RURAL DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE KNOWLEDGE BRIEF SPRING 2016

KNOWLEDGE BRIEF

Innovative Solutions to
Basin-Boundary Food System Challenges

This Brief summarizes research conducted as part of the
Columbia Basin Rural Development Institute’s Regional
Food Systems project. For other research products
associated with this project, visit cbrdi.ca/food.

BACKGROUND
In the Columbia Basin-Boundary region the
challenges farmers face and the unmet demand
for locally produced food suggests that there is
room for improvement in the region’s food system.
Agriculture in the Columbia Basin-Boundary region
(the Basin-Boundary) is typically small scale and
the majority of the food consumed in the region
is imported, a reflection of a food system that is
designed to work with large-scale producers and
national, continental, and/or global supply chains1.
However, there is a renewed and growing interest in
agriculture and food security in the Basin-Boundary2.
This necessitates changes to the existing food
system to better work with local producers and other
intermediaries to produce and supply food to the
people of the Columbia Basin-Boundary region.
Innovative solutions are emerging that transform
how our food is grown, processed, distributed,
marketed, and sold. These solutions increasingly
focus on ensuring economic, environmental,

social, and cultural sustainability. It is important to
understand that innovative actions may not require
a completely new system or huge investments,
but rather the re-purposing or re-organizing of
what exists, building on existing infrastructure and
assets. Below we provide an overview of several
innovative solutions which could be adapted across
the Columbia Basin-Boundary Region. We highlight
models that have already been implemented on
a smaller scale within the region that could be
duplicated or expanded, as well as examples from
outside the region. Innovative solutions are broken
into three categories: supply, processing, and
ownership and land access.

SUPPLY SOLUTIONS:
SHORTENED SUPPLY CHAIN
The local food movement is essentially a movement
to shorten the supply chain. While perceptions and
definitions of local food differ, what is consistent
is that for food to be considered local means the
distance between production and consumption
is shortened3. As such, the local food movement
may best be characterized by what it is not - a long,
globalized food supply chain with considerable
geographic separation between producers and
consumers. The global food system is characterized

1.888.953.1133

www.cbrdi.ca

KNOWLEDGE BRIEF

I N N OVAT I V E S O LU T I O N S TO B A S I N - B O U N DA RY F O O D S YS T E M C H A L L E N G E S

by long supply chains where there are centralized
processing systems, multiple intermediaries, and
long transportation distances. Within these long
supply chains farmers can be unaware of what
happens to the food they produce and sell. Similarly
consumers can be unaware of where, how, and
by whom the food they buy is produced. One
approach to localize the food system is to shorten
supply chains.
A short supply chain means reducing the number
of intermediaries between the producer and the
consumer4. While there is no agreed upon definition
of a short supply chain, the general principle is
that the physical and social distance between the
producer and consumer is as small as possible.
Shortening the supply chain reduces the number of
organizations involved and decreases the physical
distance food travels4. The shorter the supply chain,
the greater the proportion of revenue that goes to
each organization involved and the easier it is to
communicate information about where and how
the food is produced.
Supply chains are not simply ‘short’ or ‘long’ based
on a certain number of organizations. Rather, a
supply chain should be thought of as a continuum
where the more intermediary organizations are
added the longer the supply chain is and vice versa.
The shortest food system supply chain is the direct
sale - where farmers or processors sell directly to
consumers through farm gate sales, ‘pick your own’,
sales over the internet, home delivery, and farmers
markets. In these situations, the consumer has the
opportunity to learn about the farm and farmer
that produced the food because the consumer can
actually meet the farmer.
One example of direct farm to consumer sales
are Community Supported Agriculture (CSA)
Programs where consumers purchase a share in a
farm’s harvest and receive a package of food on a
regular basis (e.g., weekly, biweekly, monthly)5. The
upfront payment from CSA programs helps farmers
by providing income when expenses are high
(i.e., during the spring) and providing a consistent
consumer base 5. Multiple CSAs exist within the
Columbia Basin-Boundary Region5. One example
is Blueberry Patch Farms where you can get CSA
boxes with6-8 different vegetables or fruits that
vary depending on what is in season (http://www.
blueberrypatch.ca/)6.

