first publication gis korea markc

I. Introduction

Establishing practical methods of measuring com-

munity food security is an essential requirement

when considering how to reinvent our current food

distribution system (Anderson and Cook, 1998).

Without actual guidelines, appropriate measure-

ments, or a clear understanding of what security

means for a particular local region, the ability of

researchers to undertake investigative measures that

try to understand and/or prevent future inefficiencies

is doomed to repeat past mistakes. These ineffi-

ciencies are not statistical in nature, but exist as the

health of each citizen within this country. A recent

article by Cummins and Macintrye (2005) establish-

es the research position that the decision an individ-

ual makes about what they are going to eat, actually

has very little to do with what they want, and more

to do with what is available and acceptable within

there social environment. An example would be the

ability to buy what is considered “organic” produce

and foodstuffs in today’s grocery stores; whereas

twenty years ago, to ask a salesclerk about this prod-

uct would only warrant strange looks.

So if what is provided in our supermarkets, gro-

cery stores, corner stores, restaurants, and fast-food

eateries, is determined more by a larger series of

social factors, such as access, availability, price, and

desire; than these should be the areas to focus inves-

tigative research on. One area of food security that

has gained notable support is the notion of accessi-

bility. A person who lives in a certain neighborhood

The Spatial and Socioeconomic Features of Drop-off Sites for CSA Farms within the Milwaukee Metro Area

Mark Caldwell*··Woonsup Choi**··Chulsue Hwang***

Abstract : The aim of this project has been to plot the locations of Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) drop-offsites in the Milwaukee Metro Area. Based on the eleven farm’s drop-off sites, a public Google Map has been createdshowing these drop-off points and the appropriately linked farms. In the focus of socioeconomic interests, these siteshave been correlated with 2000 Census tract information dealing with percentages of White and Black neighborhoods,rates of bachelor’s degrees and areas where median income is below $10,000 dollars. Results show that drop-off sitesare clustered in those areas where there is a higher concentration of White residents, in contrast to few or no drop-offsites in predominantly Black tracts sites. As well, the majority of locations lie in areas where there are high rates ofBachelor degrees, showing a potential connection with educational obtainment and dietary trends. Lastly,neighborhoods that have significant proportions of the population living below the poverty line have little or no drop-off sites in operation. Store front and traditional churches have been identified that may act as community sites for theestablishment of new CSA locations in these disaffected areas.

Key Words : Community Supported Agriculture(CSA), drop-off locations, spatial & socioeconomic divide

The Geographical Journal of Korea Vol. 44, No. 3, 2010 (281~288)

* Graduate Student, Department of Geography, University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee** Assistant Professor, Department of Geography, University of Wisconsin ([email protected])

*** Corresponding Author, Associate Professor, Department of Geography, Kyung Hee University ([email protected])

should be able to buy and consume foods that pro-

vide nutrition and sustenance for themselves and

their family.

Yet, there are social barriers that create incongru-

encies in the food landscape. Two major factors that

shape food access, are socioeconomic status and

therefore the neighborhood an individual habitats. A

study conducted on commercial food stores across

28,050 zip codes based on 2000 Census data, con-

cluded that if you live in a lower income neighbor-

hood, you will have 25% less grocery stores and

supermarkets as compared to someone who is mid-

dle class, and if you are African-American you will

have 50% less supermarkets and grocery stores than

someone who is White (Powell et al., 2007). These

Figures show a stark discrepancy in access, and

brings about the question; if someone doesn’t have

access to basic foodstuffs due to a lack of grocery

stores, than what do they have access to?

The answer is an increase in fast-food and conve-

nient stores. In a series of recent articles conducted

utilizing GIS mapping software and multivariate

regressions techniques, a pattern appears that shows

two trends. First, the creation over time of food

deserts, or pockets of a city that do not have ade-

quate access to nutritional and affordable food, is

based on the changing demographics of the city,

where there are twice the rates of fast food restau-

rants in African-American and lower income neigh-

borhoods; and second the rate of growth for these

stores coincides with a correlative decrease in super-

markets within those same neighborhoods

(Chaloupka et al., 2007).

Bringing about the question: what causes super-

market relocation and expansion into certain areas of

the city and the outlying periphery? Larsen and

Gilliand(2008) examined the way that supermarket

locations within London, Ontario from 1961-2005,

went from being highly clustered within the periph-

ery of the city, to being highly dispersed into the

suburban middle income areas around the city, leav-

ing the lower income regions in the center empty.

