The Southern United States is one of the most diverse regions in the country. The American South has terrain that varies from lowland coastal areas to the high altitudes of the Appalachian Mountains causing variable climatic conditions. These variable climatic conditions allow for high crop yields and crop diversity as well as an abundance of animals and fish. The abundance that exists in the South is not something that is shared equally as poverty and social injustice are both historic and contemporary issues throughout the South.

This chapter is a series of three papers comprised of research related to environmental, agricultural, and social issues. The first paper by Lena Beckhorn is based off of research into weather and climatic events, namely Hurricane Katrina, with a focus on the agricultural devastation that the region was left with in its wake. The second paper “Race, Poverty, Disease, and Diet in the Southern United States Pre-Colonial through the Antebellum Period” by Christina Rodriguez, orients its focus on research conducted on the diets of impoverished and enslaved people in the pre-colonial through the Antebellum period and the health consequences that afflicted impoverished and minority Southerners due to dietary insufficiency. The final paper in this chapter, “Agricultural Workers in the American South”, by Marion Punches, focuses on the current social issues that agricultural laborers in the South are faced with.

Hurricanes are the most economically destructive natural disasters that occur in the United States (NOAA, 2015). Despite the vast amount of research on Hurricane Katrina there is a lack of literature on the impact to farmland. Hurricane Katrina had a significant but principally ignored impact on agriculture.  Coverage of Hurricane Katrina focused solely on the devastation caused to New Orleans and the surrounding states (NOVA, 2005), (HBO, 2006). “Katrina’s impact on Agriculture” by Lena Beckhorn examines Katrina’s effects on agriculture on a local and national level.

Waves of culturally distinct people have settled the American South throughout the ages. This was not a new world, and in “Race, Poverty, Disease, and Diet in the Southern United States Pre-Colonial through the Antebellum Period”, by Christina Rodriguez, the relationship between race, poverty, diet and disease is explored.  The traditional ecological knowledge of multiple bands of culturally distinct Native Americans in the American South was a vital lifeline to enable the survival of Europeans. White Christian ideas of manifest destiny and the othering of Native Americans by this group, restricted Native Americans access to food, contributing to high mortality rates through removal actions and denial of access to resources (Silver 2007, 540-543). The first laborers in the region were impoverished Europeans in the form of indentured servants. Their bodies were not well adapted to the intense sun, heat and humidity in the region. When the use of these white laborers fell out of favor they were released with no land and were afflicted with health issues related to their diet, due to poverty (Coelho and McGuire 1997, 95-103). Additionally, slaves were imported from Africa and suffered immensely from the time they were captured, the middle passage, and during their enslavement at the whims of their white owners. Dietary insufficiencies were common in Africans once they were removed from Africa leading to widespread illnesses and high rates of mortality (Truswell et. al 1968). Diseases of nutrition in the American South have evolved, but still persist with high frequency in impoverished and minority populations.

The last paper observes how the state of agriculture in the U.S has always been that of duality, with little value and understanding given to workers, despite agriculture’s importance to our American way of life.  “Agricultural Workers in the American South” by Marion Punches seeks to understand workers and labor conditions in the South using literary analysis.  Through this exploration, emphasis is given to understand those who work in agriculture, their struggles, and their value, in order to recognize the need for a more socially sustainable system (Food Empower Project. 2018, New American Economy. 2018, Rodman, et al. 2016, and U.S. Department of Labor Employment. 2013-2014).

From environmental to social issues agriculture has always had its complications in the South.  These complications exist due to historical inequalities which have continued to shape the South, limiting opportunities for marginalized groups that are only heightened by natural disasters.  It is though studying these issues that we are better able to understand the south and see its future potential.  A future where environmental and human well being is considered, mitigating suffering and the unequal burden on marginalized groups within southern society.

Works Cited

Coelho, Philip, and McGuire, Robert. 1997. “African and European Bound Labor in the British New World: The Biological Consequences of Economic Choices.” The Journal of Economic History 57, no. 1 (Spring): 83-115.

Food Empower Project. 2018. “Produce Workers” http://www.foodispower.org/produce-workers/

New American Economy. 2018. “Undocumented Immigrants”. https://www.newamericaneconomy.org/issues/undocumented-immigrants/

Rodman, S. O., Barry, C. L., Clayton, M. L., Frattaroli, S. Neff, R. A., & Rutkow, L. 2016.
Agricultural exceptionalism at the state level: Characterization of wage and hour laws for U.S. farmworkers. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 6(2), 89–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2016.062.013

Silver, Timothy. 2007. “Learning to Live with Nature: Colonial Historians and the Southern Environment.” 73, no. 3 (Summer): 539-552.

Truswell, A., Hansen, D. and Wannenburg, P. 1968. “Plasma Tryptophan and Other Amino   Acids in Pellagra.” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 21. (Fall): 1319.

U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration Office of Policy Development and Research. 2013-2014. “Executive Summary”. Findings from the National Agricultural Workers Survey (NAWS) 2013-2014: A Demographic and Employment Profile of United States Farmworkers. Research Report No. 12.  https://www.doleta.gov/agworker/pdf/NAWS_Research_Report_12_Final_508_Complint.pdf

Hurricane Katrina’s Effect on Agriculture

By Lena Beckhorn

When a hurricane devastates a region, there are numerous reports of the devastation caused to infrastructure, the environment, and people’s’ livelihoods. When a hurricane strikes a particular area, it leaves damage in its wake that is not easily cleaned up. Hurricanes are the most economically destructive natural disasters to occur in the United States. Hurricanes are not like other natural hazards, such as tornadoes, because they impact a greater area and cause a much greater amount of devastation. When the hurricane hits a particular locality in the United States, the media focuses on damage caused to property, infrastructure, personal livelihood, and occasionally the environment. A week or two after a hurricane makes landfall it drops out of the news media coverage, but the recovery process takes much longer. For example, during particularly devastating Hurricane Katrina, media coverage was all-encompassing, but still managed to ignore the impact it had on a large portion of the economic engine Southern agriculture. Hurricane Katrina had a significant impact on agriculture though the impact has largely been ignored. Instead the economic impact has dominated the narrative. The effects of hurricanes on agriculture has far-reaching consequences outside of the devastated area (NBC 2005).

Hurricane Katrina made landfall in the Louisiana on August 29, 2005 as an intense category three hurricane with top sustained winds of 125 miles an hour (NOAA 2005). Katrina had previously made landfall in the state of Florida as a category two hurricane but had rapidly intensified to a category five hurricane with sustained winds of 175 miles an hour and a central pressure of 102 mbar (NOAA 2005). The destruction and loss of life that Hurricane Katrina left in its wake was devastating. Unlike recent storms like Harvey and Florence, the most devastating aspect of Katrina was not the rainfall, which was just under 8 inches, but rather the storm surge (NOAA 2005).  Combined with the levees breaking, the surge resulted in catastrophic flooding for 80% of the city of New Orleans and a large part of the surrounding area (NOAA 2005). Devastating flooding and high winds had disastrous impacts on crops in the region. Parts of Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi were inundated by 11.45 feet of storm surge (NOAA 2005). Hurricane Katrina is the costliest hurricane to ever strike the United States with an estimated total damage of over $160 billion (NOAA 2018). In total twenty-three counties were affected by Katrina and a total of 233,099 Km² (Motha 2011). Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi’s agricultural production account for a significant amount of the soybeans, sugarcane, and corn produced in the United States (USDA 2005). The hurricane severely damaged agricultural machinery infrastructure used to harvest sugarcane (USDA 2005). There are four main agricultural impacts of natural disasters: contamination of water bodies, loss of harvest or livestock, increase susceptibility to disease, and destruction of irrigation system and other agriculture infrastructure (EPA n.d.). Hurricane Katrina flooded thousands of acres of crops, contaminating the harvest for the entire region.