2

Rural Development In s t i t u t e K N OW L E D G E B R I E F Spri n g 2 0 1 6

Farmers Markets are another example of a
shortened supply chain where farmers sell
directly to consumers. However in the case of a
farmers market, the market acts as somewhat of
an intermediary, providing an organized venue
and requiring farmers to contribute in order
to participate (e.g., through fees). In the BasinBoundary there are over 30 farmers markets where
consumers can buy direct from farmers7. One
example is the Creston Valley Farmers’ Market. In
2015 between 20 and 50 local venders attended
this year round market where everything is
made, baked, or grown locally8. News, events,
vender information, reports, and the market's
business plan are all available at http://www.
crestonvalleyfarmersmarket.ca.
There are many other examples of innovative
approaches to shortening supply chains beyond
direct sales. Further detail on single intermediary
examples are found below in the values-based
supply chain section.

VALUE-BASED SUPPLY CHAIN
A values-based supply chain (value chain) is
a business arrangement among supply chain
partners to share business planning, knowledge,
and market intelligence to help develop strategies
and solutions that benefit each organization in the
chain9. A value chain is a collaborative approach to
business management where organizations share
operational and ethical principles and maintain
steady and open communication9. The value chain
approach is driven by the needs of consumers and
focuses on factors like the uniqueness of products
or services, enhancing innovation, redefining value,
improving quality, and increasing efficiency10–12.
Value chains include the full range of activities
required to bring a product or service from
conception through production to delivery, end
use, and/or disposal12–16.
Small or medium sized enterprises (e.g., a small
farm) often sell products through intermediaries,
creating a long supply chain where other
organizations profit15. The value chain approach can
help producers to connect and engage with other
organizations along the chain, allowing producers
to closely work with intermediaries to gain
benefits like increased market access, improved
relationships, and reduced uncertainty10,11,15,17,18.

A value chain approach can increase efficiency
and reduce waste. For example, processing
facilities can allow existing by-products to be
used for value added products, reducing waste
and creating a new revenue stream. Value chains
also allow for the consideration of values beyond
financial, such as social or environmental values14.
Intermediaries like distributers and retailers benefit
from acquiring specialized products that they can
sell at higher prices, as well as reduced risk through
advanced planning and price negotiations. The
transparency of a value chain allows for marketing
and communication to capitalize on the growing
demand for food products that are produced in an
environmentally and socially responsible way.
The value chain approach has been applied to
agriculture in examples globally, including in
Canada and the United States19,20. For example,
using a value chain approach farmers can be
strategic collaborators, as opposed to anonymous
interchangeable suppliers. Within a value chain
the success of each partner is linked. For example,
Edmonton’s Little Potato Company applied a value
chain approach, working closely with organizations
in their supply chain (e.g., distribution, retailer,
restaurant) to ensure mutual success based on the
their unique little potato varieties and products
(http://www.littlepotatoes.com/en/)21.
Other examples of value chains include
intermediaries that work together on production,
distribution, and marketing. For example, a
Food Hub is an organization that manages the
aggregation, distribution, and marketing of
food products from multiple local producers to
strengthen their ability to satisfy wholesale, retail,
and institutional demand22. Essentially food hubs
overcome the challenges faced by small producers
and/or processors by pooling the resources of
multiple producers and/or processors to create
economies of scale, increasing efficiency by
sharing marketing, storage, processing, tools, and
distribution services23.
Food hubs can take many forms (e.g., business,
cooperative or non-profit organization) and vary
depending on the community (e.g., virtual or
physical place). Food hubs can be an example of
both a value chain approach as well as a shortened
supply chain. For example, food hubs can balance

goals of being financially stable with having positive
economic, social and environmental impacts within
their communities24.
The food hub concept has been adopted in a number
of places. For example, the Vancouver Food Hub is a
partnership between local growers, Farm Folk City
Folk, and Vancouver’s Farmers Markets, providing
a one stop shop for restaurants, markets, and other
organizations to order food25. Within the BasinBoundary there is the Kaslo Food Hub which hosts
various food security related programs, including a
Food Cupboard, Resource Library, Tool Library, and
more26. Also from within the region is the example of
the Kootenay and Boundary Food Producers’ Co-op
whose aim is to develop services and infrastructure
to better link producers and customers, as well
as building agricultural capacity and developing
educational and marketing opportunities around
farm viability (http://kbfpc.ca/)27.

