Hawaiʻi Island Agriculture and Food System Study

Analysis Step 1

Study Document

January 20th, 2021

INTRODUCTION

This document will serve as a running summary of the analysis phase of the Hawai’i Island Agriculture and Food System Study. The analysis is based on a process of socratic inquiry to generate findings, conclusions and recommendations for the Hawai’i Island Agriculture Partnership (HIAP) and the Hawai’i Island Food Alliance (HIFA) to incorporate into their strategies and action plans.

The information provided from this document only represents a subset of the data gathered for the study. In order to collectively analyze the data without holding an analysis workshop for several days, we are releasing and reviewing data in multiple steps to break up the analysis in pieces and build more detail upon each step, thus not giving the team members too much data to review before each meeting. Thus, the analysis is divided between four meetings as described below.

1. STEP 1) DEFINING THE SYSTEM

   
   

   (Systems Mapping Sub-Team Meeting – January 12)

●      Meeting Purpose: Understand the structure, scope, scale, and shared definitions of Hawai’i Island’s Agriculture and Food System and help refine the framework for understanding where the various pieces of data collected fit into that system.

●      Driving Query: What does the agriculture and food system look like now?

●      Meeting Data: Information provided for this meeting will focus on quantitative data and maps to understand the breadth and scope of the system. The outputs for this meeting will be a set of findings that represent the study team’s observations of the data shared.

2. STEP 2) UNDERSTANDING AGRICULTURAL VALUE CHAINS

   
   

   (Agricultural Value Chains Sub-Team Meeting - January 28)

●      Meeting Purpose: Understand the market systems for agricultural products and how value can be added to the island’s agricultural production to increase income and employment.

●      Driving Query: What are the top opportunities for adding value in agricultural markets in ways that generate more income for farmers?

●      Meeting Data: Information provided for this meeting will include a summary of existing studies about agricultural development on the island and responses from stakeholder interviews and focus group discussions. The outputs for this meeting will be a set of findings that represent the study team’s observations of the data shared.

3. STEP 3) IMPROVING FOOD RESILIENCY

   
   

   (Food Resiliency and Sustainability Sub-Team Meeting – February 4)

●      Meeting Purpose: Understand the needs, issues, and opportunities associated with improving the resiliency of the island’s food supply.

●      Driving Query: What are the most important actions needed to improve the efficiency, sustainability, and resiliency of Hawai’i Island’s food system?

●      Meeting Data: Information provided for this meeting will include a summary of existing studies about agricultural development on the island and responses from stakeholder interviews and focus group discussions. The outputs for this meeting will be a set of findings that represent the study team’s observations of the data shared.

4. STEP 4) GENERATING COLLECTIVE ACTION

   
   

   (Analysis Workshop – February 18)

●      Meeting Purpose: Review findings generated during the earlier sub-team meetings and collectively develop conclusions and recommendations for HIAP and HIFA.

●      Driving Query: What actions can we take to collectively transform Hawai’i Island’s agriculture and food system to be more efficient, equitable, and resilient?

●      Meeting Data: The information provided for this meeting will include the findings generated by the sub-teams and stakeholder input on potential opportunities for system improvements. Meeting outputs will be a set of study conclusions and recommended actions for HIAP and HIFA.

STEP 1: DEFINING THE SYSTEM

The first step in the analysis process starts building a shared and coherent understanding of Hawai’i Island’s agriculture and food system to help shape the framework for further analysis of more study data on specific components of the system. The systems mapping subteam reviewed thew following data designed to build a shared understanding of the scale, scope and structure of the agriculture and food system:

1. Numerical Data

●      Title: Agriculture Value Chain Quantitative Dashboard

●      Produced by: Supersistence

●      Purpose: This data gathered from the 2017 agricultural census and other sources is to help us understand the scale and breadth of agricultural production, sales, and employment on Hawai’i Island.

2. Spatial Data

●      Title: Food Resiliency and Sustainability Story Map

●      Produced by: Supersistence

●      Purpose: To show agriculture and food-related data from various sources spatially on an ArcGIS platform.