Another study conducted in Montreal (Apparicio et

al., 2007) reiterates those results by adding the

dimension of three measurements they used which

controlled there research focus: proximity, diversity,

and variety. The variety and diversity means what

kind of food is available to consume as well as pur-

chase for cooking. Each of these factors showed a

significant insufficiency in those neighborhoods

within the city that thirty years prior, and inhabited

by a growing middle class population, had sufficient

access to a variety of food stores. A display of the

way food networks are designed to be most affective

for those groups that have a greater amount of eco-

nomic and cultural capital.

So how to provide for those areas that are most

excluded? In terms of distance traveled, nutrition

received and dollar saved. This brings about the

need to re-establish new ways of providing healthy

and inexpensive food in areas that need more

options than are currently available. A potential in

roads into this distribution network may lie in

Community Supported Agriculture (CSA’s, where

farmer’s offer shares of their farm and yield to the

public for a set seasonal fee. When food is available,

residents meet at a set location where the farmer’s

drop-off there crops, interact and exchange informa-

tion with their patrons, and get feedback about

what’s desired. CSA networks are currently spread-

ing in towns and cities across the country, but

remain available in part to those groups that have the

social access to these farming locations and the abili-

ty to travel longer distances to receive there shares.

Mark Caldwell·Woonsup Choi·Chulsue Hwang

–282–

A recent phenomenon in information network

technologies, Google Maps is an interface GIS sys-

tem that is utilizes simple user tool box and drop

menu to generate any array of interest. The research

interests of this project built upon two other models

that have been established; the first focusing on

Boston Community Gardens (CandiceBNAN,

2009), which is an extension of the Boston Natural

Areas Network, which is continuing to plot urban

garden projects, volunteer resource sites and educa-

tional facilities. The second organization, the Land

Stewardship Project created a CSA Twin Cities

Directory Drop Site map (Cael et al., 2009) that

establishes exact and non-exact drop site locations,

as well as those farms that provide CSA shares to the

Minneapolis and St. Paul cities of Minnesota. Using

this second model, the Google Map that has been

established reflects those indicators of site and farm

locations.

The indirect goals of this study are continuously

changing based on the focus of the information that

has been gathered. Yet the aim of this inquiry was

first and foremost to gather information, and then to

process this information into a form that could be

correlated and displayed so that any person, espe-

cially those non-GIS users could see the social

impact of this current food distribution system with

images instead of words. This has an important place

in the transference and communication of complex

ideas with readily identifiable mapping imagery.

II. Study Data

The raw concept originated when the researcher

attended the 8th Annual Farmer and Food Open

House at the Urban Ecology Center of Milwaukee,

Wisconsin. Upon entering the facility, a lamented

topological map was displayed in the far corner of

the lobby. Outlined in detail where the locations of

the farms and there drop-off sites within the

Milwaukee Metro Area. The immediate research

interest in food network systems and geographical

information systems elicited the necessity to find out

where this information came from, so as to generate

a digital component and analyze potential social

trends. After a series of short introductions with

approximately five staff, the contact information of

Jamie Ferschinger, the Community Development

Coordinator, was provided as the person who creat-

ed the data shown on the map. From a meeting with

Jamie, a word document was given to the researcher

which had some basic questions about location, con-

tact information and food availability, as well as a

questionnaire about farming practices.

III. Results: Race, Education, Incomeand Community Links

The information provided from the word docu-

ment was complied using a Microsoft Excel spread-

sheet, which became a uniform table that could act

as an index for the creation of drop-site locations in

ArcGIS. The information that was used for the pur-

poses of plot point shapefiles only extends to the

contact information, locations and CSA information

of the farm, questions about farming practices have

been excluded due to non-conformity of the ques-

tions, as shown by the example template in Table 1.

This information was then geo-coded into

ArcGIS, using Milwaukee county and city bound-

aries, neighborhood tracts and major street (TIGRE)

shapefiles. As displayed in Figure 1, there are 31

–283–


points that fall within the Milwaukee Metro Area,

which is divided amongst eleven farm locations.

Symbols have been used to display each farming

operations specific sites, but in further maps the sites

will be shown as a single group in reference to some

socioeconomic factor. CSA sites that have intersec-

tions or approximate addresses have been geo-coded

using as specific measurements as possible. Of the

eleven farms, Pinehold Gardens and Rare Earth

farms have the most drop-off locations within

Milwaukee County, with five sites each.

1. Spatial Features with Race

Using these sites as a single operational compo-

nent of food distribution, the comparison between

White and Black neighborhood census tracts has

been analyzed using 2000 data. In Figure 2, the total

White population is displayed according to number

of total residents identifying as Caucasian only,

where the darker the shade, the higher amount of

residents of this descent. The sites appear to be clus-

tering in those areas that are more heavily shaded,

and potentially indicating that CSA’s are available to

predominantly White tract groups, extending into

larger neighborhood networks and townships, as dis-

played by the three locations boxes, where there is a

high frequency of locations.

