Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Sandrine Badio
This research was made possible through the cooperation of Village Harvest, LifeCycles, North
Harvest Berkeley, Portland Urban Tree Project, St. Andrews Society, and Thunder Bay Food
Action Network.
Sponsored by Dr. Gary Genosko’s Technoculture Lab and the Food Security Research Network
at Lakehead University, 2009.
Introduction
Gleaning is an ancient practice rooted in the Bible. In the book of Leviticus, God dictates
to Moses the Laws of the land, one of which pertained to the welfare of the poor: “When you
reap the harvest of your land do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of
your harvest. Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen.
Leave them for the poor and the alien. I am the Lord your God” (Leviticus: 19:22). In some euro-
Christian societies where the line between the church and state was unclear, the ancient act of
gleaning was tolerated by law. With the erosion of feudalism and the emergence of capitalism,
legal reforms began to ban or curtail the act of gleaning to accommodate the new economic order
in Europe (Simonton 1998: 120). Further, Western states gradually implemented welfare systems
that repudiated the laissez-faire attitude towards poverty (Guest 1997). In doing so, the state
shouldered the responsibility for providing for its poor, externalizing independent acts of
In an effort to reduce fiscal deficits, governments have, over the last few decades, slashed
social programs that protect the welfare of low-income families in Canada. As a result, the
responsibility for providing for the poor is returning to communities and non-profit
organizations. Centuries after the undermining of gleaning, communities across North America
are reviving and modernizing the ancient practice to tackle one dimension of poverty—food
insecurity. This report attempts to provide an overview of gleaning, its various facets, and how it
is being used presently as a tactic to achieve food security. I will look at how gleaning has been
represented in scholarship and the mainstream media. I will analyze the dimensions of gleaning
in relation to food politics, food security, and humanitarianism and then briefly look at select
2
locations where gleaning is actively underway. I want to offer a comparative analysis of three
summarizing information that I have gathered from individuals who are currently coordinating
similar initiatives. It needs to be kept in mind that, in Canada, food insecurity is a silent problem
that plagues about 9.2% of the population (Office of Nutrition Policy and Promotion. 2007).
Gleaning is a cost-effective tool that may be applied to empower individuals to participate in the
In modern scholarship, gleaning has been largely overlooked. Existing research tends to
examine the topic from a European framework during the pivotal phase of legislative adaptation
to the economical restructuring that occurred during the 18th century. By oversimplifying the
analysis of the practice of gleaning, important historical information on its role in communal life,
agricultural methods, labour relations within the village, approaches to property, changing
perceptions of charity, definitions of criminality and marginality, and the role of women in rural
Liana Vardi (1993) illustrates a rather vintage perspective on gleaning in France by looking
practices from the Middle Ages through to the eighteenth century (Vardi 1993). France, unlike
England, protected the customary right of gleaners. This was only achieved, however, through
activity that was part of farm labourers’ earnings, was abandoned to the poor under state pressure
(Vardi 1993: 1433). The state’s interference in agricultural arrangements led to the victimization
3
of the very poor by farmers and farm labourers. To protect the portion of crops that was owed to
the state in the midst of conflict, the “crown intensified rural policing by prompting villages to
hire harvest guards” (Vardi 1993: 1433). Through Biblical appropriation, gleaning in France
was turned into a metaphor for charity. Farmers, however, bore the brunt of the duty of charity
by being forced to abandon crops that played a significant role in their profit margins. In Britain,
by contrast the practice was under threat due to a different set of circumstances.
English scholar Peter King (1991) has attempted to calculate the earning contribution of
gleaning to the household economy of the rural labouring poor in England from 1750-1850. As
he explains, the backbreaking task of gleaning was undertaken by the vast majority of labouring
families in central and eastern England. He estimates that gleaning “contributed up to one-eighth
of annual household earnings and often even more in households headed by widows” (King
1991:474). And in times of scarcity it offered a safety-net for the subsistence of the poor.
