This article highlights two different bodies of change in a similar area, both advocating for food justice, and compares their effectiveness in inequity/trauma, land, labor, exchange, and democratic process. The highlighting of these two groups is meant to bring light to both opportunities and challenges faced by municipal governments.
While both organizations had pros and cons, it stood out to me that they each had a lack of effort put into deeper systemic causes. It is mentioned the organizations tends to shy away from controversial/politically challenging topics, why? Is it due mostly to a lack of resources, so they choose the safest paths of change? The author wants the reader to know that municipal governments tend to be limited to more smaller, gradual changes rather than deep systemic issues like labor conditions and poverty.
From this, I gather once more that many of the systemic issues discussed in this course in the context of food justice can not be helped only by local governments and organizations that can influence local policy and legislation, but will require changes in higher governments to incentivize actors towards social good over individual profit. It is a challenge itself that these organizations and governments are constrained by the same economic systems as those they wish to help.
No comments:
Post a Comment