3. System Maps

a.     Cause and Effect Map

○      Title: Hawai’i Food System Map

○      Produced by: Kamehameha Schools

○      Purpose: In 2020, Kamehameha Schools commenced a food system mapping project for the state of Hawai’i. The project sought to identify and map the many interconnected forces at play that are both helping and hurting Hawaii’s ability to have a truly resilient food system.  People representing a diverse range of stakeholders participated in the mapping project. While the map had a statewide scope, the process had considerable input from Hawai’i Island and is considered to be applicable to Hawai’i county for the purposes of this study. 

b.    Market System Map

○      Title: Hawai’i Island’s Agriculture and Food Market System Map

○      Produced by: The Hamakua Institute

○      Purpose: Market system maps are designed to show systems from the lens of supply and demand, seeking to understand the structure and interactions of the system, the roles and functions of different market actors and their performance in relation to each other. Data will be collated for this map and reviewed by the Agricultural Value Chain subteam on January 28th.

c.     Tiered Food System Map

○      Title: Tiers of Hawai’i Island’s Food System

○      Purpose: Tiered Food System Maps build an understanding of food systems through the lens of consumption relationships across the food system, identifying five different levels of relationships between food producers and consumers. Data will be collated for this map and reviewed by the Food Resiliency Sub-Team on February 4th.

Subteam Analysis

The subteam was asked to make observations about the data in response to three key questions:

1. What observations can we make about the structure, scale and scope of the agriculture and food system on the island?

2. What overlaps can be observed between agricultural development and food resiliency?

3. How can information about this system be better summarized and communicated to improve understanding, aid analysis, and inform planning?

Below are the summarized findings from the Systems Mapping sub-team in response to each of the above questions. Asterisks next to a point indicates the number of other team members who highlighted that finding as important.

1.    What observations can we make about the structure, scale and scope of the agriculture and food system on the island?

Findings

• ********Few farms make a lot of money, while a large number are making very little (ie. where money is moving in the food system – nearly 2% of farms make 66% of the revenue. This says a lot about issues of market dominance / networks / services and value addition.

• ***Small scale farms with annual sales less than $1,000 and farms in the $50,000-$250,000 range have been increasing, while farms in the $1,000-$50,000 range have been decreasing.

• **Large farms have remained relatively constant in number, but nearly doubled in revenue over 20 years

• *Vast majority of operations are in food and nut farming with a relatively stable representation over time.

• *There’s been quite a growth in numbers of firms over time. Something like a 30% increase in smallholder farms over the past 10 years. It would be important to know the primary drivers of that increase.

• *Commercial kitchens are clustered in a few of the more populated centers and less accessible to the rural areas where many farms are, but it was noted that the map shows commercial kitchens that are currently open to public use. Many changed their status this year due to COVID.

·       60% of farms are small in size over the last two decades. 0-10ha farms dominate. But there’s still quite significant numbers of large and very large farms.

●      The challenges between small farms and large farms seem the most obvious in the data, with the available services and in looking at infrastructure - and knowing that the map of available services is in flux, especially the availability of public kitchens through COVID.

●      There is a wide diversity of agricultural production on the island for many different tropical fruits and vegetables, particularly amongst small farms.

●      Processing at small farms has decreased. *

●      Wages seem to be increasing proportionally more than establishments or employment.

●      Data shows a need for more shared infrastructure (in some shape or form). Scale of our farms means they’re not able to scale up on their own.

●      There is a need for shared infrastructure. Models can differ, but it appears that the scale (size) of the farms might indicate that the farms cannot do processing on their own.

●      The nature of the scale of agricultural industry is an impediment to its evolution--its ability to be sustainable and resilient--and in the meantime the money is flowing only to a handful of operators. Others who may have the potential to grow and diversify do not even have access to the structure that would help them do so. So, unless and until we address those structural limitations, we are stuck with what we have.

Further Queries

In addition to the findings above, the systems mapping subteam raised a number of questions about the data which are summarized below:

●      **The spatial mapping is useful. It would be interesting to consider where some of the facilities are in relation to different crops - who has access to what kind of facility? What’s missing? What has spare capacity potentially?

●      Do small farms get bigger over time? Any evidence of expansion / ability to expand / consolidate over time?

●      Farm labor was noted as a barrier in several areas. Another data set shows non livable wage jobs.  How do we balance this? 

●      Can we get wholesale trade data? Wages seem to be increasing proportionally more than establishments or employment. What does this imply? Higher skilled and hence higher paid types of employment – which, if so, would be interesting in itself.

