Summary:

Elaine Power, a food scholar at Queen's University, argues that the word "AgriFood" itself encodes a fundamental contradiction: the agri side serves corporate capital while the food side is rooted in care, community, and life. In this conversation with Jesse Hirsh, Power traces how invisible and undervalued labour—from racialized farmworkers to domestic cooks—holds the food system together while extracting the least reward from it. Her analysis connects feminist political economy, the ultra-processed food industry, and ecological crisis into a single, unflinching diagnosis of what is broken and why.

Show notes:

Elaine Power is a food scholar at Queen's University whose career has moved fluidly across dietetics, feminist political economy, and food systems research. In this episode, she joins Jesse Hirsh to explore a tension embedded in the very language we use to describe the sector: that "AgriFood" quietly names two opposing logics—one oriented toward capital accumulation, the other toward nourishment, care, and sustaining life. That friction, Power argues, is not incidental. It is the organizing contradiction of the modern food system, and almost everything that is broken about that system flows from it.

Power's first major insight is about the systematic invisibility of labour across the entire food chain. From temporary foreign workers doing backbreaking fieldwork in Canadian agriculture, to grocery clerks briefly celebrated as heroes during the pandemic before being returned to minimum wage and precarious shifts, to the uncompensated domestic labour that happens in every kitchen—Power argues that the people who actually feed us are consistently rendered invisible and undervalued. She connects this pattern explicitly to race and gender: agricultural labour in North America has historically been and remains largely racialized, while domestic food labour has been feminized and therefore dismissed. The feminist movement's fraught relationship with the kitchen, she notes, was a rational response to that devaluation—but it created an opening that corporate food manufacturers eagerly filled with ultra-processed products that monetized the very work society refused to honour.

A second tension Power surfaces is convenience. The agro-industrial food system did not simply respond to a demand for convenience—it manufactured and deepened that demand, replacing the social and nutritional value of cooking with cheap ingredients repackaged as food-like products. Power draws on Tony Winson's concept of "pseudo-foods" to argue that the profit logic of large food multinationals is structurally opposed to genuine nourishment. Meanwhile, the ecological costs of industrial agriculture—she cites hydrogen sulphide poisoning from seaweed blooms caused by fertilizer runoff off the coast of France as a vivid, lethal example—are externalized onto communities and ecosystems that have no seat at the table. Revaluing real food and the labour that produces it, she suggests, would require confronting capitalism's tendency to invert what actually matters.

Listeners will come away from this conversation with a sharper vocabulary for naming what feels wrong about the food system and a clearer sense of why reforming it demands more than consumer choice or technological fixes. For anyone working in or thinking about Canada's agri-food sector, Power's analysis is a necessary provocation: the sector cannot build a legitimate future without honestly accounting for whose labour it depends on, whose health it sacrifices, and whose voices it continues to exclude. In a moment when food security, trade disruption, and climate pressure are converging, this episode makes the case that the most radical thing the sector could do is take care seriously.

Topics: Labour Invisibility, Feminist Food Politics, Ultra-Processed Food, Corporate Agri-Food, Convenience Culture, Racialized Farm Labour, Food System Values, Ecological Crisis

Hi, I'm Jesse Hirsch.

Welcome to the Future Herd.

Today's episode is a banger, one of those incendiary conversations that just

kind of feels dangerous, that makes you wanna kind of hide somewhere, where no

one's gonna see how you react to it, or whether you laugh, whether you gasp,

whether you start to have revelations about a completely different food system.

Elaine Power is the kind of intellectual that not only does Canada

produce, but we sure need a whole lot more from, or at least we need

to listen to a whole lot more from.

And Elaine is kind of the person who, quite frankly, uh, reinvigorates my

desire to use this podcast as a platform for provocation, as a platform for

thoughtful policy as we kind of allude to at the conclusion of our conversation,

but also to really encourage people to think about food and our relationship

to food in an entirely new manner.

Now, full disclosure, I recorded this conversation in May and then sat on it

for a while, and part because it, it, it is so radical, it is so refreshing.

It is, if anything, kind of dangerous to the status quo.

And I wanted to make sure that we had a certain amount of political and, uh, uh,

policy diversity, uh, in the can, kind of in our knowledge base before we lit

fire to it all by chatting with Elaine.

Now, granted, I am hyping up this conversation in hopes that

you are excited to listen to it.

Uh, this is where I will remind you that if this isn't the first time you've

listened to this podcast, go and give us a rating somewhere, anywhere that

other people might be able to access the episodes we're putting together.

Uh, it certainly helps give us feedback, but more importantly, it helps give,

uh, the knowledge and the conversations that we're producing some traction.

'cause that's really the moral responsibility I felt after having

this conversation with Elaine, that on the one hand we face, uh, some really

challenging and difficult times ahead.

But on the other hand, there is a range of policy ideas, cultural

ideas, solutions that would really transform society and our food in,

in a way that is truly revolutionary.

So enough hype, uh, let's get into the episode.

Uh, without any further ado, here's a lane power.

Elaine, welcome to the Future Herd.

Thank you so much.

I'm delighted to be here.

Now, I, I've kind of worked up a ritual where the first

question is meant to be a kind of intuitive, uh, almost roar shot test.

Uh, what does the future mean to you?

Oh my gosh, the future.

It's a loaded word.

What could I say?

It, it is Jessie.

Um, I am kind of worried about our future, I have to say, uh,

with no matter which way you turn, uh, it feels pretty messed up.

so I'm worried about, uh, democracy.

I'm worried about the food system.

I'm worried about the climate crisis.

I'm worried about the food system.

It's all kind of messed up.

I have a, I have a 19-year-old, and of course I teach young people.

I, I was teaching this past term, I was teaching, of course, on the food system,

and I had to work really hard not to just really burden them completely,

like, like kind of, you know, um, all in that, all encompassing sense of doom

and dread and despair because the food, the, the dominant, the agro industrial

food system is totally messed up.

I, I, I'll, I'll refrain from using profanity, but, um,

You may,

really is

this is the benefit of podcast is we could fucking square.

There's privileges there,

so if a system is really fucked up, it's really fucked

up no matter which way you turn.

So, yeah, so,

on.

my, I mean, they, they, the young people I taught this year, um, they,

they seemed, they seemed inspired by my passion for the subject and they also

seemed to get that I cared about them as people and this messed up system.

So, uh, and, but one, one day after class.

One of the very bright young women came up to me and said,

how do you stay optimistic?

No.

How do you stay hopeful?

And I, and I, I refrain from saying, well, I'm not very hopeful.

And then proceeded to, um, to talk about, you know, watching the birds

in my backyard, um, as a, as a way to maintain my sense of stability

and groundedness in the world.