Out of the total of more than $160 billion worth of damages, $2 billion were damages to agriculture and related sectors (NBC 2005). All agricultural sectors were heavily damaged, with sugarcane, cotton, and chicken farms receiving the worst of the damage (Drabenstott and Henderson 2005). The loss of crops was devastating to farmers because they only receive $.20 for every dollar associated with their produce (NBC 2005). The devastation to agriculture could have potentially caused a rise in food prices (NBC 2005). Besides these immediate effects there were long-term effects that will impact the Gulf region for years to come (Drabenstott and Henderson 2005). In the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the New Orleans port grain export terminals were shut down and the price of fuel spiked, hindering the transport of food (Drabenstott and Henderson 2005). The near-term effects of Hurricane Katrina caused the region to lose 15% of its farm income (Drabenstott and Henderson 2005). After an examination the USDA determined that 80% of lost income was from crop loss caused by Hurricane Katrina (USDA, 2005). Cash crops accounted for the biggest losses. The hardest hit was the sugarcane industry; Katrina obliterated 85% of the American sugarcane crop (USDA 2005). Louisiana sugarcane crops suffered the greatest damage (Drabenstott and Henderson 2005). The loss of such a large percentage of the national sugarcane crop caused a sugar shortage (Drabenstott and Henderson 2005). As a result, more Mexican sugar was imported (Drabenstott and Henderson, 2005). The livestock industry was also impacted by Katrina (USDA 2005).  Thousands of cattle drowned, thousands of chicken farms were destroyed, and without power, dairy farms had to throw out their milk (Drabenstott and Henderson 2005). According to the USDA the total damage for the chicken, cattle, and dairy industries was $26 million (Drabenstott and Henderson, 2005). Another deeply impacted industry was the fish and shellfish industry, particularly in Louisiana (USDA 2005). Damages caused by high winds and waves totaled $151 million equaling 16% of the nation’s total revenue for fish industries (Drabenstott and Henderson 2005). 12% of all US sugarcane production and 9% of broiler crops were in areas of Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Florida affected by Hurricane Katrina (USDA 2005). Although the South is known for cotton, rice, soybeans, and corn, these crops were the ones that incurred the least amount of damage (USDA 2005). Katrina also damaged the manufacturing aspect of the agricultural industry, damaging ports and storage facilities on the Gulf of Mexico (USDA 2005). Katrina knocked out power for millions of people, which hindered the transport and processing of agriculture, especially poultry and dairy (USDA 2005).

Not all the effects of Hurricane Katrina were felt immediately afterwards; some have more long-term effects such as the recovery of metropolitan areas like New Orleans (Hsu 2006). When the levees failed, people’s’ livelihoods were destroyed in just a few hours (Hsu 2006). Farmers who evacuated before the storm had abandoned their farms due to catastrophic losses totaling more than five years of profits (Hsu 2006). As a result of their crops being destroyed months previously, farmers were unemployed with no market in which to sell their meager crop (Hsu 2006). Farmers’ incomes stagnated with no crops to harvest and no market to sell their produce (Hsu 2006). The debris littering the ocean floor from Katrina’s storm surge destroyed fish habitats and made it nearly impossible to fish (Hsu 2006).  The Mississippi Alabama Sea Grant Consortium claims that the shrimp and oyster populations are declining and are approaching nonrecoverable status unless money is given to clean and restore the oyster beds and other habitats in estuaries (Hsu 2006). The timber industry has become devalued due to the abundance of downed trees and the damage caused to old growth groves (USDA 2005). Farmers have been compensated by the government, but it is not nearly enough for them to recover, because it does not total the cost of their damages (Hsu 2006; U.S. Forest Service n.d.). The farmers have been deprived of their income with no current source of revenue. It will take years, possibly decades, for the agricultural sector to recover, especially for more long-term industries such as timber and fisheries. Fishing boats were blown away and processing centers were destroyed resulting in thousands of people losing their jobs (Motha 2011; Hsu 2006). In Mississippi alone the agriculture, timber, and fisheries lost more than $10 billion of revenue (Hsu 2006).

Despite the amount of financial devastation caused to farmers, the overall price of food remained stable one year later (Leibtag 2006). There was a slight increase in production costs due to supply disruptions, but the overall price of food did not increase significantly in the region hit by Hurricane Katrina (Leibtag 2006). The increase in food prices was surprisingly low, nearly matching the percentage the national price of food rose in the previous year (Leibtag 2006). The destruction of the vast majority of the sugarcane crop and the sugar shortage that followed caused a 10.8% rise in the price of sugar, the largest price increase of any food product (Leibtag 2006). Rice had the second largest price increase, and surprisingly, bananas had the third largest spike in price due to disruptions in the transportation chain (Leibtag 2006). Higher energy costs due to the destruction of all platforms in the Gulf also affect the price of food due to its necessity for processing, manufacturing, and transporting goods (USDA 2005). Energy costs only account for a small fraction of the price of food (Leibtag 2006). The main factors that affects the price of food are accessibility and demand.

With the global temperature on the rise the intensity and frequency of natural disasters such as hurricanes will increase. Global warming affects all aspects of civilization including agriculture. As the world warms and the global population continues to rise, the availability and accessibility of food will become increasingly important. To better prepare for the future with more frequent and intense hurricanes, scientists have to study how hurricanes currently impact agriculture. In the era of globalization, we instinctively rely on agriculture and expect produce to appear in grocery stores no matter the situation. Destruction of crops or shipping channels may result in increased food prices due to shortages caused by the disruption of shipping channels and agricultural harvests (Drabenstott and Henderson 2005). Agriculture suffers long-term damage as a result of hurricanes even though mass media chooses to ignore it, as is seen in New Orleans, which is still recovering agriculturally more than 10 years after Hurricane Katrina (NOAA 2005). Images of thousands of acres of destroyed crops are not as interesting as images of obliterated buildings and buckled streets. Hurricane Katrina made landfall in New Orleans in 2005 and the city is still recovering agriculturally more than 10 years later (NOAA 2005).

There have been many studies on the different impacts of Hurricane Katrina. This literature review attempts to provide more dialogue on the impact caused to agriculture in the region. Agriculture is just as important as the damage caused to infrastructure in cities. Unlike the damage to infrastructure, damage to the agricultural economy has the possibility to affect the entire nation through increases in the price of food resulting from the destruction of various crops such as sugarcane or rice. Although the impact of natural disasters such as Hurricane Katrina on agriculture is often neglected or minimized, it is a highly important industry that deserves more attention due to its necessity for survival.