PROCESSING SOLUTIONS
Access to local licensed and inspected processing
facilities can be a barrier to entry into food
processing, limiting local production. For example,
the recent closure of Passmore Pluckers certified
organic abattoir in South Slocan means that anyone
looking to process birds in the West Kootenays
will now have to go to Grand Forks or Creston28.
Similarly, the lack of licensed and inspected
commercial kitchens can also pose a barrier.
However a variety of solutions exist to address these
processing challenges.
Community abattoirs provide access to processing
facilities for multiple local producers.
For example, the Salt Spring Abattoir is a
community facility managed by a not for profit
society and funded by grants from a variety of
sources that provides processing access on Salt
Spring Island (http://www.saltspringabattoir.ca/) 29.
Similarly, in Ontario Manitoulin Island Community
Abattoir Inc. is an incorporated not for profit that
is managed by a volunteer board and successfully
funded through a variety of local, provincial, and
federal sources30. Within the region, Boundary
Country Meatworks in Grand Forks is an example of
a community abattoir, owned and operated by the
Grand Forks and Boundary Regional Agricultural
Society (http://bcmeatworks.com/)31.

KNOWLEDGE BRIEF

I N N OVAT I V E S O LU T I O N S TO B A S I N - B O U N D A RY F O O D S YS T E M C H A L L E N G E S

Ru ral D e v e l op m e n t I n stitu te K N O W L E D G E B R I E F S pr i ng 2 0 16

3

KNOWLEDGE BRIEF

I N N OVAT I V E S O LU T I O N S TO B A S I N - B O U N DA RY F O O D S YS T E M C H A L L E N G E S

4

Accessible commercial kitchens allow small
producers to develop, test, and produce products
for sale. Access to such facilities can allow producers
to access specialized equipment they could not
otherwise afford, helping them to produce and
sell their products more easily32. Some examples
of commercial kitchens go beyond rentable
space, incubating and supporting (e.g., providing
marketing, financial, technical, and regulatory
assistance or training) new food processing
businesses and entrepreneurs who can then take
part in shortened, values-based supply chains as
part of a growing local food system. For example,
in Manitoba while there are multiple, inspected
commercial kitchens that provide rentable space
to businesses and entrepreneurs, there is also the
Food Development Centre in Portage la Prairie
that supports research and product development
through on-site consulting, ingredient sourcing,
food testing, and other services (https://www.
gov.mb.ca/agriculture/food-and-ag-processing/
food-commercialization/food-developmentcentre/)33. Commercial incubator kitchens are
seen as an economic development opportunity
in the Basin-Boundary, as well as an initiative to
support food security. For example, one feasibility
study found that a community kitchen on the
east shore of Kootenay Lake would be financially
viable and recommended moving forward with
implementation34.
A Food innovation district is a geographic
cluster of food-oriented businesses, services,
and community activities, such as markets, food
business incubators, and facilities for common
storage, packaging, and distribution35. Food
innovation districts are supported by “local
governments through planning and economic
development initiatives in order to promote a
positive business environment, spur regional food
system development, and increase access to local
food” 36. According to the food innovation toolkit
developed by Michigan State University, planners,
economic developers, elected officials, and
community champions all have roles to play in food
innovation districts36. There are multiple examples
of food innovation districts from the United States,
such as the Michigan Food Innovation District
which brings together not only growers and
producers, but research, financing, processing and

Rural Development I n s t i t u t e K N OW L E D G E B R I E F Spri n g 2 0 1 6

manufacturing, and many other actors (http://www.
mifoodinnovationdistrict.com/)37. Within the BasinBoundary the formation of clusters around specific
crops or processing is suggested in the Boundary
Area Agricultural Plan38. Such arrangements may
help smaller producers and processors to achieve
economies of scale and access tools, marketing
strategies, and wider distribution.