●      Overall, the data and the way it’s being presented is an excellent resource. It will serve many purposes over time.

●      Would be interesting to see where the waste from food processing and production is currently going. Is waste management a barrier to increased agricultural production and/or the economic viability of food processing growth?

●      Would be interesting to see the volume of agricultural products/inputs that are currently being imported from outside of Hawaii.  How much are we as farmers spending on soil amendments etc. that could be produced locally?

●      How does farm size relate to overall land ownership? Who are the land owners and do they only offer specific sizes of parcels to farmers?  That could be a limiting factor for farm size.

●      Are agriculture practices moving away from small scale farms back to plantation type practices?

●      Are there global economic shifts causing the trends we can see?

●      Do the large farms internalize value-added functions (eg processing / cold storage / packaging etc? which means they’re not available (potentially) to others? Would be interesting to know what these products are that are contributing the most value - and if they are raw / value added and / or sold domestically or exported? 

●      Does this mapping system clarify for us that Hawaiʻi’s agriculture meet the needs of Hawaiʻi County? How does this system meet the need and do we have the information around what that need actually is?

●      We still need more data around local vs export markets. Exports still need to be part of the island’s ag portfolio, but how can local food supply needs be met by local farmers?

2.    What overlaps can be observed between agricultural development and food resiliency?

Findings

·       *The data starts to tell the story of how these systems are related and how they feed into each other.  It would be great to see how we can “close the loops” and have these systems actually feed each other and build upon each other’s success. 

·       *The maps show that there are linkages. But what they look like - exactly - differs by crop / product. Some undergo very little by way of value addition, are sold and consumed locally, and often at low value. Others are subject have value additions and different destination markets -  likely higher value and further away. So there are different connections of ag products to different parts of the food system. Managing this complexity though, means breaking down the system into specific components. A focus on products, channels, transactions and end markets is needed to understand the overlaps in ways that can guide action going forward.

·       *The data shows the interrelation between scales of food. Relates to the balance of economically driven agricultural choices and local food resiliency.  For instance, papaya exports under the COVID crisis ceased, and those became a local food input (food for pigs) under the situation.  The economic systems can pivot under stress for resilience.

·       *The ʻāina is ʻohana loop in the Hawai’i Food System Map seems to be a link or overlap between our food resiliency and agricultural development.  Per example maybe in summary, according to Food Bank Data: 80,000 individuals and 5,000 families are now receiving food relief.

·       The network map shows interlinkages.  It also lays on perceptions relative to nodes and gaps. More than data, it’s the perspective on the data…

·       Our median farm size hasn’t changed that much over the decades. Over the course of the 20th century farm size didn’t change much. But how we interface with the market system has. We need co-ops to enable producers to participate in new market systems that exist.

·       The overlap exists in that “sweet spot” between local agricultural production and local food supply, which is key. Understanding that overlap is critical for helping both farmers and consumers on-island.

·       The more small farms that participate within the marker system through Coops and Food Hubs, increases their economic resilience and keeps more of the dollars spent on food and agriculture within the local economy, thus increasing local food and economic resilience. Strong diverse local market systems, leads to a more diverse and resilient market economy, and this in turn can increase household income and purchasing power. Access to healthy food is linked to availability, price, and consumer purchasing power.

Further Queries

In addition to the findings above, the systems mapping subteam raised a number of questions about the data which are summarized below:

●      **How do the outputs from one activity become inputs for another activity?.  Example: How does waste from processing become soil amendments for further production? What inputs are currently feeding these loops? And where are these inputs coming from?

●      **Can we identifying specific crops and products in these maps to better understand the overlapping threads?

●      Can we get more consumption data to better understand the system?

·       Can we better integrate need data to help focus our analysis?

·       The system is not broken, it is producing what it was set up to produce.  What is the system framework showing us that the island is set up to produce?  Do we have data or stories that show where positive change is occurring that we can build upon?*

·       These maps show linkages between ag development and food resiliency--it starts to tell that story but it lacks a certain amount of specificity. Can we see how they feed into each other better, and also to understand where we have real gaps and where we don’t have data?

3.    How can information about this system be better summarized and communicated to improve understanding, aid analysis, and inform planning?

Findings

·       ****An ecosystem map of organizations doing work in the sector is needed.  This would allow for more collaboration and less duplication.