In comparison to Figure 3, which shows the total

amount of residents who claim Black only as the

racial makeup; there is a reversal effect, where the

darker colors are now positioned in the center of the

city, in tracts where there is little or no drop-off sites

located. These comparative maps reiterate previous

studies conducted on supermarket accessibility as it

relates to racial demographics of a neighborhood,

with those areas that are predominantly Black hav-

ing less available sites for potential CSA exchange.

In addition to the lack of sites in Black neighbor-

hoods, there appears to be clustering of sites in

White tract areas, allowing residents within these


–284–

Table 1. Excel farm template

Farmd ID 1

Business Name Backyard Bounty Farms

Contact Info Laura Comerford

Address W 4873 County Rd. Plymouth, WI

Phone Number 920-892-4319

Email [email protected]

Website www.backyardbounty.space.live.com

Produce Vegetable, Eggs, Poultry

CSA Yes

Number of Years 12

Payment Cash, Check, Payment Plan Worker Share

Food Distribution Maryland and Menlo Ave, Milwaukee, WI

Notes Prospect and Locust. Milwaukee, WI

Chase near Oklahoma

66th and Loyola

Farmd ID

Business Name

Contact Info

Address

Phone Number

Email

Website

Produce

CSA

Number of Years

Payment

Food Distribution

Notes

Fig. 1. CSA drop-off sites according to location

areas a wider array of available vendors to chose

from. To conclude the analysis on race, two loca-

tions have been selected on Figure 3 as interest

points because of there unique positions within this

discussion. First, Growing Power, the renowned

urban farm that has been in operations for over

twenty years, is located at 55th and Silver Spring,

within a large tract area of predominately Black resi-

dents. Through the use of there operations, they have

established there own weekly food allotment pro-

gram that may act as an additional source for nutri-

tional and affordable produce within these areas.

Also, Harambee is a neighborhood that has acute

rates of health diseases and income disparities,

which may receive the greatest benefit from the

introduction of nutritional and affordable food

shares.

2. Spatial Distribution with Education

A different way to correlate these drop-off sites

would be to compare educational obtainment of the

given population with these assigned locations.

Figure 4 utilizes census data on the number of

Bachelor degrees in a given tract as a mean guide-

line for measuring educational standards. The darker

the shade, the greater proportion of residents who

have bachelor degrees, showing immediately a lack

of heterogeneous spatial dispersion, with three sig-

nificant CSA cluster sites emerging in those areas

where the shading is darker and therefore a higher

rate of college educated residents. Some stark find-

ings from this analysis are that the same central areas

of the city where higher rates of Black people reside

also have entire neighborhoods consisting of thou-

sands of residents who do not have a college educa-

tion. Interpretations from these results are two-fold:

first that cultural capital in the form of education

–285–


Fig. 2. White populationin relation to CSA sites

Fig. 3. Black population in relation to CSA sites

may play a vital role in shaping the dietary habits of

these college graduates, shifting eating trends

towards local and organic food patterns. As well,

through this relationship, sites will exponentially

grow in these areas because of the extended network

of other educated residents who desire the same

form of localized dieting.

3. Spatial Features with Income

Using information about annual incomes, Figure

5 shows rates of residents who make less than

$10,000. A necessary note, the area near the eastern

cluster of CSA sites, which shows a block of darkly

shaded tracts, and therefore high rates of poor resi-

dents, are actually locations where a large proportion

of students reside, who typically do not earn a full-

time salary, instead pursuing academic careers. The

largest block of residents living below the poverty

line, as indicated by $14,000 or less annually over-

laps with previous maps in that Harambee is a cen-

tral hub for a predominantly Black, less educated

and impoverished citizens. What these maps corre-

lating socioeconomic factors with established CSA

drop sites display is a general picture of the distribu-

tion network of CSA sites in Milwaukee, with those

areas of predominantly White residents who have a

college degree and live above the poverty line have

access to alternate forms of food, which are more

nutritionally beneficial due to organic farming prac-

tices, and more affordable due to decreased shipping

costs. Put another way, those areas such as

Harambee, which already lack access to even basic

food amenities, now have another new food network

formation that is out of there grasps.

4. Spatial Features with Community

To conclude these results, Figure 6 utilizes the tax

exemption key for store front and traditional church-


–286–

Fig. 4. Rate of bachelor’s degrees in relation to CSA sites Fig. 5. Poverty areas in relation to CSA sites

es in the 2006 Milwaukee Land Parcels shapefile to

locate those that fall within the area where little or no

drop-off sites occur. These organizations may act as

a vital link in establishing CSA locations within

those neighborhood tracts highlighted above. A

potential partnership may be able to be brokered

between the Urban Ecology Center and one of these

churches, where they would act as a weekly hub for

community members to meet and pick-up food

shares.