OWNERSHIP AND LAND ACCESS
SOLUTIONS
The agricultural plans from within the Columbia
Basin-Boundary region expressed that farmland
is often prohibitively expensive for new farmers,
and development pressures in some areas mean
that agricultural land is sold based on speculative
residential or recreational values which are typically
higher. The loss of farmland due to development is
also a major issue identified in the Regional District
of East Kootenay Agriculture Plan where pressures
on agricultural land seem to be the greatest within
the Basin-Boundary39. The loss and development
of farmland is identified as the top agricultural
concern for the people of British Columbia (BC)40.
High farmland prices in BC combined with lack of
access to capital create challenges to accessing
affordable farmland for people wanting to start
farming and current farmers wishing to expand41.
To address the loss of farmland and prohibitive
cost of land in the Basin-Boundary, the Regional
District of East Kootenay and Regional District of
Kootenay Boundary plans recommend research
into the feasibility of alternative land ownership
models (e.g., Agriculture Land Trust or land
cooperative model) to make land more accessible
to farmers that cannot afford to buy farmland at
market prices39. Additionally, there are a variety
of alternative farmland access models, including:
cooperative and community farms, incubator farms,
farmland access agreements, public farmland, and
farmland trusts.

COOPERATIVE AND COMMUNITY FARMS
Cooperative and community farms can help support
access to land for new farmers, as well as help with
sharing costs and pooling resources (e.g., labour)42.
There are many different ways that these types of
farms can be structured. Cooperative farms are
member owned and are generally community or
regionally based, resulting in surplus revenue being

recirculated into the local community42. Community
farms are considered to be social enterprises that
can be operated by co-operatives, institutions, or
societies, generally comprised of complementary
businesses42. This structure reduces the land cost
and operating costs for the individual farmer, and
allows for shared marketing and distribution42. Both
cooperative and community farms have a global
track record of successful examples. One example is
the Haliburton Community Organic Farm in Saanich
BC (http://haliburtonfarm.org/about-us/). The
farm is run by the Haliburton Community Organic
Farm Society and functions on four principles:
stewardship, education/research, economic viability,
and community involvement/partnerships43.

INCUBATOR FARMS
The goal of incubator farms is to support new
farmers through a short-term lease (1-5 years) on
existing farmland, a deal that often includes existing
infrastructure (e.g., fencing, irrigation), training,
and mentorship42. An incubator farm can take a
variety of forms, including ownership by land trusts,
operating on public land, or operating on private
land where an existing farmer wishes to support
new farmers42. One example is Three Feet Below
Farm in Richmond, BC (http://www.threefeetbelow.
ca/). This incubator farm allowed three farm school
students to learn and grow their skills in a low risk
environment on a small plot with the mentorship of
an experienced farmer44. Use of the farm has since
been passed to new students to provide them a
chance to learn44.

FARMLAND ACCESS AGREEMENTS
Beyond purchasing land or the cooperative,
community, or incubator farm options discussed
above, there are alternative land access agreements.
The Young Agrarians network facilitates
connections between land owners with farmland
available and farmers seeking access to land across
Canada through land linking workshops, land
access guides, and online tools for finding and
listing land45. Existing landowners, whether they
are public or private, can benefit from land use
agreements through benefits like reduced property
taxes, seeing their land being used, and accessing a
portion of the food produced on their property.
There are a variety of short and long term ways that
agreements can be made between landowners and

farmers providing land access options without land
purchases. Leases allow the use and occupation
of a property, or portion of a property, for a predetermined period of time in exchange for rent42.
License agreements allow a person to do a specific
action on, or with, someone else’s property (e.g.,
grazing)42. A memorandum of understanding
is an agreement between at least two people,
typically serving as a temporary agreement over a
specific use of the land42. Each of these land uses
has different durations and levels of formality.

PUBLIC FARMLAND
Public Land is owned and administered by the
federal, provincial, or municipal government. In BC,
agriculture in the form of cropland or grazing are
accepted uses of crown land, however the provincial
government is not currently accepting new
applications46. Use of municipal lands for agricultural
purposes is determined by individual municipalities.
For example, in Nelson the Seniors Economic
Environment Development Society (SEEDS) grows
food in greenhouses on city property47.