·       ***It’s less about the data we have access to and more about finding the “holes” in the data.  What don’t we know? This will direct future work or emerging industries / markets / ways to be more sustainable.

·       **Need to plug data into systems maps and test some of the theory examples.  Will also give us a baseline to see what impacts/outcomes are of the changes we make in the system.

·       *We need to dive deeper into the system with some practice data.

·       *The maps need to show exactly how the food is being produced currently. On both of the maps it is unclear what the inputs are and where they come from, such as agricultural products (fertilizers, soil amendments, herbicides, pesticides, packing products, tools, machines, etc.), labor (demographics of the labor currently used), processing and packaging products used (boxes, bags, crates, water, etc. )

·       Looking forward to data informing overarching narrative, rather than peripheral/anecdotal evidence. Greater acuity in detail will be essential in forming intelligent/appropriate policy (i.e. deeper understanding of what “local” means and how to invest in more resilient ag practices, interconnected support systems like food hubs, and integrated waste/ag input streams) – There is a need for hyper-specific detail on inputs and infrastructure/capacity

·       *Testing theories would be a great action to call.

·       *Look at how we can use the current situation or what exists today to our advantage.  Take deeper dive into the small farm data to understand more of the nuances there.

·       The Ag and Food system spatial data webpage is excellent and has a wealth of information, but it would be helpful to share the data in an additional format so that information can be compared and analyzed rather than clicking on the map.

·       There’s a lot of richness and detail, but there are gaps too. Dynamics - issues related to things like organisation, linkages, networks, relationships, market access routes, interconnectivity and cooperation. Perspectives - one of the maps does offer some perspective from stakeholders on key constraints. But there’s a lot more to learn about perspectives on why things are the way they are; what untapped potential might be; and what might be needed to unlock it.

·       Need to emphasize the dates of relevant data and recognize the substantial market changes occurring during the pandemic. To a certain extent, we are basing our analysis on data that has already changed and we don’t know if or when it will return to the earlier market dynamics represented by this data.

·       Looking at the system maps helps a great deal to begin to understand not only what we do know but what we do not know. When we take that data we can really begin to dive deep into how the supply chains and systems are interacting, with a grounded ability to make suggestions on what we can do moving forward. Importantly, plugging data into these maps to test some of the theory can be useful, and detail will be essential for intelligent and appropriate policy.

·       People are seeing many of the same things in the data, which helps us to focus on what is most important

·       Missing from the data: local versus exporter markets: these big farms are generating most of the revenues are likely exporters. Depending on goals (food security, resilience, etc.) and how the export story plays into that goal...it does play a part in the story but understanding what is being produced for local versus export markets would be helpful.

Further Queries

In addition to the findings above, the systems mapping subteam raised a number of questions about the data which are summarized below:

·       *Who has access to the data and makes informed decisions? What would viable educational outreach programs look like?

·       *How do we grow the support network?  Often the same 30 people in these meetings across the state, across all efforts. Could be much more effective/far-reaching if we can leverage a wider network

·       Understand who we can influence. Who is our target audience in this?  We need to understand the connections between “levels” of farmers.  If the large farms have infrastructure and market access, how can they be leveraged (or convinced) to use their resources to support smaller farmers and fold them in?  This was the (unfortunately failed) Kalona brand model...to create something big in order to provide market and opportunities to the small cacao growers.

·       Systems are complex, like this one. So how do we continue to dive deeper in our data collection and analysis to drill down into the specific components of the system’s supply chains? (i.e. inputs, products, processing, through wholesaling, marketing, distribution, to end consumers, etc.). Getting to the root causes, not just symptoms of problems, will be key.

GLOSSARY OF DEFINITIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS

For the purposes of this study, the following assumptions and definitions are being used to help provide a shared language and understanding for describing the reality of agriculture and food on Hawai’i Island.

Assumptions

●      That agriculture and food on Hawai’i Island can be characterized and viewed as one system.

●      That this system, like all systems, has nested subsystems within it.

●      That placing spatial and temporal boundaries around this system is important for understanding and improving it.

Definitions

Over time and throughout literature, agriculture and food systems have been defined in various ways. For the purposes of this study, the following definitions are being used to help provide a shared language and understanding to describe agriculture and food on Hawai’i Island.