Policy Pathways toward Agroecology - Paper on SNAP Essay
In this paper, you will hone the knowledge and skills you have gained over the course of the semester by identifying and analyzing how a particular agricultural policy does or does not constitute an agroecological approach. Select a government (municipal, state, federal) or non-governmental (private or public) policy that has shaped or could shape agriculture and food systems, analyzing the policy through an agroecological lens. This will involve doing in-depth research on the policy, including 1) Who, what and when - who was involved in pushing for the policy (and who was not), what are its main tenets, and its evolution over time; 2) How it has been or would be implemented; and 3) Evaluating to what extent this policy employs agroecological principles. Found at this website http://www(dot)fao(dot)org/agroecology/knowledge/10-elements/en/. Finally, citing the literature to support your claims, explain how the policy could have been better designed in order to achieve outcomes in alignment with agroecological principles. This paper is to be focused on the Supplemental Nutrition Assitance Program
https://en(dot)wikipedia(dot)org/wiki/Supplemental_Nutrition_Assistance_Program
Policy Pathways toward Agroecology - Paper on SNAP This paper is to be focused on the Supplemental Nutrition Assitance Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supplemental_Nutrition_Assistance_Program Description In this paper, you will hone the knowledge and skills you have gained over the course of the semester by identifying and analyzing how a particular agricultural policy does or does not constitute an agroecological approach. Select a government (municipal, state, federal) or non-governmental (private or public) policy that has shaped or could shape agriculture and food systems, analyzing the policy through an agroecological lens. This will involve doing in-depth research on the policy, including 1) Who, what and when - who was involved in pushing for the policy (and who was not), what are its main tenets, and its evolution over time; 2) How it has been or would be implemented; and 3) Evaluating to what extent this policy employs agroecological principles. Found at this website http://www.fao.org/agroecology/knowledge/10-elements/en/. Finally, citing the literature to support your claims, explain how the policy could have been better designed in order to achieve outcomes in alignment with agroecological principles. Formatting We expect this paper to use elements typical in a research paper, such as including a thesis statement. Paper length: Six pages (excluding references) Format: Double-spaced, 12 point font with 1” margins. References: A minimum of 10 peer-reviewed papers AND/OR other resources (e.g. NGO reports, interviews, news stories). Include a bibliography with references listed in alphabetical order following a standard format, e.g.: Davis AS, Hill JD, Chase CA, Johanns AM, Liebman M (2012) Increasing cropping system diversity balances productivity, profitability and environmental health. PLoS One 7(10). In text citations should be listed by author (three or more authors use “et al.” after the first author) and date. For example: However, the paradigm of input intensification and specialization that has contributed to large yield gains in staple crops has also led to dramatic declines in crop diversity (Aguilar et al., 2015; Newbold et al., 2015), which is recognized for field-level benefits like improving crop yields, soil health, and input use efficiency (Pretty, 2018), and at the national scale for increasing the stability of food production (Renard and Tilman, 2019). Rubric The paper will be worth 65 points, broken down as follows: Component Points possible Description Clear thesis 10 A clearly identifiable thesis statement is essential. What is the point you are trying to make? It should take a stand, not just describe something. For instance, “While California’s ban on the harmful pesticide chlorpyrifos will make some progress protecting the health of farmworkers and the environment, without a more comprehensive strategy for developing knowledge and support for ecological pest management, the agricultural industry will likely switch to other harmful pesticides, making this piecemeal approach largely ineffective” Specificity of topic 10 Clearly identifiable who, what, where, and when. This is not about scale (e.g. an international policy is fine), but rather about how precisely you have pinpointed the topic. Analysis of topic through an agroecological lens 25 Critical analysis of the who/what/how of the policy through an agroecological lens, by invoking specific agroecological principles and approaches discussed in class or readings, or that you have researched. How well does this analysis support your thesis? Clarity of writing 10 Clarity at several levels: 1) A logical structure to the whole paper. Does it flow from one part to the next?; 2) Paragraphs with a clear focus and an arc. What is the point of this paragraph? 3) Sentences “that tell a story, just the shortest one possible”. More or less grammatically correct. Formatting & referenc 10 Meets formatting (including not going over the length… points will be deducted from papers that exceed the length requirements) and references requirements listed above.
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is the United States major anti-hunger program and stabilizer of family well-being in times of financial distress. The program offers nutritional aid to the elderly, people living with disabilities, low-wage working families, and other individual and families with low incomes. It helps more than 40 million with low-incomes meet the expense of a nutritionally adequate diet (Mabli, 292). In 2019, for example, the federal government spent more than $60.5 billion to purchase food for more than 38 million Americans (Statista, np). Most of the participants are families with children, households with elderly, and people living with disabilities.