FARMLAND TRUSTS
Farmland trusts are independent, non-profit
organizations that protect and preserve farmland
by owning and managing the land, holding
covenants, and/or providing support for farming
and farmland protection48. There are a variety of
different trust governance structures and purposes.
For example, the Ontario Farmland Trust works
to protect and preserve farmland in Ontario by
acquiring farmland and interests in farmland,
conducting research and education, managing and
disbursing funds, and fostering cooperation with
other groups interested in protecting farmland
(https://ontariofarmlandtrust.ca/)49. In BC the Farm
Folk City Folk organization is leading an initiative
to create a new governance model that would hold
farmland in trust50. This Foodlands Trust Project
is exploring four farmland trust models to be
developed and piloted between 2015 and 201850:
•

Integration of provincial trust operations into an
existing non-profit organization;

•

Registered, membership based cooperative
trust;

•

New stand-alone provincial trust organization;

•

Municipally integrated regional farmland trust.

KNOWLEDGE BRIEF

I N N OVAT I V E S O LU T I O N S TO B A S I N - B O U N D A RY F O O D S YS T E M C H A L L E N G E S

Ru ral D e v e l op m e n t I n stitu te K N O W L E D G E B R I E F S pr i ng 2 0 16

5

KNOWLEDGE BRIEF

I N N OVAT I V E S O LU T I O N S TO B A S I N - B O U N DA RY F O O D S YS T E M C H A L L E N G E S

REFERENCES
1.

2.

Brynne, A. Food Security in the Basin. (2009).
Available at: http://www.cbrdi.ca/wp-content/
uploads/Food-Security-in-the-Columbia-BasinJun2009.pdf. (Accessed: 30th March 2016)
Columbia Basin Rural Development Institute, J.
Applied Project Brief: Colubmia Basin-Boundary
Food System. (2014). Available at: http://www.
cbrdi.ca/wp-content/uploads/ResearchBrief_
FoodSystems_Final.pdf.

3.

Brain, R. The Local Food Movement: Definitions,
Benefits & Resources. (2012). Available at: https://
extension.usu.edu/files/publications/publication/
Sustainability_2012-09pr.pdf. (Accessed: 30th March
2016)

4.

Galli, F. & Brunori, G. Short Food Supply Chains
as drivers of sustainable development. Evidence
Document. (2013).

5.

Farm Folk City Folk. CSA Programs. (2014). Available
at: http://www.farmfolkcityfolk.ca/resources/
knowledge-pantry/csa/. (Accessed: 23rd March
2016)

6.

Blueberry Patch Farms. Blueberry Patch Farms.
Available at: http://www.blueberrypatch.ca/
community-supported-agriculture-csa.html.
(Accessed: 23rd March 2016)

7.

Columbia Basin Rural Development Institute.
Cultural - Farmers Markets. Digital Basin (2016).
Available at: http://www.cbrdi.ca/digitalbasin/
wpPrtDriver.php?Community=Select%2520a%2520
Community&Theme=Culture&Pillar=Cultural&Cate
gory=Farmers Markets&AdjustExtent=1. (Accessed:
23rd March 2016)

8.

9.

Creston Valley Farmers’ Market. Creston
Valley Farmers’ Market 2015 Year End
Report. (2015). Available at: http://www.
crestonvalleyfarmersmarket.ca/site/wp-content/
uploads/2016/01/2015.12.21_SeasonFMreport_FAC.
pdf.
Diamond, A. et al. Food Value Chains: Creating
Shared Value to Enhance Marketing Success. (2014).
Available at: http://www.cbrdi.ca/wp-content/
uploads/Food-Value-Chains.pdf.