Um, I, every week in the class, I would do a section, you know, that I called in

the news about things that were happening that we generally, um, in the news about

that had some relation to the food system.

It's very depressing.

And so after she asked that question, um, the next week it was March, and

the next week I put up pictures of, you know, the robins and the crocuses.

Like, is really the only way to stay for me anyway, to stay from

descending into total despair.

Uh, and there is a kind of paradox between, on the one hand,

I, I think a growing sense that our food system is at risk, that our, our,

our global climate system is at risk.

I'm personally feeling 2026 may be a breaking point on a number of different

fronts, and yet every day I'm eating food that gives me pleasure and every

day I'm learning more about food that makes me feel more human and makes me

even feel healthier as I age, which was a paradox I had not anticipated

or, or, and certainly welcome.

Yeah.

I do try to focus our conversations here on the podcast on kind

of the present and the future, I do feel a little bit of kind of responsibility

to my audience to spend a little bit at the beginning, not so much on origin

story, but getting a sense of where the guest's perspectives come from.

And, and in your case, you've had a, a really interesting dance between

your political interests and your research interests, where they are

clearly reinforcing each other, but you're not necessarily the kind

of academic or politically engaged person who has focused on a specific

issue and stuck with that issue.

W. It's guided your journey.

And I say that 'cause you could have ended up anywhere championing any policy

or fighting any, you know, tyranny.

But the, the causes and the issues you've chosen kind of speak to maybe

not a logic, maybe a, a method.

I, I don't know.

I, I'm curious if, if only because I, in, in sort of learning more about

your background, I was blown away.

I was like, wow, that, that seems like you had a really fun time.

Even though to your point, you're dealing with issues that are kind

of depressing and, and, and kind of difficult, uh, on an empathic level.

To wrap your head around, I'm doing what I do, which is ramble.

Uh, Elaine, uh, uh, help me out here.

H how, how, how did you get to where you are now?

Was it entirely accidental or were there some driving principles along the way?

I think, you know, I'm from the East coast.

I, I grew up in Nova Scotia and, uh, I, I feel like the wind blew me here.

Um, I don't, it's funny you should say that, this, because I was just, I'm

just working on a paper right now that has a revise and resubmit and I'm kind

of rethinking the literature review and thinking it's only I had specialised a

little more, but it's not in my nature.

I, I am kind of, I'm one of those people who likes to see the, like,

to make the connections among the, the bigger the, in the big picture.

And so, um, you know, the, the book that got me interested in food and

food systems was Francis Mo La Pe Diet For a Lonely Planet, or, yeah,

no Diet For What, what's it called?

Diet.

Diet for a Hungry Planet, not Lonely Planet.

That's, that's the Travel People Diet for a Hungry Planet.

which I read as an undergraduate, which is a long time ago now.

And, um, uh, I got really interested in the politics of food because of

that book and the idea that, uh, you know, we had lots of food and, uh,

we, we, we needed, you know, to figure out how to distribute it better.

and the idea that we didn't need, you know, meat necessarily to have a, a

healthy diet and to have enough protein.

Um, that kind of set me on a, on a journey that is long and rambly.

And as I say, I think the wind kind of blew me here, but, um, I don't know if

that answers your question, but Thank you.

Uh, uh, it's kind of reassuring, especially today to that, um, to

think about the, you know, the, the pieces that all came together

to, to put me here, which honestly sometimes feels like a cosmic joke.

Well, it does set up a natural follow up, which is why do

you think that food, both as an area of research, but also as an area of

practise, whether formally or informally, professionally or personally, why do you

think it lends itself to generalists?

Because as you were describing that, I was thinking not just of the people I've

interviewed as part of this podcast, but the people I've admired and I've enjoyed

that they were, for the most part, people who were interested in a lot of stuff and

they used those interests as ingredients to make themselves and the food or art or

research that they create even greater.

So I, I'm curious, given, you know, the time you spent in these circles,

whether you, whether you agree, whether you think that this is an area in

which generalists are kind of not only encouraged to thrive, do thrive.

Yeah, absolutely.

And I mean, uh, as you know, I, I think food is fascinating and it can lead you

in, it can lead you in so many directions.

I mean, from the very personal, um, you know, it's something we all

need every day, several times a day.

Um, it's, it's, you know, it's biological, it's physical, it's

cultural, it's, uh, symbolic.

It's, it can take in so many different directions into history, into art, into

food systems, into the, you know, the, the big picture, the small picture.

Um, I don't, I don't know, there's nothing really quite like it.

Uh, I mean, and it's a source of pleasure, um, you know, kind of Uh, so from the very

small, I mean, I, I did spend a few years as a dietitian, so you kind of thinking

about, you know, nutrients and all the way through to, know, the, the climate

crisis and, you know, global issues, and you in the news, you know, the Strait of

Horror News, the war that's, that's going on right now, that's gonna have a huge,

people are gonna die because food prices are gonna go up and, uh, they, they won't

be able to afford the food that they eat.

So it, it feels like something that connects both in both directions from

the very, um, minutia to the, the global.

And, and there's, like I say, there's delight and despair at

the same moment, um, in food, in, in my pers from my perspective.

Well, and again, you're sort of helping me understand my

own interests, my own appeal to here, and, and I think it is because

food allows us to connect the dots.

It, it allows us to see how politics and economics and culture and family

and, and, and our sense of being all kind of relate to each other, how

these systems all impact each other.

So still on the big picture piece, you know, I kind of inherited

the word AgriFood when I started this podcast in that it was not

necessarily something I thought about.

It was just some, a word I heard other people use.

And it was it by default, part of the framing of the EPIs of the podcast.

And you were one of the first person to kind of poke at that word when I

started communicating with you and, and got me thinking about where it

came from and the role that it serves.

And to phrase this in the form of a, a kind of question or observation,

it strikes me that there's a real contradiction in the phrase AgriFood.

And as I unpack it, it kind of feels that the agri side is really kind of

right wing in its view of the world.

And the food side is really kind of left wing in terms of its view of the world.

And I'm not sure how conscious this kind of setup is, whether it's like

deliberately evoking the French National Assembly or whatever.

Am I wrong in sensing this kind of political, uh, uh, polarisation or

political balance that has been created?

Wow, that, um, I've never thought of that, Jesse.

I think it might be a really, um, it might be kind of illuminating, uh, you know,

certainly, uh, agro or agri, you know, we have AgriFood, um, tends to for sure

represent, I think corporate interests.

Uh, the, there's another little part of me that says that the national,

the people I know who are part of the National Farmers Union would kind of,

would object to that, because of course there are also the, the small and medium

sized farmers, which probably you're one.