The impact of Hurricane Katrina on agriculture has largely been ignored due to its lack of media representation. Coverage of Hurricane Katrina focused solely on the devastation caused to New Orleans and the surrounding states (NOVA 2005; HBO, 2006). A conclusion can be drawn that images of distraught people and miles of obliterated neighborhoods tug at the heartstrings of the public (Barns 2005). One would have difficulty finding news coverage of a hurricane that does not center around sweeping images of demolished houses and damaged infrastructure. Images of people and sweeping devastation of homes convey a sense of loss that we find compelling, since we have homes and families, but because we are not farmers and we often do not know where our food comes from, we do not care as much about agriculture. Therefore, depictions of thousands of acres of destroyed crops are perceived to not have the same impact as pictures of devastation. It is harder to convey total devastation with sweeping shots of flattened sugarcane than with demolished houses. However, damages to agriculture are equally as important as architectural damage because people require food for survival. A significant amount of the economic damages, $2 Billion out of $160 Billion, inflicted by Katrina were from the loss of agriculture (NBC 2005). While it does not look large compared to all the destruction it is still a significant amount.  

Floodwaters rushing over a field result in a multitude of problems such as mixing with other chemicals present and polluting the surrounding area, spreading the contaminated water for miles (Iverson 2017). This can cause soil contamination and pollute the farmland. Similar to infrastructure, it will take years for farmland to recover. After a hurricane the amount of supplied food is always a key issue. Food is often hard to access because grocery stores are closed as a consequence of sustained damage. They cannot import food from the core periphery area because the agriculture is wiped out or underwater and the transportation networks are damaged.

Destruction of agriculture has impacts that can be felt on the national level. As mentioned above the disruption caused by Hurricane Katrina caused significant shortages in sugar. In the South, a substantial part of the economy is structured around agriculture. When Katrina made landfall, it cost billions of dollars in agricultural damage. Recovery is a long and arduous process that often takes decades to complete. It can take decades for the area affected by a devastating hurricane to completely recover, more than ten years after Hurricane Katrina made landfall the impacts are still visible

Not all of New Orleans has recovered equally. Some parts of the city including the wealthy parts of the French Quarter are flourishing, while areas such as Ward 9 are still struggling to recover (Edge 2017). Hurricane Katrina demolished most of the restaurants in New Orleans, so after the city dried out the process of rebuilding started (Edge 2017). Wealthy cooks and chefs were able to rebuild their restaurants, but a majority of small restaurant owners did not have access to sufficient financial resources to rebuild their restaurants (Edge 2017). As New Orleans rebuilt it became increasingly wealthy, white, and gentrified and the Lafitte housing project housing project was torn down resulting in a lack of affordable housing for the working class (Edge 2017). The economic and racial disparities present before Katrina have worsened as a result of gentrification (Edge 2017). Hurricane Katrina caused a rise in the percentage of affluent people and a decrease in the impoverished population (Edge 2017). By the 10th anniversary of Katrina New Orleans had 10% more restaurants and a 21% drop in population (Edge 2017). White residents said New Orleans had recovered and African American residents could no longer recognize the city (Edge 2017). This caused demographic shifts in the racial makeup of the population and the accessibility of restaurants (Edge 2017). Thousands of chefs moved to New Orleans and appropriated the lower and working classes’ food. (Edge 2017).

Additional research is needed relating to the status of the agricultural sector since Hurricane Katrina, although articles comparing the agricultural impacts of Hurricanes Harvey and Katrina state it will take years for the agricultural sector to recover (Foodtank 2017). Hurricane Katrina had a significant but principally ignored impact on agriculture. The narrative instead has been dominated by the economic impact. Despite the vast amount of research on Hurricane Katrina there is a lack of literature on the impact of farmland. Analysis of literature shows that the sugarcane and cotton industries were devastated at regional and national levels. The lessons learned from Hurricane Katrina’s impact on agriculture on the national level have allowed the US to attempt to mitigate damage to agriculture. Katrina is still relevant today because the lessons learned from Katrina contributed to advanced preparation for Hurricane Harvey.

Works Cited

Barns, Michael. 2005. “Analysis of Media Agenda Setting During and After Hurricane Katrina: Implications for Emergency Preparedness, Disaster Response, and Disaster Policy.” Accessed November 8, 2018   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2376984/

BBC. 2017. “Harvey vs. Katrina: Have New Orleans lessons been learned?” Accessed November 9, 2018 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41073878

Bennett, David. 2005. “Louisiana sugarcane crop faces long recovery.” Accessed November 9, 2018 https://www.deltafarmpress.com/louisiana-sugarcane-crop-faces-long-recovery

Drabenstott, Henderson. 2005. “Katrina and Rita: Lingering Effects on Agriculture.” Accessed October 1, 2018   https://www.kansascityfed.org/publicat/mse/MSE_1005.pdf

Edge, John. 2017. “The Potlikker Papers.” Accessed December 6, 2018.

EPA. 2018. “Agriculture and Natural Events and Disasters.” Accessed September 23, 2018 https://www.epa.gov/agriculture/agriculture-and-natural-events-and-disasters

Fritz, Angela. 2018. “Harvey, Irma and Maria now in the top 5 costliest hurricanes on record, NOAA says.” Accessed September 23, 2018  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2018/01/30/harvey-irma-and-maria-now-in-the-top-5-costliest-hurricanes-on-record-noaa-says/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.3b0f2eff2f5f

Foodtank. 2017. “Hurricane Harvey: Crop Losses Could Reach US$150 Million.” Accessed November 9, 2018 https://foodtank.com/news/2017/09/hurricane-harveys-agricultural-impact/

Glassey, Steve. 2018. “Did Harvey Learn from Katrina? Initial Observations of the Response to Companion Animals during Hurricane Harvey” Accessed November 9, 2018 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5946131/

HBO. 2006. “When the Levees Broke: A Requiem in Four Acts.” Accessed November 8, 2018 https://www.hbo.com/documentaries.when-the-levees-broke-a-requiem-in-four-acts-acts-1-and-2

Hsu, Spencer. 2006. “In Mississippi, Katrina Yields Bitter Harvest.” Accessed October 1, 2018  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2006/03/11/AR2006031101058.html?noredirect=on

Iverson, Ana. 2017. “A Survey of Sugarcane Soil Salt Content Resulting from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita” Accessed November 8, 2018 https://www.lsuagcenter.com/~/media/system/a/e/0/9/ae094b1f3f40ab0e52ca9ea959ac50ea/pub2949jsugarcanesaltintrusionfinal.pdf

Leibtag, Ephraim. 2006. “Despite Katrina, Overall Food Prices Stable.” Accessed October 1, 2018  https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2006/september/despite-katrina-overall-food-prices-stable/

Motha, Raymond. 2011. “Chapter 30: The Impact of Extreme Weather Events on Agriculture in the United States.” Accessed October 1, 2018 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2316&context=usdaarsfacpub