King (1992) has also written on the contextual origins of the 1788 English case from which
the ruling emerged that “no person has common law, a right to glean in the harvest field.” The
outcome set a legal precedence as a standard of case law reference (King 1992:1). The 1788
gleaning case may have been a strategic effort to “control the poor’s access to the land in
pursuance of their customary rights and to appropriate the gleanings of the most important local
crops” (King 1992: 29). Gleanings of barley and beans were used for the feeding of farm animals
and therefore were quite important to grazers. But wheat was of less importance to grazers, yet
had great importance to the livelihood of the rural poor. Thus, while the 1788 ruling gave
farmers more control over which stocks were gleaned, gleaners continued to exercise their
traditional right to glean in many places, even after the ruling (King 1992:29). To Lord
Loughborough, Chief Justice of the Court of Commons who presided over the 1788 case, the
4
customary right of gleaning was in conflict with the nature of private property which entitles one
to exclusive enjoyment of land (King 1992: 28). He also found the practice of gleaning to be
“destructive of the peace and good order of society” ( King 1992: 28). As previously mentioned,
during the late 18th century society capitalism was developing in ways which required the
dissolution of customary rights. These complex economic changes were met with social conflicts
that gave way to the proletarianization of the rural poor. Through the work of King, we
understand that by regulating the rights of indigents, the landless labouring poor were made to be
The question of the legitimacy of gleaning within a Canadian legal framework has not been
adequately addressed. What may be learned from the British and French examples in order to
better comprehend the practice in Canadian context? In Canada no statute permitting gleaning
exists. This may be the case because with the exception of Québec, Canadian law was modeled
after British common law; therefore, British principles undoubtedly influenced the legality of
gleaning in Canada. Further, Canada was erected on the principle of private property. Unlike
Britain, this ex-colony never transitioned from feudalism to capitalism and so customary rights
as known in Britain would have been unknown to Canadian settlers; or, even if some knowledge
of them existed, a context for their application in the new world would be lacking. One may only
surmise that imperial Britain’s beliefs regarding gleaning were absorbed in Canada and no
film will be explored. The place to begin is with two very popular paintings: “The Gleaners” by
5
Jean Francois Millet and “The Recall of the Gleaners” by Jules Breton. These works capture the
dynamics of the practice in its lived context. The key filmic example is French director Agnès
In the arts gleaning has been portrayed on canvas by 19th-century artists like the
aforementioned Millet and Breton, and also Alessondro Battaglia, to name a few. As it is often
said that all art is political, Millet was suspected of canvassing a political statement with his
brushwork in his 1853 piece “The Gleaners.” What does this painting from the realist genre
show us? Three women bent over the earth, raking with their eyes the few meager stalks left
behind by harvesters. Their focused industrious posture prevents them from returning the gaze of
the viewers. In the background, a group of male harvesters are preoccupied loading mountains of
wheat onto carts (Vardi 1993:1424). Next to them is a man (the landowner or possibly his
steward) on horseback overseeing the scene. “The contrast between the wealth and poverty,
power and helplessness, male and female sphere is forcefully rendered” (Vardi 1993: 1424).
Observed by French radicals, the image of the women subsisting off the remnants of the harvest
depicts the brutal existence of peasant life in rural France during the 19th century (Herbert
1966:44).
