| Just finished The Omnivore's Dilemma. If you want a closer look at the industrial parts of the US food system, and a possible alternative, you could do worse than starting there. If you're going to note that specialization in our food system is what makes it possible to feed so many people with so few farmers, sure, go ahead. Wendell Berry and many others that the reduction in the number of farmers enabled by that specialization is what has hollowed out rural communities to the point where many services can't be economically provided to people living in rural areas because there are too darn few people. I didn't grow up in a rural or agrarian area, but I live in one now. I most recently got to watch this through the lens of the school budget. The four towns that comprise our school district add up to in total 500-some students across 12 grades. Getting a budget passed took two tries and some cuts because getting enough teachers and students together and transported to school buildings is pretty high. There were other factors, but structurally the low density of students is a huge cost driver. So yeah, would more farmers farming smaller farms be less efficient? From a food production standpoint, yes. Would it bolster rural communities? Sweeping away a bunch of other diverse issues that are no doubt affecting communities differently, in aggregate, probably yes. Bringing it back to TFA: would it result in a healthier, more resilient food system in the US? Almost certainly. |