NBC. 2005. Bottom of Form“Katrina’s agriculture costs will top $2 billion.” Accessed September 23, 2018 http://www.nbcnews.com/id/9178542/ns/business-us_business/t/katrinas-agriculture-costs-will-top-billion/#.W9SkW0tKj2G

NOAA. 2005. “Hurricane Katrina – August 2005.” Accessed September 30, 2018 https://www.weather.gov/mob/katrina

NOAA. 2018. “Costliest U.S. tropical cyclones tables updated.” Accessed October 7, 2018 https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/news/UpdatedCostliest.pdf

NOVA. 2005. “Storm That Drowned a City.” Accessed November 8, 2018 https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/video/storm-that-drowned-a-city

Rethwisch, Michael. 2017. “Rethwisch: Hurricane Harvey’s impact on local agriculture.” Accessed November 9, 2018 https://columbustelegram.com/news/local/rethwisch-hurricane-harvey-s-impact-on-local-agriculture/article_b11ad5f9-70c2-507f-afad-1e438f4d1598.html

U.S. Forest Service. 2005. “USDA Assists Survivors Affected By Hurricane Katrina.” Accessed October 1, 2018  https://www.fs.fed.us/news/releases/usda-assists-survivors-affected-hurricane-katrina

USDA. 2005. “A Preliminary Assessment of the Effects of Katrina and Drought on U.S. Agriculture.” Accessed September 30, 2018 https://www.usda.gov/oce/newsroom/archives/releases/2007files/Katrinadamage_1_2.pdf

Race, Poverty, Disease, and Diet in the Southern United States Pre-Colonial Through the Antebellum Period

By Christina Rodriguez

The United States is a melting pot of culturally and ethnically diverse people, some who were settled here for thousands of years, others who came here willingly comprised of a mixed European diaspora, and still others who came here forcibly through the slave trade from Western and Central Africa. With the arrival of the Europeans, Old World ideas of a class-based system based upon the social standing of one’s birth and the color of one’s skin arrived with them. The concept of Manifest Destiny gave Europeans settlers the premise to expropriate Native American land and repurpose it for their own desires as good Christians. (Lee 1996, 2013-2014). Prior to abolition, the bible was used as a justification for the importation and enslavement of thousands of people from Africa (Oshatz 2010, 334). The economic agrarian class structure in the Southern United States consisted of large plantation holders, Native Americans who were removed from the most fertile areas in the region, poor whites who had no land, and slaves (Post 2009, 454) who were treated as a commodity class.

Aside from being relegated to a low or nonexistent social status, Native Americans who were removed from their land and African American slaves, who were subjugated due to their race, and poor whites with no social status all had limited dietary options. The purpose of this research is to provide insight into the dietary habits of people in the American South pre-colonization through the antebellum period, focusing on the factors of race, poverty, and subsequent disease prevalence related to diet. The lack of access to nutritious food and abundant social injustice during the antebellum period in the Southern United States caused Native Americans, enslaved Africans, and poor whites to have a restricted diet leaving them more susceptible to diseases that arise from severe, long term malnutrition.

Native American Diet and Disease Before and After Colonization

Research conducted regarding the lifestyle, diet, and health of Native Americans prior to the arrival of colonists is variable. The United States was home to hundreds of culturally distinct Native American Tribes, people who had traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) that allowed them to sustainably farm, gather, and hunt from the bounties of the land (Silver 2007, 540-543).  TEK knowledge is complicated and contrary to the notion of many colonists during the period which perceived these people as living in primitive ways, they flourished (Silver 2007, 540-543). Many tribes were initially peaceful with European settlers teaching them farming methods, hunting techniques, and indigenous medicinal techniques (Silver 2007, 540-543). Colonists would not had been able to survive without the exchange of knowledge by their hosts.

According to Jones, prior to the arrival of European colonists, there were many indigenous diseases such as streptococcal pneumonia, tuberculosis, chicken pox, herpes, and syphilis and the severity of the symptoms of the diseases were compounded when there were existing dietary deficiencies (Jones 2003, 714-718). This point of view tends to look at Native American disease susceptibility from the perspective of genetic weakness and ignores the fact that prior to the arrival of colonists, Native Americans had free range to hunt, gather and fish and their populations were increasing exponentially (Silver 2007, 540-543) populations that are not thriving do not increase in size at an exponential rate.  Research highlighting the success of Native Americans prior to colonization in the south by Europeans, shows that diseases brought from the old world were what devastated Native American populations. (Silver 2007, 540-543). An important secondary contributor to Native American Mortality was the removal by force from prime farming, hunting, and fishing areas (Jones 2003, 714-718), which resulted in increased mortality as Native Americans were relegated into one of the lowest segments of society. Without places to hunt, fish and farm Native Americans found themselves at a severe disadvantage in the American South as farming crops like corn had become an important contributor to their diet.

Corn was one of the most prevalent crops grown by southern Native Americans and was a primary contributor to being able to sustain increasing populations (Silver 2007, 540-543). There are some major disadvantages to a reliance on corn as a primary source of nutrition. Corn is lacking in protein and a lack of protein leads to an increase in disease susceptibility due to immunodeficiency (Jones 2003, 714-718), however, considering the expropriation of Native American lands, even the ability to grow corn on fertile soil was reduced. The decimation of Native Americans paved the way to the agrarian society that became the American South (Silver 2007, 540-543). Europeans settled the South finding that the climate was suitable for agriculture and the British populated the American South in large numbers (Post 2009, 460). With the manpower and financial capital to assert dominance, rich plantation owners dominated the landscape of the American South and their initial supply of farm labor arrived in the form of poor whites who entered contracts of indentured servitude (Coelho and McGuire 1997, 95-103).

Indentured Servants Transition to Poor Whites

There have been parallels drawn between the indentured servant class and their lack of social welfare on par with that of slaves from Africa. “All Servants imported and brought into the Country who were not Christians in their Native Country shell be accounted and be slaves. All Negro, mulatto and Indian slaves with in this dominion shall be held as real estate” (PBS 2018).  White indentured servants would serve for a period of approximately seven years and then gain their freedom. These white people who were initially brought over for labor purposes enjoyed some rights as British citizens and were generally fed decently while in servitude (Coelho and McGuire 1997, 95-103). Their skin color which was prone to burning, their tendency to escape their servitude, and their lack of resistance to mosquito borne diseases made them unfavorable laborers (Coelho and McGuire 1997, 95-103). Indentured Servants came to the Colonies willingly and comparing their condition to slaves is not accurate. The descendants of these people would become the poor white class in the American South.  The climate in the South is brutally humid and hot in the summer and the growing season is long which required intensive manual labor to be productive throughout the year (Coelho and McGuire 1997, 95-103). To mitigate the loss of investment that occurred from paying for the passage of indentured servants from Europe, their use fell out of favor with preference to the importation of slaves from Africa viewed as more desirable to the needs of plantation owners (PBS 2018).