Um, uh, but, yeah, I think you might be onto something there.

because, you know, the agra, the corporate, the corporate side of things is

really, um, well, capitalism in general, I think turns things of value upside down.

So that, and in the food system, the corporate food companies, those

big multinationals are really all about creating, I think it was Tony

Winston who said, they're like, create pseudo foods, you know,

because that's how they make money.

They take cheap ingredients and they turn it into something that we, call food.

But really, you know, certainly in terms of ultra processed um, are

just a vehicle for making money.

And, uh, they might have some calories in them, but are really very, you know,

they don't sustain life, and they're very destructive planet and for the,

for the, you know, the natural world.

So, yeah, I think you might be onto something there.

Well, and, and I say this only because I am trying to understand

these systems and the different dynamics in them, and I have always been alienated

from the agricultural side in that I, I don't feel that they are including

either the voices or the analysis or even, quite frankly, the data to,

to understand the sector they're in.

And, and a key point that, that you often bring up that I wouldn't mind

kind of unpacking for people, 'cause it, it, it strikes me as both self-evident

but also ignored is the extent to which labour in our food system is either

unrecognised or radically undervalued.

And I think farmers understand this.

Farmers very much feel that their labour is undervalued largely.

But I I'd love to hear your, your kind of, uh, insight or understanding of this.

'cause I suspect that it, to your point, really emphasises the values that we come

to the AgriFood or the food system with.

I'm just, I'm just repeatedly struck by the, labour that's invisible,

uh, and or undervalued, if you think right from the, from the, from the farm.

Um, if you think about, you know, bigger, more corporate farms that

are employing in Canada, you know, temporary foreign workers or undocumented

workers, um, labourers whose they're doing backbreaking work, um, that

is, uh, under totally undervalued.

They're feed, they're, they're feeding us, and yet, and that which is, you

know, the basis of life for humanity.

And yet we, we treat them poorly.

We, we don't, we, we, they're invisible.

They're wages are low.

They're, they have long hours.

Um, we send them home when we don't need them anymore.

at, you know, with, with disruption of family ties and, uh, you know, all kinds

of, um, uh, you know, dysfunctional relationships because they're

travelling back and forth all the time.

So from there to the supermarket where, you know, the, we, we gave, uh, workers,

you know, heroes pay during the pandemic for a few months and then went back to,

you know, minimum wages, uh, broken ships not, you know, not took full-time work.

Um, low rates of, uh, you know, unionisation and benefits and

all the rest to the, the domestic kitchen where, you know, um, with,

and the thing about food is that it, it's actually, it's a lot of work.

And so, um, you know, every, it seems like those who are able to wanna

shuffle it off onto other people.

You know, the, the second wave feminists in the sixties and seventies

wanted nothing to do with the kitchen because it, because it is

undervalued and because it is, you know, invisible and it's so much work.

Um, and so, you know, the, the big corporate aggro man, food man, quote

unquote food manufacturers, you know, started with TV dinners, but,

you know, have, have capitalised on, like literally on this, um.

The, the work and the undervaluing of food.

So in a way, um, it's like, yeah.

So I think those of us in who are food scholars who also think of ourselves as

feminists, you know, have had to work at, um, bringing, um, that, trying to

point out that this is, this work is fundamental to human life and, uh, it,

it needs to be more valued than it is.

So, um, I don't, I, I think because it's been women who are, you know, uh, at

least, uh, in the domestic fear sphere, I think, you know, in the, the agricultural

sphere, they're often racialized.

You know, we, we think, you know, I think about, in the US with, you know,

that it was black people, slaves who laboured in the fields, um, and it's

still, you know, mostly racialized people in the, in the fields, uh,

whether it's in the US or in Canada.

Um, you know, I think, I, I don't, I, you know, as you were speaking, I thought

about France where, um, you know, there is certainly more, more emphasis put on

the, on cultural aspects of food, but I think their food system is also still

very much, uh, based on exploitation of, of labour and, and the environment.

I was just reading a piece in The Guardian this morning about seaweed blooms off

the coast of France that, um, from agricultural runoff fertilisers and,

and manure, um, that it, you know, it's, it's actually, it's literally killing

people who, who step on these, you know, up to five feet deep piles of seaweed

and it's releasing hydrogen sulphide and kill, like, literally killing people.

Um, and, you know, undoubtedly also killing fish and, you

know, wildlife and so on.

So, uh, back to the original, you know, this is really depressing.

It's really dark, but, uh, but yes, I think the, you know, know what it will

take to re if we, if we were able to revalue food and the, the, like, real food

and the labour that produces it, uh, I think we would, we would the world because

it's so much at the heart of, of life.

And as an aside, when you were at the beginning talking about your

students', often reaction to you and, and, and I, what I was hearing in your

observation was that on some level, in spite of your best efforts to help these

students understand the horrors that await them, you are nonetheless inspiring them.

And I think that inspiration partly comes from acknowledging what

everyone is seeing, but hardly anyone is willing to talk about.

And I, I, I think you did that just there.

And I want to unpack a little because.

You sort of alluded to something that I'm kind of passionate about myself, which

is the, the curse of convenience that, you know, we've been sold this myth that,

you know, convenience is good, whether it comes to our food, whether it comes to our

social interactions, in my case, whether it comes to our technology, when, you

know, there's value in making a healthy meal, uh, especially with others, right?

And making that meal and sharing that labour and eating that food there,

there's community building there, there, there's a social ritual there.

So I'm, I'm curious, and, and you kind of alluded to this, but I'm curious on a, on

a political level, both on the, the, the, the plane of community, but also higher.

When we think about society, how do we counter the, that culture of convenience?

How do we get people not just to value other people's labour when it comes

to making food, which is essential?

And, and to your point, it, it's not just agricultural

labour that remains racialized.

I mean, restaurant labour, right?

Kitchens are also very racialized.

Yep.

So while on the one hand, yes, we do need to be valuing the labour

of the people who produce food, we also think, correct me if I'm wrong,

we need to be valuing our own labour.

Like thinking that it is worth us spending time to make a healthy

meal for us and our family.

A lot of people don't even, aren't even there.

And that's one of the reasons why they're so seduced by this myth of convenience.

Yeah, yeah, for sure.

I mean, when you, you talked about community building, you know,

making food for oneself and others.

I think it's also, it's an expression of love.

It's, um, and, uh, yeah, so, sorry, I lost the question.

But, um, you probably know I'm an advocate for basic income.

Um, and one of the things that I think income might be able to help us with

is rethinking how we spend our time.

right now, as you know, we're, we're all having to scramble to, um, make

enough money to put a roof over our head and food on the table.

