity; Gigi DiGiacomo, Department of Applied Economics, University of Minnesota; David Mulla, Department of Soil, Water and Climate, University of Minnesota; Mary Story, Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, University of Minnesota; David Wallinga, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. Data compilation, mapping, formatting and website assistance provided by APEC undergraduate students: Megan Dehn, Andrew McBride and Lumei Zeng. Figure 1: State Fact Sheet, Minnesota, 2007 Economic Performance Map, Figure 2. The map below illustrates the variation in total retail sales accounted for by supercenter and wholesale club stores in Total sales volume in this segment of the retail food sector grew rapidly over the study period. The economic importance of supercenter and wholesale club stores differs across states, however. These stores account for less than five percent of sales in many New England and Mid-Atlantic states, as well as in California. On the other hand, these stores account for more than 14 percent of sales in states across the southern tier of the country and up through the industrial Midwest. Maps are available for all economic indicators shown on the state fact sheet (figure 1).. Indicator Background & Tools. Todays food system is complex and multifaceted. It affects human health, the environment and the economy. It also is closely linked to culture and our sense of community. Sound food policy formation requires a robust understanding of the current food system status as well as of the linkages between policy initiatives and changes in the food system. Indicator tools - maps and fact sheets - were developed by the Healthy Foods, Healthy Lives State Level Food System Indicators Project to facilitate discussion and understanding of state level food system structure and performance over time. All indicators shown on the state fact sheet (Figure 1) were mapped for each year examined (1997, 2002, 2007) and for the period to explore economic, environmental, health and social changes in food system performance over time and across locations. This poster illustrates the use of state fact sheets and indicator maps. Figure 1 presents all indicators for a single state for a single year. Figures 2-5 depict maps showing select indicator levels across all 50 states for the years 1997, 2002 and 2007 as well as the period, Indicator maps and state fact sheets are available for all indicators, states and study years at: State Fact Sheet, Figure 1. The Minnesota 2007 fact sheet (below) depicts 123 food system indicators. Included are structural indicators measuring the food system share of employment and payroll. As shown, approximately 21 percent of state employment and 9.8 percent of Minnesotas annual payroll in 2007 can be linked to its food system with most jobs coming from the farming sector (7.7%) and retailing sector (9.6%). Payroll per employee averaged $19,855 in 2007 within Minnesotas food system – well below the state average payroll for all sectors of the economy ($42,332). This is due to the large number of part-time jobs in the farming and food retailing sectors. Defining the Food System We define the food system as an interconnected set of biological, technological, economic, and social activities and processes that nourish human populations and provide livelihood and satisfaction to the people who participate in it. The food system encompasses activities that range from the provision of inputs for primary food production, farming, food processing, food distribution and retailing to food consumption and post-consumption food waste. These activities extend across community, state and national borders, but can also be described and evaluated at a specific level of spatial resolution, such as a state. Figure 3: Environmental Indicator Map, 2007 Figure 2: Economic Indicator Map, 2007 Figure 4: Health Indicator Map, Change Figure 5: Social Indicator Map, 2007 Environmental Performance Map, Figure 3. The map below shows variation in farmland enrolled in federal conservation programs in 2007 – a year when enrollment was high across the northern tier of states - from Minnesota to Washington; in states along the Mississippi River; in Kansas and Colorado and in southeast states that have wetlands and estuaries along the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic. The New England states that have less than one-half of one percent of farmland enrolled in conservation programs are states that have a very low percentage of total land area in farms. West Virginia stands out as an outlier relative to surrounding states. Maps are available for all environmental indicators shown on the state fact sheet (figure 1). Social Performance Map, Figure 5. The map below shows changes in the percent of the US population receiving USDA Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits between 1997 and The greatest increases show up in the East Central states, in Maine, South Carolina, Arizona and Oregon. The most striking decreases in the percent of SNAP program recipients occur in California, some of the Mountain states and a few Mid- Atlantic states. Changes in the percentage of SNAP recipients may be due to changes in overall economic conditions or to efforts to increase participation in the SNAP program among those households who are eligible for benefits. Maps are available for all social indicators shown on the state fact sheet (figure 1). Health Performance Map, Figure 4. The health performance map below depicts changes in adult diabetes rates across all 50 states between 1997 and Larger rates of change, representing increasing rates of diabetes, are noted in the southern and eastern states. Some of the lowest rates of change were mapped in the Midwestern, Southwestern, West Coast and New England states, although there are several exceptions such as Arizona and Nevada which reported a rise in adult diabetes of more than 3.5 percent over the ten year period, The progression in adult diabetes parallels the dramatic rise in rates of overweight and obesity in all states. Maps are available for all health indicators shown on the state fact sheet (figure 1).