African Diet Destroyed and Diseases Raged During the Middle Passage

The diet of Africans before they became slaves was rich in fruits, vegetables, fibrous tubers, rice, and a modest amount of fat and protein (Mustakeem 2008, 474-496).  While many of their traditional foods found their way to the Americas by way of slave ships, enslaved Africans did not readily have access to them. Dietary insufficiency was an immediate effect of being captured and placed upon a slave ship. The captives arrived in poor health from mental and physical abuse with one in five enslaved Africans dying during the voyage from disease (International Slavery Museum 2018). Physically bound and stacked in rows, people were packed in with their movements completely restricted causing a complete lack of sanitation. Slaves were fed twice a day when supplies allowed A small amount of fresh African food was brought onto the ships when departing Africa (Mustakeem 2008, 474-496), but it was never enough to feed everyone and many of the forcibly captured died before completing the trip. For those that did survive, they often arrived sick with conditions such as scurvy, rickets, and pellagra. Diets on slave ships usually consisted of small portions of bread and stews made from yam and salted meat or fish. Fresh fruit and vegetables were considered a waste of cargo space as they did not have a long shelf life. A bread-based diet was not good for the digest tract of the slaves, and often led to internal blockage leading to intestinal necrosis, making the afflicted extremely ill unable to expel toxins. Salted meat and fish led to increasing dehydration which exacerbated the severity of disease (Mustakeem 2008, 474-496).

Slaves Suffered From Dietary Insufficiency, High Infant Mortality, and Pellagra

The middle passage was only the beginning of dietary insufficiency for African Slaves. Slaves had to survive consuming diets that were highly restrictive depending upon the generosity of their captors. Subsequently, many dietary related conditions persisted amongst the enslaved. According to Mcguire (2011), many enslaved adults appeared to be healthy particularly men who it could be assumed had better diets to support their workload, but women and children tended to be severely malnourished as well as afflicted by parasites. Birth cohort studies of enslaved children showed that they were often born of short stature and of low birthweight which can be attributed to pregnant slaves being expected to work laborious tasks throughout their entire pregnancies (Coelho 2000, 233).  The lack of adequate rest and nutrition led to high rates of infant mortality, maternal demise and babies born of low birth weight. (Coelho 2000, 233). Whether or not women and children were intentionally malnourished would have varied from plantation to plantation, but the data shows that being a female or a child was a risk factor for mortality for a southern slave. It is argued that the only contributing factor to negative prenatal outcomes in enslaved women was the high work intensity that enslaved women engaged in while pregnant and preexisting diseases (Steckle 1992, 491-497). Steckle’s argument negates the compounding risk factors that slave women and children existed in that is pointedly discussed in Coelho’s research. Research conducted by Coelho used mathematical methods and birth and mortality records to realize the more accurate nature of the true contributors to negative birth outcomes for pregnant slaves (Coelho 2000, 233).

During the Antebellum period knowledge about the importance of a balanced diet during pregnancy was lacking. It is a fact that diet directly impacts the health of pregnant women and their babies. Medical research data shows that a diet high in corn, especially corn that has not been fortified, and lacking in lean meat, fish, fruits, and vegetables contributes to gestational diabetes in the mother and detrimental effects to the fetus (Lowenshon 2016, 416). History would point to a lack of care and concern towards the importance of diet and pregnancy by plantation masters. Enslaved men, women, and children were all subjected to the whims of their owners and many ended up becoming extremely ill due to their insufficient diets.

Vitamin and Protein Deficiency Caused Pellagra

Slaves did not have a choice in what they could eat. Rations would be strictly controlled by the mistress of the house and were generally the most undesirable portions of the animal, some corn meal, and molasses (Truswell et. al 1968). A diet so insufficient in diversity lacks many vitamins and nutrients that are vital for human beings to stay healthy. There was an epidemic of pellagra that afflicted people in the Southern United States well into the twentieth century.  The rural farmworker, whether a slave, or a freeman had a lack of financial capital to afford health care and a proper diet (Humphreys 2009). A diet reliant on Indian corn seems to be the main contributor to the epidemic, likely from a lack of niacin and various other minerals and amino acids. Leucine is contained in corn and blocks the absorption of niacin and tryptophan which are both essential to preventing pellagra (Truswell et. al 1968). In the 1840s, the price of cotton dropped, which affected slaves on plantations who saw their already meager rations further cut (Humphreys, 2009). According to Kenneth, the symptoms of pellagra at this time were manifesting in slaves as skin trauma and sun sensitivity, a grey tongue with red inflamed edges, skin lesions oozing with fluid, hard swollen lymph nodes, dried mucous membranes, red eyes, and pain in muscles and joints (Kenneth 1977, 421).

Pellagra affected all people who had corn-based diets, completely deficient in protein that is readily available to be processed solely by the human digestive tracts, minerals, and amino acids (Truswell et. al 1968).  Another group in the south who had an arguably less diverse diet were poor whites. According to Dr. H.G. Davenport, a doctor of in the mid-19th century, the filthy homes and lack of personal hygiene coupled with the choice of a poor diet was why both slaves and poor whites had such high incidences of pellagra. Early on, physicians realized that if caught early most people afflicted with pellagra could have their symptoms alleviated by feeding them well (Kenneth 1977, 421).  While period academics realized that diet and living in squalor caused diseases in vulnerable populations, no social welfare was enacted in the period to benefit people at risk. Being fed well is not a choice when you are either a slave or living in poverty. Winter and spring saw the worst incidences of dietary related disease in the South. Summer and Fall tended to offer more wild abundance that people were able to gather, and the weather was favorable to growing subsistence crops (Forret 2004, 786-788). While many slaves were permitted to have their own vegetable plots to supplement their diets this was never a guarantee, poor whites often did not have the land to grow anything for subsistence as any land that they did work would be devoted to cash crops (Truswell et. al 1968).

Discussion

Social justice was nonexistent in the antebellum south. Native Americans who once had free range to move across the land surviving from hunting, fishing, gathering, and farming were starved from their traditional food sources after being forcibly removed from their land (Silver 2007, 540-543). Africans were forcibly taken from their land and enslaved for several hundred years. Poor whites were relegated to a low status in society, just a tier above slaves (Humphreys 2009). When people are treated inhumanely, as in forced Indian removals, and the enslavement of thousands of Africans brought to the region in bondage, they are stripped of their dignity and humanity. Their ability to make better choices to improve their socioeconomic status was non-existent. It can be argued that poor whites had their freedom, but the imbalance in control of assets made their rise out of poverty nothing more than a dream for most (Humphreys 2009).

People who are stripped of their ability to be able to sustain themselves and systemically mistreated are powerless. The domination of the Antebellum South at the hands of wealthy white plantation owners subjected diverse groups of people to austerity. Subsequently, many poor southerners came to be afflicted with diseases rooted in nutritional deficiency. In the Antebellum South, corn was king, and for some people corn meal was their only source of food. A diet lacking in vital nutrients from animal protein, fruit and vegetables caused pellagra and scurvy, both of which caused the afflicted to suffer (Humphreys 2009). Even during the antebellum period, doctors realized that people would recover from these afflictions if they were fed well (Kenneth 1977, 421). With this knowledge in hand, the lack of value for human life outside of elite society prevailed. In an ideal world, those who had the power in the South would have realized how they were treating people of different races and of different classes was ethically wrong. The American south is still a land existing with an abundance of inequality (Hoetz 2008). The image of a gaunt, malnourished, distended bellied southerner has transitioned to the image of the obese southerner.