And, you know, some, of us, it's kind of a chicken and egg, isn't it?

Because I think about how people are really scrambling to, um, I say, do

that work, but also raise a family potentially, or to be, you know,

to be involved in other activities.

And it we're so.

We're so time crunched.

I mean, maybe it's a product of, I was gonna say maybe it's a product

of the choices we make, but I, choice is kind of a such a loaded word.

You know, I think we, we have li very limited choice actually.

and so in a way, I think basic income would open up some space

potentially for us to make other choices and for people to rethink their

relationship to food in particular.

That they could rethink how to, they get their food and how much they want to, how

much of their own food they wanna grow.

Um, and give us some breathing space.

I mean, in a way, capitalism kind of depends on us not having that breathing

space, you know, so that we are buying those convenience foods and like buying

or buying instead of taking time.

So, you know, there's a real, obviously there's kind of a, you know, such a

relationship between time and, and money, um, inverse relationship.

So those of us who have some money don't have the time, and those of

who have time don't have money.

so anyway, it's a, it's messed up.

But, but absolutely I think, uh, you know, we have been sold this, um,

bill of, you know, convenience that of course we all, we all want to work less.

and, and then we forget about the, joy, the, the, the joy.

Also the, the, pain of the, of that work, um, of, you know, producing

our own food of, um, you know, that.

Uh, but I, I honestly, there's, to me there's nothing like, it could

be very simple food, but if it's homemade, it has a different quality.

It's like the food that you grow yourself that tastes nothing like what

you, what you get in the, in the store.

Um, so there's that we, it, the, the convenience gloss is over the

delight, the joy, the pleasures of, of other aspects of, of the food.

Whether it, particularly the taste, but also that joy and pleasure of sharing

the food of, um, you know, of the love that comes with that, you know.

I kind of feel that we are, we're, we're evoking a larger culture of

food and on the one hand we've already critiqued the kind of corporate culture

of food at at least we've, you know, hit some of the edges around that.

And, you know, to go back to my point about this juxtaposition between the

politics of the agri side and the politics of the food side, I, I'm

curious to what extent, again, also circling back to our generalist idea, w.

Food studies as a larger, kinda a culture, as a larger kind of discourse

of researchers, of activists, of eaters, of, you know, people who

wanna make food more accessible.

What role does culture play within that work?

And, and I say this and playing on words that I always find it funny that the

word agriculture relies upon culture.

And of course that culture means lots of different things from fermentation

to, you know, how farmers do things.

But the food side has a culture to itself that I think you're describing

when you talk about affection.

When we talk about community, when we talk about valuing the labour that

goes into these things, is there a, a meta consciousness within food studies

around culture and psychology of food?

I mean, there certainly is around health and around nutrition and around policies.

Are there people, you know, elaborating and doing research around some of

the, the concepts that we're, we're currently unearthing and throwing around?

Yeah, I think so.

I think some, you know, you mentioned two other people that you've had

on your podcast, and I would say both of them have, uh, you know, an

awareness of, of cultural issues.

Um, I think sometimes it gets buried in other, you know, I think each

of us comes to, this, comes to food studies with our own preoccupations

and and, you know, whether that's the environment, uh, and so on.

So I, you know, there, I think it is in a way, maybe the substrate

underneath a lot of what happens.

Um, maybe again, kind maybe taken for granted somewhat, um, more than others.

Um,

Well,

yeah.

Uh, sorry, I

and

lost your question again.

well, you, you're not losing anything.

We we're, we're, we are, uh, quite joyously discussing very

scary and at the same time, inspiring topics at the same time.

Whi which kind of leads me to a follow up in, in speaking with Alyssa and speaking

with Charles and speaking with yourself, I feeling a sense of revolution that,

that, you know, within food studies there is a kind of revolutionary ethos,

which to go to our earlier point is a consequence of using food to connect

the dots and see the poly crisis that is threatening all aspects of our lives.

Is, is food studies, uh, explicitly revolutionary or are there just a lot

of revolutionaries in food studies?

That's such a great question.

Uh, I, I think, um, many of us identify with a critical food studies that

is deliberately attentive to issues of power and whether that's, um,

you know, issues of gender, of race, of class, of inequality, of wealth,

of the corporate kind of power.

Um, I don't know that food studies is inherently revolutionary, but it really,

you're right, it does attract a lot of people who, know, you don't have to go too

far in, in thinking about food to realise, you know, it, it really exemplifies and

reproduces a lot of the systems of, um, of inequality that, that structure the world.

So, um, yeah, so I would say more that, you know, there are more or

less there, you know, obviously there are, there are people in food studies

who are particularly revolutionary.

I think in Canada especially the food studies community really has always

had an emphasis on thinking, imagining, um, a more just world and, um, and

thinking about thinking about that through food and through the food system.

And is that also true globally?

Because certainly from my own biassed view, it, it does seem that when

people focus on food, let's say outside of the agricultural industry,

it does also lend itself to, Hey, our current systems are inadequate.

We need to overthrow them and or replace them in order to sustainably

feed people in a socially just manner.

Yeah, I, I think it depends how, you, probably depends how you

define the boundaries of food studies.

Um, know, I, I, because I, my work kind of crosses into, you know, a critique of

food, charity in particular and, um, you know, kind of some anti-poverty work.

There's, I think that there's actually lots of who publish in lots of food

scholars who, or publish in food studies journals who I think are, be

happy to tinker around the edges and make things a little bit better, but

without a revolutionary or more radical kind of, um, agenda, I would say.

Yeah.

Well, and, and let's, let's unpack some of that, you know,

criticisms, uh, of food, charity.

And, and I say this because I, I'm certainly familiar with the concept

that charity is an obstacle to justice.

But the fact that I just said those words means that there are people listening

right now who are like, what the fuck?

So, uh, I'd love for you to, uh, share your own thoughts on the limits

or problems, uh, with our current charity approach to addressing hunger.

How long do we have?

We got time.

Sorry.

Okay, so food, charity, specifically food banks, which are

relat relatively new in Canada.

Uh, you know, the first one opened in Edmonton in 1981.

uh, that's within my lifetime.

Um, know, it's a while ago, but, uh, it was a direct

import from the United States.

was very, it's a very clear that there was a, you know, a food bank

in Arizona that set up in the sixties that was, and food banks at the, the

origin, the origins of food banks were about redistributing food waste.

And, and the US is very much characterised by this idea that if you have hungry

people, you give them food and their food, their, I mean, the snap, the

what the, the current, uh, iteration of food stamps is a, is different

than that, but it's in its origins.

It was meant to, um, help people, you know, connect them with food surplus.

food banks originally were also about this idea that food was going to waste horror.

