6/26

Last week ICIC, a research and advisory group focusing on inner cities, released a new report on urban food systems.  It is a valuable and important report.  Its importance emerges both from its findings and from those most likely to read it.  Its value, in my judgment, is the potential to advance a meaningful dialogue between private and public sectors.

Among the ICIC findings:

The comparative analysis of food systems in Los Angeles, New Orleans and New York City finds both shared vulnerabilities and unique weaknesses that are a function of differences in each city’s food system and their exposure to different natural disaster risks. 

None of the cities were exposed to significant food processing vulnerabilities. Because of the global nature of the food system, a very small share of total food consumed in a city is processed and packaged locally. For example, if a major earthquake hit Los Angeles, some food processing plants would likely be damaged, but they are largely food exporters. The food consumed in Los Angeles, as is the case in most cities, is sourced from food processing plants across the country and world. 

All three cities face food distribution vulnerabilities because of the location of some warehouse supplier facilities in “at risk” areas. Los Angeles faces the greatest risk, with the vast majority of its warehouse suppliers subject to earthquake damage. In New Orleans and New York City, only local warehouse suppliers are at risk, creating greater risks for smaller grocery and corner stores, which rely more on local warehouse suppliers for their food supplies.

The ICIC report was developed with support from the Rockefeller Foundation's 100 Resilient Cities Initiative.  It is especially written for Chief Resilience Officers and their public sector colleagues. This is an important audience that heretofore has typically not given much attention to supply chain resilience.  It is immensely helpful to bring the issue forward.

Every engagement with reality is reductionist.  Reality is too profuse to be concisely captured.  It is now a mere cliche to note that our view of reality depends on where we are standing and our related angle of observation.

ICIC stands in the inner city. This is where ICIC has its expertise.  Given this angle, the observations reported are accurate.

I usually stand somewhere much closer to a big distribution center surrounded by trucks and plates of concrete spaghetti connecting my place to the inner city.  I see some other angles.  ICIC invited my contribution to the report.  I am interested -- sometimes surprised -- by how I was "heard".  But I need more time than I've had to constructively outline the differences.