Modern day southerners who live in poverty suffer from a rash of health issues at exponentially higher rates than those in the region who live above the poverty line (Hotez, 2008). Many of the health issues that are experienced by modern southerners can be attributed to their diet. Like diets in the antebellum south, present southern diets rely heavily on corn. Corn is a cheap filler that causes nutrients to be depleted. Most low cost processed foods and drinks are sweetened with high fructose corn syrup adding nutritionally void calories which contribute to obesity, insulin resistance and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (Lavine 2013). Fruit and vegetables are still lacking in the diet of poor southerners, even in a region that produces an abundance of fresh produce. The food that people who live in poverty can consistently afford is inundated with sodium, fat, and sugar.

The research conducted shows that race and class mattered when it came to the quality of diet that people consumed in the Antebellum Southern United States. Exploitation of land, resources, and an unequal distribution of wealth combined with racial and social injustice contributed to the fate of people of color during the period. Over a century and a half has passed since the period known as the Antebellum South ended, but the struggle for equality for people of color is still a reality in the region. Rising out of poverty is still a difficulty for many people, as is finding the means to nourish themselves in a healthy way.

During the antebellum period, poverty and insufficient diet was observed in all racial groups. Conditions such as pellagra, and scurvy that were related to a lack of adequate nutrition were common health conditions that afflicted the most impoverished people in the Southern United States. These conditions affected the quality of life for Southerners for generations from conception through old age. Hunger, disease, and poverty were as much a part of the old south, as plantations and southern hospitality.

The contemporary Southern United States still is a challenging place for people who live in poverty. Social elitism in the South never went away, nor did widespread oppression of people of color, who to this day are more likely to live in poverty than white people. Despite advances in health care, and a deeper knowledge of the importance of a healthy diet for human health, the issues in the antebellum south in regard to health and disease still disproportionately affect people of color and poor whites. More must be done to educate and advocate for impoverished southerners, so they can live healthy and productive lives. In the richest country in the world, it is evident that social welfare is still lacking in the Southern United States.

Works Cited

Coelho, Philip, and McGuire, Robert. 1997. “African and European Bound Labor in the British New World: The Biological Consequences of Economic Choices.” The Journal of Economic History 57, no. 1 (Spring): 83-115.

Coelho, Philip, and McGuire, Robert. 2000. “Diet Versus Diseases: The Anthropometrics of Slave Children.” The Journal of Economic History 60, no. 1 (Spring): 232-244.

Forret, Jeff. 2004. “Slaves, Poor Whites, and the Underground Economy of the Rural Carolinas.” The Journal of Southern History 70, no.4 (Fall): 783-824.

Hoetz, Peter. 2008. “Neglected Infections of Poverty in the United States of America.” Neglected Tropical Diseases 2, no. 6 (Summer): 1-10.

Humphreys, Margaret. 2009. “How Four Once Common Diseases Were Eliminated From The American South.” Health Affairs 28 no.6 (Spring)

International Slavery Museum. 2018. “Life on Board Slave Ships.” National Museums Liverpool.

Kenneth, F and Kiple, Virginia. 1977. “Black Tongue and Black Men: Pellegra and Slavery in the Antebellum South.” The Journal of Southern History 43, no. 3 (Summer): 411-428.

Lavine, Joel et al. 2013. “Dietary Fructose in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.” Hepatology 57 no. 6. (Winter)

Lee, Yuanchung. 1996. “Manifest Destiny Through Court Reform.” The Yale Law Journal 105, no. 7 (Spring): 2013-2018

Lowensohn, R., Staler, D. and Naze, C. 2016. “Current Concepts of Maternal Nutrition.” Obstet Gynecol Surv.71 no.7 (Summer): 413-426.

Mcguire, Robert et al. 2011. “Slavery and Diseases in the Antebellum American South.” Parasites, Pathogens, and Progress Chapter 6

Muskateem, Sowande. 2008. “I Never Have Such a Sickly Ship Before”: Diet, Disease, and Mortality in 18th Century Atlantic Slaving Voyages.” The Journal of African American History 93, no. 4 (Fall): 474-496.

Oshatz, Molly. 2010. “No Ordinary Sin: Antislavery Protestants and the Discovery of the Social Nature of Morality.” Church History 79 no. 2 (Summer): 334-358.

PBS. 2018. “From Indentured Servitude to Racial Slavery” The Terrible Transformation

Post, Charles. 2009. “ Agrarian Class Structure and Economic Development in Colonial British North American: The Place of the American Revolution in the Origins of US Capitalism.” Journal of Agrarian Change 9 no.4 (Fall): 453-483.

Jones, David. 2003. “Virgin Soils Revisited.” The William and Mary Quarterly 60, no.4 (Fall): 703-742.

Silver, Timothy. 2007. “Learning to Live with Nature: Colonial Historians and the Southern Environment.” 73, no. 3 (Summer): 539-552.

Steckle, Richard. 1992. “Work, Disease, and Diet in the Health and Mortality of American Slaves.” Without Consent or Contract: Technical Papers 2 no. 4 (Spring): 491-497.

Truswell, A., Hansen, D. and Wannenburg, P. 1968. “Plasma Tryptophan and Other Amino Acids in Pellagra.” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 21. (Fall): 1319.

Twyman, Robert. 1971. “The Clay Eater: A New Look at an Old Southern Enigma. Southern Historical Association 37, no. 3 (Summer): 439-448.

Agricultural Workers in the American South

By Marion Punches

Introduction

The  American South has a long complicated history with agriculture – one that has existed longer than the country itself.  Today’s agriculture has its complications too, complications which can be better understood by reviewing the available literature about farm workers in the region.  These complications arise from systemic inequality, lack of representation and visibility that continues to make the agricultural industry socially unsustainable.

The literature explores these themes by focusing on specific aspects of southern agriculture as it relates to the worker and to the system as a whole.  Special emphasis is given to the role of perspectives in the literature as well as a key perspective that needs to be studied further.  Though reviewing the literature, we can begin to understand the farm worker, their struggles, and their value.

Analysis of Literature

Farm workers are a commonly overlooked workforce, with the available literature recognizing only limited aspects of their reality.  Demographically 80% of the workforce is hispanic, 72% are male, with an average age of 38, 68% of which were born in Mexico and 27% in the U.S (U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration Office of Policy Development and Research. 2013-2014).  63% of these workers are married and 57% have children (U.S. Department of Labor Employment. 2013-2014).  When we as a society think of people who are middle aged, married and have children, we tend to think of people who have relative stability in their lives.  However, given that 39% of farm workers were living apart from all nuclear family members when they were interviewed and that 16% of farmworkers had full-year employment the previous year, these statistics would indicate that they are still looking for stability (U.S. Department of Labor Employment. 2013-2014).