10. Fearne, A. Value Chain Management. The importance
of being relevant. (Kent Business School, 2011).
11. Government of Manitoba - Agriculture Food and
Rural Development. Value Chains: Strategic Alliances
for Improving Profitability. (2015). Available at:
https://www.gov.mb.ca/agriculture/business-andeconomics/market-development/value-chains.html.
(Accessed: 30th March 2016)
6

Rural Development I n s t i t u t e K N OW L E D G E B R I E F Spri n g 2 0 1 6

12. Sturgeon, T. How Do We Define Value Chains and
Production Networks?*. IDS Bull. 32, 9–18 (2001).
13. Mitchell, J., Coles, C. & Keane, J. Upgrading along
value chains: strategies for poverty reduction in
Latin America. (2009). Available at: http://www.odi.
org.uk/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publicationsopinion-files. (Accessed: 30th March 2016)
14. Alasia, A. & Hardie, D. J. Employment shifts in natural
resource sectors: A focus on rural value chains. Rural
and Small Town Canada Analysis Bulletin 8, (2011).
15. Kaplinsky, R. & Morris, M. A handbook for value chain
research. (2001). Available at: https://www.ids.ac.uk/
ids/global/pdfs/VchNov01.pdf. (Accessed: 26th
March 2016)
16. Meyer-Stamer, J. Regional Value Chain Initiatives:
An Opportunity for the Application of the PACAApproach. (2004).
17. Mitchell, J., Shepherd, A. & Keane, J. in Markets
and Rural Poverty: Upgrading in Value Chains (eds.
Mitchell, O. & Coles, C.) 24–43 (Earthscan, IDRC
Books, 2011).
18. Agriculture and Food Council of Alberta. Value Chain
Guidebook: A Process for Value Chain Development.
(2004). Available at: http://www1.agric.gov.
ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agp7974/$FILE/
valuechain.pdf. (Accessed: 30th March 2016)
19. Feser, E. & Isserman, A. The Rural Role in National
Value Chains. Reg. Stud. 43, 89–109 (2009).
20. Stevens, C. Value Chains and Trade Policy The Case of
Agriculture. IDS Bull. 32, 46–59 (2001).
21. Alberta Agriculture and Forestry. Value Chain Success Stories. (2014). Available at: http:// www1.
agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/
agp12160. (Accessed: 24th March 2016)
22. Cantrell, P. & Heuer, B. Food Hubs: Solving Local.
(2014). Available at: http://www.cbrdi.ca/wpcontent/uploads/Food-Hubs-Solving-Local2014.pdf.
23. Hild, C. The Economy of Local Food in Vancouver.
(2009). Available at: http://www.sauder.ubc.ca/
Faculty/Research_Centres/Centre_for_Social_
Innovation_and_Impact_Investing/Core_Themes/
Low_Carbon_Economy/~/media/Files/ISIS/Reports/
Food Systems Reports/The-Economy-of-Local-Foodin-Vancouver.ashx.
24. Barham, J. et al. Regional Food Hub Resource Guide.
(2012). Available at: http://www.cbrdi.ca/wpcontent/uploads/foodHub-guide.pdf.
25. Vancouver Local Food Hub. Local Food Fresh
to You. (2015). Available at: http:// www.
localfoodmarketplace.com/vfmdirect/. (Accessed:
30th March 2016)

26. North Kootenay Lake Community Services Society.
Kaslo Food Security Project. (2015). Available at:
http://www.nklcss.org/home/?q=section/kaslofood-security-project. (Accessed: 29th March 2016)
27. Kootenay and Boundary Food Producers’ Co-op.
Home: KBFPC. (2016). Available at: http://kbfpc.ca/.
(Accessed: 30th March 2016)
28. Metcalfe, B. West Kootenay’s only abattoir shuts
down. Nelson Star (2016).
29. Salt Spring Abattoir Society. Salt Spring Abittoir.
(2016). Available at: http:// www.saltspringabattoir.
ca/. (Accessed: 30th March 2016)
30. Farm Management Canada. Manitoulin Island
Community Abattoir Inc. (2013). Available at: http://
www.fmc-gac.com/content/manitoulin-islandcommunity-abattoir. (Accessed: 30th March 2016)
31. Boundary Country Meatworks. About. (2016).
Available at: Boundary Country Meatworks is a
versatile abattoir, owned and operated by the Grand
Forks and Boundary Regional Agricultural Society
(GFBRAS). (Accessed: 30th March 2016)
32. Lowitt, K. Community Kitchen Best Practices
Toolkit: A Guide for Community Organizations in
Newfoundland and Labrador. (2011).
33. Government of Manitoba - Agriculture Food
and Rural Development. Commercial Kitchens
for Rent. (2016). Available at: https://www.gov.
mb.ca/agriculture/food-and-ag-processing/foodcommercialization/community-kitchens.html.
(Accessed: 30th March 2016)
34. Food Roots. East Shore Food. (2012). Available
at: http://www.cbrdi.ca/wp-content/uploads/
Eastshore-Food-Feasiblity-Report.pdf.
35. Center for Regional Food Systems. Food Innovation
Districts. Michigan State University (2014). Available
at: http://foodsystems.msu.edu/activity/info/food_
innovation_districts. (Accessed: 29th March 2016)
36. Cantrell, P., Colasanti, K., Lucas, L., Sarah, G. &
McCauley, M. Food Innovation Districts: An
Economic Gardening Tool. (2012). Available at: www.
nwm.org/food-innovation-districts.
37. MI Food Innovation District. What is a food
innovation district? (2014). Available at: http:// www.
mifoodinnovationdistrict.com/. (Accessed: 30th
March 2016)
38. Russell, R. Boundary Agricultural Plan. (2011).
Available at: http://www.cbrdi.ca/wp-content/
uploads/ Boundary-Area-Ag-Plan.pdf. (Accessed:
30th March 2016)