SNAP plays a vital role in preventing hunger and poverty. In 2018, for example, SNAP prevented over 8.4 million people from poverty (Snap to Health, np). Similarly, research shows that for every $1 billion spent by SNAP participants, over $340 million in farm production and $110 million in farm products, and 3000 farm jobs are generated (Snap to Health, np). Thus said, the program is managed by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) in cooperation with social worker agencies. It is anchored to USDA goal to increase food security and reduce hunger by improving access to healthy diets, food, and nutrition education to low-income Americans.
The program is deep rooted to the original Food Stamp Program of 1939 and pilot programs of the early 1960s. It was started to allocate growing food surpluses to low-income families after the Great Depression (Nestle et al., 1632). The program was a replica of a commodity distribution program by the Federal Surplus Relief Corporation, which encouraged domestic consumption of local surplus food as a form of unemployment reprieve. The Food Stamp program allowed needy families to purchase orange stamps for $1 each to a sum equivalent to their monthly food expenses (Hollenbach, 52). For each successful orange stamp purchased, an individual would receive a blue stamp worth 50 cents. While the orange stamps were used to buy any food, blue stamps would buy foods USDA considered surplus.
In addition, the program was widespread and operated in almost 50% of the states serving nearly four million people every month. That is, the program was quickly perceived by the broader market, including the general public grocers, participants, and farmers. For instance, farmers provided surplus food commodities to the organization while the retail stores ensured the products' availability. Unfortunately, the program ended in 1943 due to lack of surplus food prompted by the impacts of war and a significant drop in the unemployment level (National Research Council, np).
Nevertheless, the Food Stamp did not just fade, but the interest continued until 1960, when the program became a reality again under Senator John F. Kennedy. In his presidential campaign in West Virginia, he announced that he would revive the program if elected president. After the election, President Kennedy issued an executive order in January that allowed the expansion of food distribution programs. In February of the same year, the president announced that USDA would start numerous food stamp pilot programs. The pilot programs were successful and quickly expanded from the initial eight sites to forty-three (Nestle., 1632). 1n 1964, president Lyndon Johnson requested the permanent Food stamp to be enacted and later signed the program into law in the same year.
In the new program, orange and blue stamps were substituted with food coupons, which members were expected to buy. The purchase requirement ensured that food stamp benefits were proportional to the cost of a healthy diet and the size of a family. The state’s welfare agencies were tasked with the responsibility of determining eligibility and vetting of participants. Families that were not enrolled for public assistance could apply at agencies' offices. The food coupon allowed participants to buy any type of food except for alcohol, tobacco, and imported foods, including bananas, tea, and coffee. As a result, the number of participants dramatically increased to more than 500,000 in April the subsequent year.
By 1971, the Food Stamp Program was revised to substitute individual state rules with national eligibility criteria. Before the revisions, many states and counties operated multiple commodity distribution programs as an alternative to the Food Stamp Program. In 1974, the program expanded across the nation, attracting more than 10 million participants (National Research Council, np). It was not until 1977 when the program was revised yet again, resulting in the Food Stamp Act of 1977. Part of the revision was the purchase requirement, which allowed a family to receive coupons worth the value of a healthy diet as determined by USDA.
Unfortunately, this revision had dreadful participation impacts that elicited controversial debates. Consequently, the purchase criterion was abolished, and members were permitted to obtain a free portion of their benefit in coupons and buy a healthy diet by complementing their vouchers with 30% of their net income. Upon implementation in 1979, a significant percentage of household participated in the program resulting in over 1.5 million participants than in the previous month.
In the 1980s, the lawmakers raised concerns about the Food Stamp Program's cost and size and started amending the legislation. Among the heated concerns was the requirement for a household to meet a specific gross income test. In 1988, a new law was formed, which increased the Thrifty Food Plan by 3% in the credit of the time intervals between cost-of-living adjustments and implementation over time. Regrettably, the provision was eliminated later in the same decade (National Research Council, np).
In 1996, the Food stamp was yet again amended to give states greater administrative control, limit the eligibility of abled adults without dependents, limit non-citizen participants, and the adoption of the Electronic Benefit Transfer system. The system was launched in 2002 and aimed to minimize fraud and the potential stigma common with paper coupons. In 2009, 13.6% was added to the Thrifty Food Plan for most ho...