And, uh, and they're hungry people, so you wanna connect them.

Um, it, it, it, I don't think it's a coincidence that that happened at the

same time that, you know, neoliberal political philosophy was taking root,

um, with the, you know, shrinking of the state and the undermining of social

assistance and, uh, employment insurance.

And so the, the, at that it's a perfect fit for a neoliberal kind of

political ideology, use, um, handoff responsibility for what used to be state

responsibilities, including income to the private sector, to the charitable

sector, to community organisations.

so, you know, they just took root and proliferated.

'cause there's a, there's a kind of common sense about it.

It's like, well, people are hungry and it's also people are hungry.

So we give them food.

And I mean, I think most Canadians, bye.

Those of us who have money or have the ability to feed ourselves, it just,

it seems hard to imagine that there are people who are food insecure in a

country that's so wealthy and so rich where so much food is going to waste.

So there's also something, you know, we were talking about, you know, eating

together as part of, you know, this communal community building and a sense

of belonging and dignity and love.

And so we, we, I think, uh, it's very, very personally to imagine

that you could do something that would alleviate someone's hunger.

so, but then food banks have also taken on all kinds of other, um,

know, functions in our society.

So, you know, uh, we have food drives that are team building exercises

or competitions at work, or it's a way to show that you're, you know,

quote unquote good citizen because you bring a, a non-perishable

food item to the football game.

Or, you know, you drop some things in the bin at the grocery store and then, know,

it's also now more recently, you know, a place to, again, to alleviate food waste.

So we're not sending food to the landfill and, you know, so we

get to be good citizens and we get to be good green citizens.

So they serve all these other functions.

I think that the needs of people who are food insecure completely lost in those,

in that, so we know from survey research that, you know, probably about, only about

a quarter of the people in the country who are food insecure ever go to a food bank.

And, you know, food banks are limited by their donation, what they have available

by their donations, by their labour pool, um, their, you know, people.

They have limited hours, they have to close the doors when they run out of food.

There's, so, there's just so many problems.

And so the, it's, it's serving all these other functions for other, um,

you know, groups in society, but the needs of people who actually use them.

But that, that's not one of that, those are completely overlooked and forgotten.

Um, and I guess that's classic in a way that the, you know, his history's written

by the victors and, you know, food banks are run by those who, who, who already

have, um, as a way to, know, that, that I've, in a way it kind of takes the

pressure off, um, at, you know, at we don't have people marching in the street.

We don't have food riots, um, because we

Not yet.

Um, now yet, yeah.

And, and there's a way in which it locks the status quo into place.

So it, when I think about the like thousands, probably hundreds of

thousands of volunteer hours are soaked up in food banks and, you know,

nobody wants to see people go hungry.

but the reality is that lots of people go hungry in this country or ha are

worried about going hungry anyway.

If I think about all those hours, like imagine what else we could be doing with

the, with those hours and with that time.

I mean there are, there are lots of other things.

There's lots of other work and, uh, lots of other, you know, labour or, you know,

maybe people would be out learning how to play the guitar or writing poetry or

Well, and.

food.

I don't know.

You know, on the one hand, I, I do think that some of the shortcomings

or frustrations with the kind of food bank concept are starting to encourage

some communities to think beyond them.

And, and I want to come back to that in a moment, but I, I was personally shocked,

uh, as part of doing this podcast to learn that a lot of food banks actually don't

even make use of food waste, that they only buy food, which seems so illogical

to me, given the amount of perfectly good food that is thrown away on a daily basis.

I mean, as a, a, a relatively new food researcher, uh, again, I,

every day I am still in shock at the amount of food that is thrown away.

And, and my brain in, in its own kind of autistic way, is always going

through scenarios in which that food could be effectively redistributed.

I, I mean, I was, when I was younger, more familiar and, and, uh, slightly connected

to groups like Food Not Bombs, which were kind of very much food justice groups.

And, and there are some food not bombs still active in, in North

America today, but, but what are some, some post food bank scenarios?

What are some kind of radical, and, and, and, and let's do this in the context

of if resources were not an issue, um, what are some scenarios or, or what are

some concepts that that could, to your point about allocating all that goodwill,

allocating all that volunteer labour, what are some of the ways in which we

could channel that, you know, if we had both the resources and the political

culture slash will to make it happen?

A and I'll elaborate on that in a bit, but, but I'm curious to spend some

moments brainstorming on, on what some of these alternatives could look like.

Could I back up just a, a bit, um, before

Please.

that question, and because I wanted to talk to,

just talk a bit about food waste.

and, uh, you know, one of the things that is seared in my brain when

I first moved to Toronto in the nineties, um, and I remember, um,

talking to the head of the Daily Bank, daily Bread food bank at the time.

Her first name is Sue, and I've lost her last name.

But, she talked about getting two tractor trailer loads of, uh, almost, um, of,

of oranges that were half rotting.

And I wasn't there, but she had to kind of mobilise an army of volunteers to, through

two tractor loads of to sort out the ones that were rotting from the ones that

were still usable and get tho that fruit out to people as quickly as possible.

And I've never, for, never kind of forgotten, even though I wasn't there.

Like I, I imagine the smell and, and we've, I think probably most of us

have had that experience of putting our fingers into an orange in the

grocery store that's mouldy and to rot.

And I just like, oh, oh.

So

mean, she told me that story 30 years ago and I've never forgotten it.

I, I, if I might, uh, digress just to, to around your point.

A lot of it has to do with packaging.

So think oranges, onions, other produce where if one of them in the bag starts

to go, they throw the whole bag out.

Apples is another limes, lemons and the amount of them that they are throwing out

every day because one out of 10 or one out of 15 is rotten and there's no process

to recover all the other good ones.

That volume alone is unbelievable.

Sorry, go ahead.

Yeah, yeah, for sure.

And, and, and it's, it's also built into the system, right?

Because partly like you talk about packaging and also the, the way

that food is, you know, transported across, um, vast D distances.

So it's actually the idea that, you know, that there's going to be food

waste is like, it's built into the, the quote unquote manufacturing

of, of the food that we eat.

Um, or, you know, like the oranges, the fresh produce and so on.

But also all the other perishable items, it's just assumed you know,

at more than half, more than half of it is going to, um, be wa food waste.

Um, so yeah, it, it, again, it kind of points to one of these like devastating

critical weaknesses in the food

And, and, you know, to, to circle back to, to my question, I, I feel

that there are a, a bunch of converging trends, one of which is transparency.

That, that we are in an increasingly surveilled world.

And even those who are engaging the surveillance no longer control the

ability to surveil, which is to say random people are going into grocery stores and

sharing prices to other people causing a, a growing literacy of this stuff.