The literature reflects that this lack of stability is present beyond their employment status and affects their personal wellbeing.  Of the farm workers interviewed, only 35% had health insurance (U.S. Department of Labor Employment. 2013-2014).  This is alarming considering that farmwork is incredibly taxing on the body given the physical requirements of the job, but also exposure to chemicals used in the fields (Food Empower Project. 2018).  These chemicals include pesticides and the risk of pesticide poisoning which 10,000 – 20,000 agricultural workers being diagnosed with each year (Food Empower Project. 2018).  Besides getting pesticide poisoning, there are continued long-term effects associated with this exposure including cancer, neurological disorders such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s, and infertility along with other reproductive complications (Food Empower Project. 2018).

This instability has consequences, and for the individual these consequences can prove to be fatal.  One specific case, that of 17 year old Maria Isabel Vasquez Jimenez, was especially alarming as she died of heat stroke after working a 9 hour shift in 95°F conditions while two months pregnant (Food Empower Project. 2018).  Maria should never have been working under such extreme conditions, especially while pregnant (Food Empower Project. 2018).  Such a tragedy points to clear lack of consideration for the worker and an attitude that they are easily replaceable (Food Empower Project. 2018).  It is conditions like these that cause agricultural work to be one of the most hazardous industries in America (Food Empower Project. 2018).  One does not do this type of hard work because they have options, they do it because they must, and yet even though these workers work an average of 42 hrs/week, 36% of the families have a combined income below the national poverty line (Food Empower Project. 2018).  We need agricultural workers in America and they need safe working conditions that can support themselves and their families.

The literature points to a variety of means to better support farm workers including through policy changes.  One such policy is that farmwork is excluded from basic federal worker protections – including overtime and minimum wage (Rodman, et al. 2016).  States actually set their own standards for workers, some of which include farmworkers and others that do not (Rodman, et al. 2016).  Overall, states choose whether to explicitly and non explicitly exclude some or all farmworkers from minimum wage 76%, overtime 100%, rest periods 27%, and meal time 19% (Rodman, et al. 2016).  These are long grueling hours of mostly non stop work and yet, workers are legally not given overtime and can be paid less than minimum wage (Rodman, et al. 2016).  There is clearly a social cost for the under payment of these workers, which is why it is shocking that our state and federal governments do not require farms to account for their true cost of operation.  We need better policies that consider how valuable these workers are instead of allowing a system to exist that continues to undervalue and exploit vulnerable workers because they need to earn a living.

Depending on the source, the literature gives a subtle difference in how the most exploited workers in the South are identified.  This is usually seen with the phrasing “illegal” or “undocumented” worker which can indicate the political or geographic bias of those writing about them (Haspel, Tamar. 2017 and New American Economy. 2018).  This bias, which can be seen throughout the literature, is important to note given that it alters how we perceive, talk about, and treat farm workers – especially since 47% of farm workers fall into this categorization (U.S. Department of Labor Employment. 2013-2014).  With such a large proportion of agricultural workers seen as “illegal” or “undocumented”, it is important to understand the value they provide our system (Haspel, Tamar. 2017, New American Economy. 2018, and U.S. Department of Labor Employment. 2013-2014).

Along literature bias for how farm workers are portrayed, there are misconceptions as to the impact of having these workers – especially if they are undocumented.  One misconception is that undocumented workers use tax dollar benefits without contributing anything, however as we are about to see, they contribute quite a lot (New American Economy. 2018).  In 2014, undocumented immigrants earned a total of $178.3 billion with $13.2 billion going towards federal taxes and $7.8 billion going towards state and local taxes, contributing $3.4 billion to Medicare and $13.5 billion to social security (New American Economy. 2018).  Along with this contribution to taxes, the total spending power of these undocumented workers is $157.3 billion, a sum that should speak volumes to businesses and government officials (New American Economy. 2018).  5 out of 10 of the states where undocumented workers contributed the most to state and local taxes in 2014 were in the South, with Texas at $1.4 billion, Florida $407 million, Georgia $245 million, North Carolina $202 million, and Virginia $194 million (New American Economy. 2018).  Clearly the South is still very much reliant on these workers for their labor, but also for taxes (New American Economy. 2018). Despite this reliance on workers, the literature points to a lack of protections for workers since they are excluded from federal protections and often do not have proper legal status to be here, which enables exploitation (Rodman, et al. 2016).

An issue that comes up quite frequently within the literature about undocumented workers is that of deportation.  Deportation has its own costs, including an estimated $1.6 trillion reduction in the U.S GDP, a 5.7% loss to the U.S economy, and $400 billion in direct costs to the federal government (New American Economy. 2018).  Overhauling the problems within the system beyond deportation would save the U.S this money and is estimated to even be economically beneficial as $1.4 trillion of GDP growth is projected from legalization, $116 billion in additional federal taxes, and $68 billion in additional state and local taxes from legalization within a decade (New American Economy. 2018).  These economic and social factors clearly demonstrate that our system seriously needs to rethink the needs of these workers and how we can create a more transparent system of employment in agriculture.

Another misconception is the idea that undocumented workers fill up jobs that would otherwise go to American workers (Clemens, Michael. 2013).  Michael Clemens from the New American Economy has found this to be untrue through a case study in North Carolina (2013).  The case study highlighted that there were not enough local manual laborers in North Carolina to meet demand, and that even unemployment levels of native North Carolinians had no impact on their willingness to work in this sector (Clemens, Michael. 2013).  This dependence is further highlighted as Michael Clemens mentions that more money is invested in being compliant with labor regulations within agriculture than with its workforce (2013).

Based off the literature one can assess that these jobs are underpaid, incredibly strenuous, and offer no perks, making it socially unsustainable.  The previously mentioned health costs make such an industry not just unfriendly to workers, but not economically viable to the individual as the industry itself does not account for the short-term security of its workers nor their long-term health costs (Food Empower Project. 2018, Rodman, et al. 2016, and U.S. Department of Labor Employment. 2013-2014).  Unfortunately, we have come to accept these low wages as a way to keep our national food prices down as a 25% wage increase would cause produce prices to increase by 2-3% (Haspel, Tamar. 2017).  Along with that, more expensive national food prices would lead to a greater dependence on imports (Haspel, Tamar. 2017 and O’Brien, et al. 2014).  While this could lead to dramatic changes in our food system, this is only an annual additional cost of $30 per household (Haspel, Tamar. 2017).  While this seems like a reasonable amount, the literature was quick to mention that this added cost could be difficult for some American households (Haspel, Tamar. 2017).

Overall the working state of farmworkers needs dramatic improvements, how this should be done depends on the perspective.  One such perspective is the industry self-regulating perspective taken by Fair Labor Association.  The Fair Labor Association identified that companies could improve the industry by increasing workers knowledge of their rights, rewarding responsible producers, and using technology to talk to workers personally to get their inputs and hear their concerns (Fair Labor Association. 2017).  While these suggestions are useful, it is important to remember that all of this is voluntary and that it assumes that companies would want to empower their workers.