39. Columbia Basin Rural Development Institute.
Knowledge Brief: Agriculture Planning. (2015).
Available at: http://www.cbrdi.ca/wp-content/
uploads/CommonThemesAGplans_final.pdf.
(Accessed: 30th March 2016)
40. McAllister Opinion Research. BC Public Attitudes
Toward Agriculture and Food 2014. (2014). Available
at: http://www.cbrdi.ca/wp-content/uploads/BCPoll-Agriculture-and-Food-REF.pdf. (Accessed: 30th
March 2016)
41. Dennis, J. & Wittman, H. Farmland Access in British
Columbia Project Summary Report. (2014). Available
at: http://www.cbrdi.ca/wp-content/uploads/
Farmland-Access-in-BC-Research-Summary-0714.
pdf. (Accessed: 30th March 2016)
42. Tunnicliffe, R. Young Agrarians Land Access
Guide 2.0. (2013). Available at: http://www.
cbrdi.ca/wp-content/uploads/YoungAgrarians_
LandAccessGuide5.0.pdf.
43. Haliburton Community Organic Farm. About Us.
(2016). Available at: http://haliburtonfarm.org/
about-us/. (Accessed: 30th March 2016)
44. Three Feet Below. Three Feet Below. Available at:
http://www.threefeetbelow.ca/. (Accessed: 30th
March 2016)
45. Young Agrarians. Young Agrarians. (2016). Available
at: http://youngagrarians.org/. (Accessed: 29th
March 2016)
46. Government of British Columbia. Land Use Agriculture. (2015). Available at: http://www2.gov.
bc.ca/ gov/content/industry/natural-resource-use/
land-use/crown-land/crown-land-uses/agriculture.
(Accessed: 30th March 2016)
47. Seniors Economic Environment Development
Society. SEEDS Nelson. (2016). Available at: http://
www.seedsnelson.org/.

KNOWLEDGE BRIEF

I N N OVAT I V E S O LU T I O N S TO B A S I N - B O U N D A RY F O O D S YS T E M C H A L L E N G E S

48. The Land Conservancy of British Columbia. A Review
of Farmland Trusts. (2010). Available at: http://blog.
conservancy.bc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/
FLT_dec2010.pdf.
49. Ontario Farmland Trust. Protecting Farmland Forever.
(2014). Available at: https://ontariofarmlandtrust.ca/.
(Accessed: 30th March 2016)
50. Farm Folk City Folk. Foodlands Trust Project. (2015).
Available at: http://www.farmfolkcityfolk.ca/
projects/foodlands-trust/. (Accessed: 29th March
2016

Ru ral D e v e l op m e n t I n stitu te K N O W L E D G E B R I E F S pr i ng 2 0 16

7

I N N OVAT I V E S O LU T I O N S TO B A S I N - B O U N DA RY F O O D S YS T E M C H A L L E N G E S

www.cbrdi.ca

1.888.953.1133