And I think there is gonna be a growing literacy of just how

much food is wasted and the way which that food could be diverted.

And I correlate this to what I see growing radical sentiment amongst young people

who are facing this poly crisis and going, what the hell are we supposed to do?

So that brings me back to my question of what are some of the alternatives that

we could be floating to people, uh, when it comes to either dealing with hunger

or dealing with how we distribute food, or dealing with the ways in which we

recognise the labour that goes into food.

I, I have to imagine as a politically engaged person, you've either thought

about this stuff or heard other smart people talk about this stuff.

So I'm, I'm, I'm curious as we start to, uh, uh, approach the end of the

episode that we give people, uh, maybe not a sense of hope that might be a tall

order, but a sense of fire as to their, uh, being, uh, other ways to do things.

Yeah.

Um, I mean, some might be less, some might be radical, some might be less radical.

Like, I think we, we could start by reintroducing what we used to call home

economics into the school curriculum so that people actually, you know,

I, we maybe don't wanna call it home economics, but just so that, you

know, have, people have a sense of confidence in their skills to actually

Yeah.

food for

Yeah.

Uh, maybe we wanna incorporate, you know, growing food into, uh, the

school curriculums as well, so that people, again, have more of a sense of

like, maybe, you know, the schools, of course are all, everything's awash in

at this moment, but, um, maybe the way to counter that is to return to some

really, like, some practical skills that we need to survive, um, on the planet.

so I don't know.

Some people might think that's more radical than other people,

it feel, does feel like, um, but that feels like a place to start.

I love the idea.

I, I mean, I don't want, I, I don't waste a lot of food because

I do cook a lot of my own food.

Um, but, uh, given that if we're gonna stay in the current system, at least

we could, I think we could take some of that food and maybe of, maybe, maybe

one of the things we could do is, uh, a food not bombs kind of idea where that

food waste is cooked or, and, or somehow redistributed, but not just for, you

know, a small group, small proportion of stigmatised, uh, activity like a food

bank, but actually like, you know, as like food not bombs, get they set up in

parks or public spaces where anybody can come along and, uh, and have some food.

Um, I've been involved in some work and some research on food insecurity

on campus, including even at Queen University, which most people would

not imagine would ever happen.

And, you know, the one, some of the people that I did that research with,

we talked a lot about, you know, having, um, quote unquote a soup kitchen.

But, uh, you know, again, a place where students could gather with and make and

make soup and then distribute it for, um, you know, people can pay what you

can, you know, soup and bread in, in my idea of a university that actually

cared about, or any institution for that matter that actually cared about

the people, you'd have kind of have a soup pod in every corner with some

fresh fruit and some, and some bread.

And, and it could be really simple and anybody can help themselves at any points.

Um, know, I, I had the.

The principal of Queens at the time say, well, how do we

de-stigmatize the food bank?

It's like, well, you put it in a public place and you allow anybody to come and

get the food, whatever they want, like

Yeah.

questions asked.

Like, anybody can just come and you put it in a public place.

You don't make it, you don't hide it away.

Uh, you make it the kind of normal part of.

Um, but it's not really about the food bank.

It's about, um, having food freely available, um, for everybody, everybody

you know, the people who are cleaning the buildings to, uh, of the place.

So, so that there's, again, kind of recreating a sense of community

and communal, communal eating,

Well, and it.

on your ability to pay.

Y you know, treating food as, as a kind of luxury I is something I think

we currently do, but we don't acknowledge.

And what you're describing is treating food not just in the context of

abundance, but, but treating it as if it is life, as if it is something

that is inherently accessible.

Because what I was imagining, what, while you were describing that, is some

of the posh conferences and events I've been at where, you know, you're there

with all these really important people and there's great food everywhere.

And when I was younger, I used to kind of describe my religion as being the free

lunch, that I would go to all these policy events and go to all these academic events

because they'd have free lunches and I'd be able to get all this great food.

Imagine if we could do that at a community level, at a society level where there

were just places you knew you could go, anyone could go and there'd be great food.

To me, that's not radical that that is common sense.

Um, I I, I'm curious to what extent as a teacher, as someone who engages with

young people, and of course as we age, it's easy to disparage young people,

and our current society is certainly doing its best, uh, to try to disparage

young people from all, uh, uh, sides.

I, I suspect you do not have that view.

And at the same time, I, I'm curious to get your sense of, of where the

young people are at a, am I right in thinking that they're, uh, uh,

uh, uh, open to radical ideas, itching for something different?

Or is that me projecting and wishing that young people were, uh, uh,

the way I was when I was young?

Yeah, I, I would say, you know, guess I'm at Queens.

Um, we don't have a particularly radical student body at Queens necessarily,

but, uh, one of the, one of the things that I find quite delightful after,

you know, the, the food system course that I've been talking about at the

second year course, there's students from all different levels taking it.

But I've had, um, you know, several students, uh, write

to me after the course.

I had one in particular who sent me, you know, photos.

It, the course inspires students to grow some of their own food.

And so, um, there, there's some that I've kept in touch with who continue to grow,

you know, some, some of their own food.

I think if nothing else, it gives them a sense of appreciation for the work.

Um, and the, the struggle and the, the riskiness, you know, whether the

rabbits eat the lettuce or, you know, the frost kills tomato plants or whatever.

Um, also, uh, you know, one of, couple of, some of the students said this

year, oh, look forward to seeing at the farmer's market in the summer.

You know, so I think it does help them, and they, nothing else, they

don't take for granted anymore.

The, the, the things that they buy at the grocery store, they

have a little more awareness of the, the labour and the, the work.

Um, and also the, you know, the, the, the environmental impact potentially.

Um, so, uh, who knows where that goes.

It's a bit like, I feel a bit like I'm a dandelion plant, you know,

kind of spreading seeds and who knows where those seeds land and

how long they might take to sprout.

But, uh, yeah, I mean, when I first came to Queens a long, long time ago, in the

early part of this century, um, I was really struck by, at the time the, the

kind of resources that the students have.

They're not all the, there's food insecurity on campus, but they generally

have a lot of resources, um, not just economic, but cultural and social.

Um, they end up with their degree from Queens, they go on to do amazing things.

And so it's been a real privilege.

I'm, I'm about to retire, but it's really been an incredible privilege, um,

to some of those seeds, whether it's, uh, about social determinants of health

or about the food system, you know?

Yeah.

It's, um, when I look at, when I look at the students at, certainly

at the, the best students, I, I, I do feel hopeful actually.

Yeah.

Well, and the model of the dandelion as revolutionary

certainly, uh, uh, holds well, uh, for the future success of the revolution,

given how, uh, dandelions are quite resilient and the scourge of, uh,

uh, many people who seek monoculture.