Another painting that treated rural gleaning was “The Recall of the Gleaners” by Breton
(1859). What distinguishes this painting from others of its time is that Breton precisely captured
the dynamic scene of the gleaners. With one exception, all the women in the picture plane are
hard at work, calculating their every movement, picking up ear stalks. The scene is accentuated
by the presence of children. Even their little hands are put to work. In the distance, the men are
loading the day’s harvest onto a carriage.. The calmness of the scene is disturbed by the presence
6
Both Millet and Breton resided in France when the country was experiencing a double
crisis: financial and agricultural, on one hand, and political on the other hand. The artists treated
the subject of gleaning at the moment when a new economic order was eroding old feudal
doctrines (Weisberg 1980: 83). In the 1850s gleaning was being questioned as parcels of land
were increasingly privately owned. Landowners saw gleaning as an infringement of their rights
whereas the peasantry felt that outlawing the custom would undermine and deny the “basic
patrimony of the poor” (Weisberg 1980: 83). The rights of gleaners were upheld but with more
restrictions because landowners could still choose to close their fields to them. The garde de
champêtre was left to enforce these restrictions. Millet (with the landowner on the horseback in
the background) and Breton (with the village policemen in the foreground) successfully
underline the presence of authority figures in traditional French life. In such works one can
observe that during the mid 19th century in France, the simple practice of gleaning also embodied
class struggle, division of labour, and power relationships that were under negotiation to
Varda’s film “The Gleaners and I” revisits the ancient but still extant practice of
gleaning in France (Callenbach 2003). This whimsical documentary of loosely organized scenes
navigates through many layers of gleaning. For instance, the traditional meaning is defined as the
gathering of leftover crops after the harvest. Next to the definition in the Larousse is a sketch of
Millet’s “The Gleaners.” Within the blink of an eye we are standing before the real portrait in the
Musée d’Orsay in Paris. At times Varda brings her viewers along to glean on fields and on city
streets alongside the displaced and homeless, the unemployed, and marginalized as they visit the
historical and legal dimensions of the practice in contemporary France (Portuges 2001). On one
hand, this documentary is a socioeconomic critique of how the core of society reproduces itself
7
through irrational waste; all the while this waste could be given a second life by the marginalized
on the periphery of society. On the other hand, this documentary is a collection of scenes knit
thematically together by gleaning, which has evolved from its traditional meaning to encompass
plural modern practices. In Varda’s documentary we quickly understand that gleaning no longer
has a gender, class, or rural specificity. It may be motivated by need for survival or by an
obsessive redeeming of abandoned treasures in rural fields or urban streets (Portuges 2001). As
in the symbolic representation of the law through Breton’s garde de champêtre, Varda reminds
us that authority still looms over the practice and continues to define where, when, and how
gleaning can be done; or not, as many vineyards do not permit it to take place.
In the past few years, mainstream US television shows such as the Oprah Winfrey,
ABC’s 20/20, and CBC news have documented the growing subculture of freeganism. The word
derives from “free” and “vegan.” Although not all freegans are vegans, they are, however,
conscious that advanced post-industrial society is wasteful and make an ethical statement by
gleaning in dumpsters behind supermarkets to obtain free groceries. These largely middle-class
citizens, who avoid queuing at grocery store check-outs like most Americans, find alternative
means to reduce the 96 billion pounds of edible food dumped in landfills per year in the US
(USDA 1997). At times freegans glean more than they can eat either share their findings with
colleagues, donate them to local charitable organizations, or like the activists from “Food Not
Bombs,” create warm meals to be served on street corners to those in need. Although most
freegans glean city dumpsters as a political statement, the parallels survive between this modern
off-shoot of gleaning and the traditional one as captured in Millet or Breton’s depictions. The
8
In the print press gleaning and poverty tend to be connected. For example, a February
2004 article carried by Reuters titled “In time of crisis, Parisians take to scavenging” points to
the growing number of citizens who have difficulty stretching their income to purchase staple
dietary items. This is an indication that the cost of living is becoming unbearable for many, and
that financial crises has touched the previously untouchable classes. The welfare system does not
fill the gaps and as a result people from diverse socio-economic backgrounds are falling through
the cracks. As a result, some urbanites turn to the streets around the 15th of the month to glean
rubbish in bins. Some store owners are well aware of the social problems and do their best to
help by leaving fragile eggs on top of the rubbish for gleaners. In another article in the Toronto
Star in August of 2007 titled “Reaping a Harvest of Goodwill,” support services and a church
join in solidarity to fight hunger by giving some Toronto residents the opportunity to glean crops
on a farm located in a suburb of Toronto. Unfortunately, organizers cannot meet the full
demands due to lack of financial resources and transportation costs. The plurality of gleaning
today is evident in the examples just discussed: from bohemian freeganism to the needs of the
precariat and efforts at reconnecting gleaning to its rural roots through capital intensive bussing
In a similar gleaning project being administered by the Food Action Network and the
Regional Health Unit in Thunder Bay, transportation constraints and a limited number of farmers
participating in the program (no mention of farms beyond Belluz) are slowing the impact that
organizers could make on the local fight against hunger as explained by health nutritionist
Catherine Schwartz Mendez in a September 2008 article printed in the Chronicle Journal.
9
logistics and distance between poor neighborhoods and social agencies and the farms
themselves.