In addition to these maps, a GoogleMap has been

established as a public tool for use by anyone who is

interested in knowing where a CSA site may be in

there area. This map was modeled after the Land

Stewardship Project’s CSA map, and attempts to

allow greater use of the information that has been

geo-coded in ArcGIS and analyze in Excel.

IV. Limitations and Future Research

There are some immediate issues with the raw

data itself that will require further discussion with

the Coordinator at the Urban Ecology Center.

Information about these fields would be useful for

greater user accessibility and communication

between farmers: exact addresses, contact person for

drop-off sites, weekly pick-up dates, and subsidized

weekly allotment price. As well, some of the ques-

tions are not aligned, so the answers vary from

farmer to farmer.

Second, the research interests of this project

should be expanded into more complex forms of

spatial regression analysis, perhaps using Moran’s I

or Ripley’s K functions to determine more exact

measurements of accessibility according to demo-

graphics. Census data that was used for initial esti-

mates should be updated, utilizing 2008 information

for the most accurate representation of current

socioeconomic trends. Incorporating additional food

sites such as supermarkets and convenience stores

prior to this regression would allow for a more com-

plete understanding of the food availability network

within the Milwaukee metro area.

Third, the creation of this geo-database should be

extended and connected to other projects dealing

with community food security, urban gardens, and

food store accessibility. Through these linked part-

nerships, research in this area can expand in the

capacity to understand and significantly impact the

way that food systems are designed. Despite these

limitations, it has been the attempt of this study to

generate a new geo-database that can act as a foun-

dational platform for future research in the area of

alternative food distribution methods. Using three

socioeconomic input factors: race, education and

–287–


Fig. 6. Potential church locations for drop-off sites

income, an emphasis on the relationship between

these factors and disparities in access to CSA drop

sites is vitally important component to this research.

CSA shares can act as a way to provide affordable

and nutritional food, which doesn’t require the start-

up capital of establishing a new grocery store or

supermarket within a designated area. In this way,

the customer pays less from transit and mark-up

costs and the farmer expands there base of opera-

tions. With the potential support of community orga-

nizations within and outside these areas that have the

social and economic resources to implement such

programs; establishing such a relationship would be

beneficial for all who are involved.

References

Anderson, M. D. and Cook, J. T. 1999. Community

food security: Practice in need of theory?,

Agriculture and Human Values 16(2): 141.

Apparicio, P., Cloutier, M. S., and Shearmur, R.

2007. The case of Montreal’s Missing Food

Deserts: Evaluation of accessibility to food

supermarkets, International Journal of

Health Geographics 6(4).

Cummins, S. and Macintyre, S. 2006. Food environ-

ments and obesity: Neighbourhood or nation?,

International Journal of Epidemiology 35:

100-104.

Larsen, K. and Gilliland, J. 2008. Mapping the evo-

lution of ‘food deserts’ in a Canadian city:

Supermarket accessibility in London,

Ontario, 1961-2005, International Journal of

Health Geographics 7(16).

Larson, N, Story, M. and Nelson, M. 2009.

Neighborhood environments: Disparities in

access to healthy foods in the US, American

Journal of Preventative Medicine 36(1): 74-

81.

Paul Neal, Z. 2006. Culinary deserts, gastronomic

oases: A classification of US cities, Urban

Studies 43(1): 1-21.

Powell, L. M., Chaloupka, F. J., and Bao, Y. 2007.

The availability of fast-food and full-service

restaurants in the United States, American

Journal of Preventative Medicine 33.4s: 240-

245.

Powell, L. M., Slater, S., Mirtcheva, D., Bao, Y., and

Chaloupka, F. J. 2007. Food store availabili-

ty and neighborhood characteristics in the

United States, Preventative Medicine 44:

189-195.

Smoyer-Tomic, Spence, J. C., and Amrhein, C.

2006. Food deserts in the Prairies?

Supermarket accessibility and neighborhood

need in Edmonton, Canada, The Professional

Geographer 58(3): 307-326.

8th Annual Local Food and Farmer Open House:

Know your Farmer, Know Your Food.

Report assembled by Jamie Ferschinger,

Community Development Director at the

Urban Ecology Center, 1500 E. Park Place,

Milwaukee, WI 53211.

Boston City Community Gardens Established April

29, 2006 by CandiceBNAN, Boston Natural

Areas Network, Boston, MA. GoogleMaps.

Twin Cities CSA Drop-Off Locations Established

Aug 3, 2009 by Cael et. al, Land Stewardship

Project, Minneapolis, MI. GoogleMaps.

접 수 2010년 7월 8일

최종수정 2010년 8월 14일

게재확정 2010년 9월 1일


–288–

first publication gis korea markc

Documents