Uh, as we kind of come to a close, uh, one of the questions I always like to,

you know, offer at the end is, is if, has there, is there anything that we

haven't touched upon that you would like to touch upon, uh, before we end?

And, and I say this more as an invitation, Les, as a lament in that,

Hmm.

you know, we have covered quite a bit of ground, but that suggests

that maybe there's some big 800 pound gorilla, uh, in the corner that we

should be addressing before we conclude.

Well, I, I did mention it, but, uh, you know, I've be, as I say, I've

become an advocate for basic income and I feel like I have a hammer and everything.

Basic income is the answer to almost everything.

Um, not on its own, but, uh, you know, I do think it would, um, the,

the National Farmers Union, for example, has at their, um, convention

in the fall passed a resolution, um, supporting a basic income, I think

of $50,000 a year for, for farmers.

Um, and especially, you know, the average age of farmers is

approaching 60, it might be 60 by now.

Um, and so to support young, not gonna address the cost of land, but it

will provide, uh, you know, kind of a foundation for young farmers, a financial

foundation, foundation to, to enable them to survive all the ups and downs of,

you know, the frost we had this morning here in Kingston, in the middle of May.

Um, the, the vagaries of, of farming, which is, you know, it's really risky.

I really have so much respect and admiration for people who, um, are,

who are growing food other people.

Um, so, so it would, it would provide an income floor for, for young,

particularly young farmers, for, uh, and especially, you know, marginalised

people from marginalised groups, whether in farming, whether that's

women or, uh, racialized groups.

Um, people who are, who want to create a different kind of world, and a

world that's more just, and that it obviously is, is more, um, sustainable.

Um, and of course it would, I mean, it's often thought basic income's often

thought about as in relation to poverty.

It would, it would create, again, an income floor if it were a livable basic

income, it would enable people to afford, food and to be able to make different

choices about the food that they eat.

it could support, you know, people who want to do, you know, food,

food processing for example, or like start small businesses

on kind of food entrepreneurs.

So, um, it would make a huge difference, I think, in the food system from

production and consumption perspectives.

Uh, I think, I honestly think it's too threatening, right now for, especially for

you think about the low wage employers, um, including, you know, the fast food

companies and, uh, the Amazons and all the rest who depend on a low, on a workforce

that's desperate make some money.

Um, and maybe, maybe that's where AI is going to push us, you

know, quote unquote over the edge could push us over so many edges,

Let, let, let me jump in right there.

O only because, you know, AI is my domain of expertise and, and this is where I

would argue that the narrative around AI and unemployment is entirely made up.

And the reality is what you described, that the employment crisis is

about greed and an unwillingness to pay people a decent wage, let

alone give them a meaningful job.

Like working at an Amazon warehouse is demoralising and dehumanising on

so many levels that we're kind of using AI as this, you know, oh, that's

what's disrupting the employment.

That's what's disrupting the marketplace when in fact,

it's, it's corporate practises.

It, it, it's, it's terrible wages.

And, and more and more people are saying, no way, I, I ain't gonna do that.

And that is why they're having difficulties.

As another aside, b before I became a farmer, one of the reasons I decided to

get into farming was I met a farmer who said, we don't really have to worry about

the cities flooding from climate change.

We will all die way before that because of a bad frost in late May or early June.

And it was that kind of insight into the brittle nature of our systems that

made me think, I kinda wanna be at the front line of this change, so at

least I am having a little more agency.

But to that point of agency, after I've allowed those digressions of myself.

What are some of the strategies or tactics that either you've thought

about or that people in the larger policy space have thought about when

it comes to advancing a, a kind of universal income or a basic income?

Because on the one hand, I, I do think we have to acknowledge a lot

of gains have been made, like we're having this conversation and it's

no longer that radical an idea.

But I think you rightfully pointed out it, it does threaten a, a, a lot of the power

holders, the stakeholders of our economy.

So what's the path forward?

What, what are some of the ideas to, uh, really get this policy

concept closer to, to implementation?

You know, I've, I've, as a social scientist, I've spent a lot

of my career thinking that if we only have the evidence, you know, we

have the, have a good evidence base and a strong evidence base that, you

know, that's gonna change policy.

And I've driven up on that.

I, that was a very naive idea of politics.

So, I mean, we, in the basic income movement, I've often said, you

know, we need our Tommy Douglas.

Like we, we actually need, someone who's willing to carry the torch and to, uh,

at, at, at, at a, probably at a federal, well, it could happen provincially.

I mean, we often compare ourselves to Medicare.

You know, Tommy Douglas implemented Medicare in Saskatchewan.

It, it, um, it was, you know, kind of took root there before

it rolled out across the country.

But it really did take, I mean, there were lots of other

factors, but it took a champion.

Um, you know, there's actually been a proposal to, uh, that's been

costed for implementing a basic income in Prince Edward Island,

which would be ideal because it's relatively small, lots of agriculture

and kind of seasonal employment.

Uh, unlikely that a lot of people are gonna uproot themselves and move to PEI.

So they could be part of a, you know, five or seven year pilot on basic income.

But it could work, we could work out the kinks and figure out how

it fits or doesn't fit with some of the other systems that we need,

like, uh, you know, PharmaCare and dental care and all the rest.

Um, so that proposal's been, it's actually, it's a group of politicians,

retired politicians and civil servants and economists have worked on that.

It's there now.

It's ready,

So

go.

It just needs federal funding.

l let me follow up on that and, and I kind of feel that

we are getting a little off track and I do have to end the episode

soon, but what about Kate Breton?

Like, what, what 'cause and, and I kind of wanted to bring up Kate Breton

in terms of, you know, your, your own personal history and I also kind

of wanted to speculate on whether farming on, on, on rocks is viable.

'cause I, I have some ideas as to how it could be, but could the, the

scenario you just described with PEI be applied to Cape Breton, but also in the

context of migration that this would be a way to attract people to move to

Cape Breton as a, a, a, a potential reversal of the, the demographics

there, or, or am I being ludicrous?

No, I don't think you're being ludicrous at all.

I mean, uh, actually, there is some good farmland in Cape Breton.

Um, uh, and there was a little mini of migration during COVID,

you know, uh, to Cape Breton and other parts of Nova Scotia.

There's also, because the university in Sydney did, uh, at one point kind of throw

open the doors to international students.

There's a big population of people from India now who are living, who've chosen to

live permanently uh, in, in Cape Breton.

Um, so I think that's a grand idea of myself.

Uh, of course it would depend on, um, you know, the provincial government,

but then there's always, you know, the Cape Red Liberation Army that

wants to from the mainland and, you know, set up our own government.