Online gleaning represents the interests of many. In one respect, activists who seek to
bring awareness to excessive food waste and its implications on the environment and for the
fight against hunger rely on blogs, websites, and forums to exchange thoughts and tactics; from
another angle, humanitarian efforts led by churches, grassroots organizations, and para-
governmental agencies rely on blogs and websites to educate, collect donations, and mobilize
volunteers to glean fresh fruits from rural farms or in urban backyards. For example, Katy
Kokler, founder of Portland Fruit Tree Project in Portland Oregon, used You Tube as a virtual
school to educate viewers about the benefits of gleaning fruit trees in local backyards. One lesson
is that owners are often overwhelmed by the necessary of managing fruit trees and appreciate
that community members are alleviating their workload. Further, this practice encourages
neighbours to come out of isolation and interact with one another in communal ritual. More
importantly though, Kokler explains that the excess fruits are brought to local food banks where
Food Security
Relative to other countries, Canada is a rich and near the top of the United Nations’
Development Index. Nevertheless, pockets of poverty may be found throughout the country. One
may even argue that in Canada poverty is increasing due to changing economic times, insecure
labor markets, the shifting nature of work, and the transformation of the traditional family
(Rainville & Brink 2001). The Canadian welfare state, which used to provide a greater level of
10
income support to satisfy a minimum living standard for its citizens, has undergone major
reforms since the 1970s; therefore, more Canadians are now unsheltered from poverty. The
ramifications of these social trends are increasingly apparent in the surging number of food bank
users across the country in response to Canada's growing food insecurity problems.
One devastating effect of poverty is food insecurity. Food insecurity results when “the
availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods or the ability to acquire acceptable foods in
socially acceptable ways is limited or uncertain” (McIntyre et al. 1998:1). In 2004, it was
reported that 1.1 million Canadian households (9.2%) were moderately or severely food
insecure. Urban households (9.6%) had a higher prevalence of food insecurity relative to rural
households (7.3%) (Office of Nutrition Policy and Promotion Health Products and Food Branch
2004: 15). For Aboriginal households, the statistics are more alarming. One out of three (33.3%)
households was food insecure (Ibid). In addition, households where social assistance was the
main source of income experienced food insecurity at the rate of 59.7%, whereas households
supported by wages reported a rate of 7.3% (Ibid: 22). Collectively these numbers indicate that
in Canada, food insecurity is a significant issue that warrants the intervention of both the state
To cope with food insecurity, it has been reported that some Canadians resort to
unhealthy and socially marginalizing strategies such as skipping meals or eating less, delaying
paying bills, buying food on credit; many access food banks (Rainville and Brink 2001). In
severe situations, mothers have been known to deprive themselves of nourishment to feed their
children. Despite receiving social assistance, food from food banks, and alternative coping
strategies, low-income families report that “there is not enough room in our budget to buy as
much fresh produce as we would like” (Hoisington et al. 2001: 46). Further, “a prerequisite for
11
food security in communities includes social and economic conditions that empower community
members to access food by earning enough income to purchase it, by growing or producing it
2001: 43).
The practice of gleaning is an activity that empowers people to move towards food
security. For example, Tracy, a single women residing in Thunder Bay, explained in a regional
poverty report that gleaning raspberries from bushes along public bike paths has enabled her to
supplement her diet with fresh fruits in the summertime (Brotchie 2007). In Tracy’s case,
summer gleaning in local parks gives her access to a fruit that she cannot afford to purchase in
grocery stores. This example combines urban knowledge and naturalist skills in a way that
empowers the gleaner and overcomes two hurdles – the price of food in grocery chains, and the
prohibitive costs of market fresh produce grown locally for a wealthy clientele.
The centralization of the food system marginalizes anyone who does not possess the
purchasing power to participate in consumer society. Gleaning is an alternative method for the
1987 by Tony P. Hall, state representative from Ohio, gleaning is not the sole answer to food
insecurity; rather, it is one part of a solution (Domestic Task Force of the Select Committee on
Hunger House of Representatives 1987: 3). Gleaning can help reduce food insecurity by
allowing those on low and fixed incomes to stretch their food budgets. They could then share the
knowledge informally within their social circles about the various methods for locating fresh
food to be used in daily diets, at least seasonally. These practices can empower individuals to be
active in the process of securing food for themselves in a dignified and sustainable manner, but
12
used as a method to support large numbers of people. The question is whether or not this kind of
practice can be modeled to support more than a few individuals is vitally important for this
study.