Another perspective is that of a nonprofit with Rural  Advancement Foundation International.  Rural Advancement Foundation International specifically suggests nonprofit certification and sees their own certification as an opportunity to empower workers (RAFI. 2018).  An issue with certification is that it can create barriers for small farmers to become certified even though they may meet standards, or standards are twisted and used as a means for larger farms to have superiority in the marketplace.

As we have seen, the literature on southern agricultural workers highlights specific areas of focus that help better understand the complexities of the industry.  This literary focus helps to establish who the workers are, their struggles, and their value (Food Empower Project. 2018, New American Economy. 2018, Rodman et al. 2016, and U.S. Department of Labor Employment. 2013-2014).  Along with this basic understanding of farm workers and their issues, the solutions given differ depending on the perspective (Fair Labor Association. 2017 and RAFI. 2018).  Overall the literature signifies a need for more research to be conducted about this complicated topic and for more work to be done to improve conditions within the industry.

Discussion

Agricultural workers in the U.S face distinct challenges that make working conditions undesirable, even though this type of work and those who perform it are critical to our food system.  The literature around this topic delves deeper into these conditions and possible solutions for enhancing the treatment, protections, and compensation of these workers.
They seem to hone in on a specific issue for southern agricultural workers rather than being able to offer positive feedback within the sector.  That being said, this constructive criticism could be useful, although possibly limiting in scope.

The limitations of the literature include a lack of socially sustainable southern agricultural models, a lack of workers perspectives, and the impact of these knowledge gaps.  One piece of literature that offered a more positive model of southern agriculture focused on that of Polyface Farm and its environmentally responsible practices (Gabor, Andrea. 2011).  Surprisingly enough, with all the focus on environmental sustainability, social sustainability was completely neglected as no mention or insight was given about the treatment of workers (Gabor, Andrea. 2011).  Tamar Haspel referenced this challenge of understanding working conditions and getting a workers perspective, attributing its difficult to the current political climate (2017).  This lack of perspective and by extension lack of visibility of workers, leads to diminished working conditions as workers are not fully aware of their rights and cannot easily relay their concerns and struggles (Fair Labor Association. 2017 and Food Empower Project. 2018).  Despite this knowledge gap, an analysis of the related literature and their respective findings is useful in gaining an understanding our the current system from a variety of perspectives and focuses.

While there was a generous amount of literature regarding workers in southern agriculture, there were also generous abouts of bias tied to the work.  While this bias can be useful in obtaining perspectives about an issue, it can skew the findings of research, which is why it is important to consider the implications behind statements like “illegal” and undocumented”(Haspel, Tamar. 2017 and New American Economy. 2018).  The bias and politicization of these workers seen within the literature created a need to better understand the value of these workers (New American Economy. 2018).  The New American Economy’s analysis of workers value focused solely on their economic contributions, providing a good argument for creating legal solutions to keep workers here, however, this focus on economic value could further dehumanize these workers (2018).

It is important to understand how the American agricultural system treats workers in order monitor its progress while increasing awareness (Fair Labor Association. 2017).  Based on the available literature we are in a situation ripe for change with a system that uses inequality as a means of creating low cost goods from which workers are not fairly compensated (Food Empower Project. 2018).  This inequality makes this type of work undesirable to American workers who though visibility and more transparent practices are more aware their value and what it means to be fairly compensated (Clemens, Michael. 2013 and Haspel, Tamar. 2017).  Therefore, instead of changing the working conditions, this industry has come to rely on workers that do not have the visibility and means to demand better treatment (Haspel, Tamar. 2017).

There are significant issues to consider within the literature now and going forward.  Looking at the literature, having more transparency within the industry pertaining to the treatment, risks, and payment of employees would be helpful, especially if it led to a third-party ranking system of farms on their treatment of workers (RAFI. 2018).  Future literature has the potential to increase transparency within the industry along with enhancing the state of farm work and addressing other concerns within agriculture including animal rights and environmental issues.

Conclusion

Agricultural work in the American South is a paradox, with workers facing inadequate compensation and poor working conditions while the work itself is highly important to the American way of life.  The literature helps explain this paradox by first establishing basic demographic information about farm workers including where they are from, their age, and sex, along with situational details including family information, access to healthcare, and economic standing that help understand who is being impacted (U.S. Department of Labor Employment. 2013-2014).

After this basis is formed, more emphasis is placed around issues within the industry, such as unfair work compensation and the hazardous consequences to workers’ health and wellbeing (Food Empower Project. 2018 and New American Economy. 2018).  Lastly, the literature helps to understand potential solutions though policy, industry, and non profit certification (Fair Labor Association. 2017, RAFI. 2018, and Rodman, et al. 2016).

Works Cited

Clemens, Michael. 2013. “International Harvest: A Case Study of How Foreign Workers Help spaces American Farms Grow Crops – and the Economy”.  https://www.newamericaneconomy.org/sites/all/themes/pnae/nc-agr-report-05-2013.pdf

Fair Labor Association. 2017. “Fair Compensation For Farmworkers in Global Agricultural Supply Chains: Emerging Good Practices and Challenges”. Powerpoint.  http://www.fairlabor.org/sites/default/files/documents/reports/fair_compensation_for_farmworkers_good_practices_and_challenges_february_2017.pdf

Food Empower Project. 2018. “Produce Workers”. http://www.foodispower.org/produce-workers/

Gabor, Andrea. 2011. “Inside Polyface Farm, Mecca of Sustainable Agriculture” The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2011/07/inside-polyface-farm-mecca-of-sustainable-agriculture/242493/

Haspel, Tamar. 2017. “Illegal immigrants help fuel U.S. farms. Does affordable produce depend on them?”. Washington Post. Web. https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/food/in-an-immigration-crackdown-who-will-pick-our-produce/2017/03/17/cc1c6df4-0a5d-11e7-93dc-00f9bdd74ed1_story.html?utm_term=.271fa32d7f89

New American Economy. 2018. “Undocumented Immigrants”. https://www.newamericaneconomy.org/issues/undocumented-immigrants/

O’Brien, et al. 2014. “Summary”. Gauging the Farm Sector’s Sensitivity to Immigration Reform via Changes in Labor Costs and Availability. WAEES. PDF. https://www.fb.org/files/AFBF_LaborStudy_Feb2014.pdf

RAFI. 2018. “Agricultural Justice Project”. Rural Advancement Foundation International. https://rafiusa.org/agricultural-justice-project/

Rodman, S. O., Barry, C. L., Clayton, M. L., Frattaroli, S. Neff, R. A., & Rutkow, L. 2016.
Agricultural exceptionalism at the state level: Characterization of wage and hour laws for U.S. farmworkers. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 6(2), 89–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2016.062.013

U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration Office of Policy Development and Research. 2013-2014. “Executive Summary”. Findings from the National Agricultural Workers Survey (NAWS) 2013-2014: A Demographic and Employment Profile of United States Farmworkers. Research Report No. 12.  https://www.doleta.gov/agworker/pdf/NAWS_Research_Report_12_Final_508_Compliant.pdf