And so,

You've heard it here on the Future Herd Podcast first.

Right on.

I don't know if that answered your question, Jesse, but I I, of course,

I mean, I may or may not retire to Cape Breton when, or, or Nova Scotia at some

point, but if I do, part of it will be to work on, um, basic income for Nova Scotia.

And, uh, you know, I think the Atlantic, Atlantic provinces in general are strong

supporters, but again, there isn't really that kind of champion like Tommy

Douglas to really push it forward.

So

Right on.

Well, and coincidentally, I do have the head of the PEI Federation

of Agriculture booked as a guest.

So I will bring up, uh, the subject of, uh, basic income in PEI to at

least see if he's thought about it.

If not, nudge him along.

Uh, uh, the path.

Our last question,

love that.

the last question I throw out, uh, as part of every

episode is, uh, the shout out.

Uh, who are the people that you look up to or that inspire you or

that, uh, uh, nurture your curiosity that you think the rest of us,

uh, should be paying attention?

Like the first question, this is meant to be intuitive.

It's not like an Academy Award.

Thank you.

List.

Like, just a couple of names of who first comes to mind, uh, that you want

to kinda, uh, pass things forward to.

Oh, wow.

I love that question.

Um, you know, one of the people who's been really important for

me, um, because of her work on Food Insecurities, Valter at the University

of Toronto, you know, recently retired.

I mean, she's kind of dedicated her life to providing a really solid

evidence base on food insecurity.

Um, some of the folks in the Canadian food studies Mustafa Cook, um, Charles

Lev Co. Uh, they're, they're, you know, we might not agree on every, point in

thinking about food justice or their food system or food insecurity, but

I just really love them as people.

Um, Jennifer Welsh, who's someone else, who's, she's retired from,

um, what's now TMU, uh, who has had a big influence on, on me.

Um, Heather McClain, who, uh, did more kind of women's health kinds of things.

She, she was one of the people who introduced me to qualitative research,

which, know, I had a, had a background in quantitative work and qualitative

work, just like spoke to my heart.

And that's where I've spent most, most of my career.

uh, Joan

And, and

in the United States, uh, was, uh, she died recently.

She also, she was way ahead of her time in terms of thinking about food.

right on.

And, and, you know,

you gonna say?

well, I was just gonna say, this is where inevitably the guest

starts to feel a moral responsibility to continue to dig deeper and deeper

for the names that they don't wanna leave out, in case anyone's listening.

And that's where I have to absolve you.

Uh, I have to absolve you from that and say, it's really meant to be, this

isn't comprehensive, this is intuitive.

And, and I have to thank you, uh, Elaine.

This, this has been a, a fantastic conversation that that certainly allows

me to fully, uh, uh, uh, uh, deepen the, the subjects and the analysis that we're

trying to do here on the future herd.

I, I've got this current, uh, a flippant saying, uh, that, that I

keep throwing out, which is that we, we are currently in a society

where we have no thoughtful policy.

And the reason we don't have any thoughtful policy is not because

people are not putting thought into the policy they're proposing, but

because there is not diverse thought in the policies that are being proposed.

I will say that doesn't apply to basic income.

I actually think there is a lot of diverse thought being put into basic income.

But it gets back to my, uh, insight around AgriFood, where agri is the

right wing and food is the left wing.

And part of what I want to achieve in the future herd is at

least create the opportunity for some thoughtful policy because.

Hmm,

For sure.

The industry right now has the reins of policy, and I'm trying to make an argument

that if they want their policy to actually work and be effective, they have to start

inviting more people to the policy table.

So I thank you Elaine,

Hmm.

for helping to make that argument today by providing a

perspective that absolutely needs to be part of the larger discourse.

But I end by saying what I've said to a lot of others, I

hope we can have you back.

I hope that you can, uh, be part of the future herd and, and really help us shape,

uh, uh, our response to what I think is an escalating crisis that you so eloquently

articulated in the first answer.

Uh uh.

So thanks again.

Well, thank you.

I mean, thank you for giving me the opportunity to talk about the things

that are I, I care so much about.

Um, I, I, yeah.

So I, and I don't think I ran it too much, so, um, thanks

No, that, that was the brilliance.

You didn't rant at all.

Like did you indict our current food system as being unjust,

tyrannical, and inefficient?

Absolutely.

Did you do it in the form of a ranch?

Not at all.

It was quite reasonable and

thank you.

Excellent.

Thank you.

I guess that's a good thing.

That was by far one of the most enjoyable conversations

I've had as part of this podcast.

And quite frankly, almost every single conversation I've had

on this podcast is enjoyable.

Perhaps my, uh, stoner mind, uh, has a short term memory bias here,

that it always feels like the last conversation was the best conversation.

Um, but this really was one that sat with me for a while, and maybe that's

why I didn't release it right away.

And I'm happy to say that there have been other conversations that

built upon this one that I have since had, but not yet released.

So I kind of feel that we're at a pivotal point here with the future herd.

We're, you know, starting to catch a bit of momentum as a herd, as we're moving

some of the, uh, technology episodes, some of the, uh, leadership knowledge episodes.

And now some of the research and critical studies episodes are really starting to

weave a picture of the Canadian AgriFood sector that I think is unique that I

don't think you can find anywhere else.

You know, people have their specialties, they have their domains, their areas

of expertise, but I suspect only at the future herd are we getting the

kind of critical perspective that people like Elaine Power bring.

Uh, I don't know what that means for the future of the future herd, but I do

know that we are gonna be taking this herd into unprecedented and exciting and

interesting and stimulating territory.

So if you got any feedback that you wanna share with us,

please check out our website.

There's a link there with our email address.

Of course, you can see information about all the episodes we have, the knowledge

we're generating, and quite frankly, the research, uh, that we're engaged in.

Uh.

I'm recording this on June 18th, and as an aside, I just got into the

Cohere Labs Discord server today.

Uh, cohere is kind of the Canadian AI champion, and they're, uh, labs, they're

open labs, uh, is kind of a place for open science, uh, researchers using ai, uh,

throughout, uh, society around the world.

And what's great is I can say, Hey, I'm from the future herd.

I'm a food researcher.

I'm a farmer.

I wanna see how we can use ai and I can point to the podcast as a public

example of the research we're doing.

So it was kind of a proud moment, uh, to be able to say that we are

building something here, something public, something accessible,

something interesting, and something we hope to drive change, uh, within

the Canadian AgriFood sector.

So more on this in the weeks and days to come.

Uh, again, uh, you can find [email protected] and let us know

what you think, uh, whether you like it, whether you don't, whether there's other

people you think we should be talking to.

Alright, until next time, we'll talk to you soon.