# Historical Geography of Agrofood System Development in Hawaii ##### Overview %%Open with overview of chapter, what are the theories to be engaged? (food regimes, resilience/complex adaptive systems) introduce the three focal scales, - explain via @redman.kinzig_2003 - cascading effects - information flow **how will information flow be assessed???** - adaptive cycle phases reference other histories of Hawaii ag (phillip, mark, etc) and how/why this is different%% This chapter narrates two-hundred some odd years of development and change in Hawaii's agrofood systems. This *longue durée* history is explored through the lenses of global food regimes theory and resilience theory %%==or SOME OTHER THEORY RELATED to complex adaptive systems==%% to explore how risk, and thereby mechanisms sustain system function (read: resilience), transforms/transfers as systems change over time. The narrative focuses on Hawaii's agrofood system, but borrowing from @walker.salt_2012's resilience practice approach, considers global food regimes as the embedding scale influencing change in Hawaii, and also considers *foodways* (explicitly household provisioning) as a dependent embedded scale. Figure 1. via [Wayfinder.Earth](https://wayfinder.earth/the-wayfinder-guide/exploring-system-dynamics/exploring-critical-dynamics-in-the-social-ecological-system/)  ![[@redman.kinzig_2003 fig2.png]] Marcro-scale: global food regimes focal scale: agrofood system micro scale: household provisioning (entitlements?) Towards the goal of constructing a historical narrative of agricultural and foodways change in Hawaii, there are numerous trajectories of agrofood systems development models to draw from (CITATION, CITATION, CITATION). Marshal et al.'s [[email protected]_2021] recent global food systems typology collapses the complexity of food systems into dominant forms at a country level. Their typology sorts countries into five food system forms: rural and traditional; informal and expanding; emerging and diversifying; modernizing and formalizing; and industrial and consolidated. By using a few variables as surrogate measures of food supply chains, food environments, and consumer-related factors @marshall.etal_2021 parse a global snapshot at the country level. I instead apply their typology as a time-series narrative of agrofood system development in the Hawaiian islands. ==When possible the datasets used by @marshall.etal_2021 will be will be woven into the narrative, namely: *agricultural value added per worker* [^1] (food supply chains), *share of dietary energy from staples* (food environments), *supermarket density per 100K residents* (food environments), and *urban population* (consumer-related factors).== %%Maybe take this out??%% @marshall.etal_2021 highlight potential for the typology to be implemented a sub-national level while recognizing that the datasets' spatial granularity is a limitation. That said, the approach can aids broad comparisons of food systems to uncover potential risk factors in transition from one type to another, especially when paired with their outcomes analyses of health (dietary intake, nutritional status) and environmental impacts. In the case of applying the typology as a historical time-series however, much of the data needed for such outcomes remain uncompiled or non-existent. To wit, compiling aggregate fertilizer use or vegetable consumption in 1850's Hawaii, let alone as a cohesive time-series from the late 18th Century, constitutes an altogether separate research endeavor beyond the scope of this dissertation. However, where possible, inferences will be made from the scant data available and provided in the narrative. ##### Scales & Cross-Scale Interactions Considered Following from @walker.salt_2012 approach to contextualize a system for resilience analysis, the narrative will explore three scales: the embedding scale of global food regimes, the focal scale of Hawaii's agrofood system, and the embedded scale of household provisioning and entitlements. Cross-scale cascading effects are considered in the narrative, say global forces restructuring local conditions. However, while recognizing that embedded scales also can have influences on those they are embedded within, any such effects will be less emphasized. Such "bottom up" information transfer in social systems %%from smaller to larger scales%% can be more difficult, and is often lost or degraded in transit [@redman.kinzig_2003], thus cross-scale interactions from the smaller (read: embedded) scale of household provisioning to the focal scale of Hawaii's agrofood system, and from the focal scale to the larger (read: embedding) scale of global food regimes are, again similar to @walker.salt_2012 resilience practice approach, not widely considered in this dissertation. ##### Information flow %%and adaptive cycles%% within the focal scale @redman.kinzig_2003 on information flow @carpenter.etal_2005 on surrogates %% explain why%%. Further, population health and nutrition are not considered within the narrative as, per (CITATION about these being outcomes not system components) these are viewed as system outcomes not components of the system. "the potential risks and benefits of different food system transformation pathways, their effects on the make-up of food environments, and possible implications for diets." [@marshall.etal_2021] Along this timeline global food regimes theory periods will be interwoven to explore the extent to which Hawaii's development aligns with dominant global food regimes. %% Define global food regimes here?%% Marcro-scale: global food regimes focal scale: agrofood system micro scale: household provisioning (entitlements?) food systems and nutrition transition literature, [^1Agricultural value per added worker is the ratio between value added in agriculture (constant US$) and number of people employed in agriculture. (via [Our World in Data](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/agriculture-value-added-per-worker-wdi) ## Rural and Traditional ## Informal and Expanding > The 1846 and 1847 values indicate the chief dependence of Island agriculture on the whalers for an external market , two or three times as much being sold to the whalers as was exported . ( The period 1849 1851 is a non homogeneous section of the whole series , for during the Gold Rush there was a temporary but violent demand for foodstuffs from California .) Through the fifties the shipping trade was in money value of about half the importance of the export market ; and already by 1858 had begun its abrupt decline to insignificance. > > The whalers demanded general garden produce , fruit , and meat ; and so gave the last continued stimulus to diversified agri culture .28 Beef , sweet and Irish potatoes , and firewood were brought to the ships in the largest money volume ; but many other products were sold , among which fowls , turkeys , hogs , pumpkins , melons , onions , yams , coconuts , limes , oranges , bananas , pine apple , molasses , and sugar were the most valuable . The temperate zone produce among these , which grew meagerly in the low warm plains and valleys , was cultivated on the slopes of several of the mountains . The flanks of Haleakala thrived with temperate crops . > > Farming organization was not stabilized: the kuleana of the native produced for the market in competition with larger farms and plantations of the nobility and the foreigner. A plantation type of organization became dominant only with the rise of sugar. > > [@morgan_1948, p. 151] ## Emerging and Diversifying ## Modernizing and Formalizing ## Industrial and Consolidated ![[@marshall.etal_2021#^9666a0]] From @marshall.etal_2021