Food Politics
Our food system consists of three main actors: producers, distributors, and consumers.
These actors are shaped by factors such as health, environment, culture, markets, ethics,
technology, inspection, and regulation. Each component constitutes an aspect of the politics
surrounding food. There are two main food system models: industrial and alternative.
The dominant industrial model is characterized by high fossil fuel consumption in the
farms requiring global sourcing and marketing strategies. Producers are alienated from
consumers by a variety of corporate entities shaping the commodity chain (Jarosz 2007). The
industrial model is criticized as being extremely unsustainable, as it erodes natural resources and
human bodies that have been linked to food allergies, illnesses and increased resistance to
antibiotics.
In contrast to the industrial model, the alternative model tends to stress organic, local, and
because food production is in closer proximity to its destination, resulting in a less significant
carbon footprint. Food production is free of the intensive chemical input typically associated
13
with the industrial model. This model excludes corporate mediations, leaving a larger margin of
profit in the hands of farmers. Direct marketing brings producers and consumers "face to face
developing the bonds of trust and cooperation" (Jarosz 2007 : 233). The majority of alternative
farms are on the smaller side (under 50 acres) and produce an array of fruits and vegetables,
making the process more sustainable. This model has been conceptualized as not necessarily
being profit driven, and less reliant on mechanization, but rather motivated by local support for
farming (Jarosz 2007). As such, typical venues for the sale of organic and local products tend to
be food cooperatives and farmer's markets. Such sites are not neutral. "Critical views of farmers
markets, and community food security movements indicate that they can be exclusionary in
terms of class and race and issues of food security” (qtd. in Jarosz 2007 ). While a number of
alternative food models exist, some stray completely from the globalized industrial model while
others may adhere to its template in certain respects. For example, local food growers may still
exploit migrant farm workers while producing organic food. Therefore, the alternative model
On a continuum where industrial and alternative food models exist at opposite poles, one
may place urban gleaning in closer proximity to the alternative model. Urban gleaning leaves a
light footprint on the environment because crops are all local, seasonal, and eliminate the
necessity of transporting crops over long distances. Since the passing of Bill 64 on April 22,
2008, homeowners in Ontario, Canada are forbidden from applying pesticides to lawns and
vegetation. Therefore, local urban fruits are now ‘organic’ by default; even if this falls far below
the standards of true organic certification, it is more than a moral victory. The process of
gleaning is extremely sustainable, as it does not interfere with cyclical and seasonal patterns, but
this also makes it unpredictable on climate change and a host of unnatural events like sprawl and
14
development. Since urban gleaning is a grassroots initiative, retailers and middlemen tend to be
excluded from the process, therefore leaving the movement in the hands of the people. Lastly,
the process is not driven by the ambition of accumulating capital; rather, people are self- and
collectively motivated to unite and join in solidarity to defeat local food insecurity.
Humanitarianism
administer a tax-supported system that would provide relief for the impoverished (Guest 1997
:11). Thereafter, in the form of a welfare state, Canada's ability to provide a minimum standard
of living has been limited. As Douglas (1983) argues, if the third sector (not-for-profit) exists, it
is due to the failure of both the government and the market. Thus, from constraints inherent in
both sectors there exists a gap of unfilled needs that non-profit organizations attempt to close.
Non-profit organizations modernize the ancient practice of gleaning to deal with the challenge of
In its very essence gleaning is a humanitarian act. From its Biblical foundation up to the
present, gleaning is ordained to protect the social welfare of the needy, and the spirit of this
practice is preserved and remains unfettered even in hypercapitalistic worlds. Nowadays, two
diverging branches typically administer gleaning: church groups and non-church affiliated
community groups.
The impact that grassroot gleaning initiatives have had in diminishing food insecurity has
yet to be quantified. However, in the US, the effects of this practice warranted attention from the
government, as politicians recognize that gleaning networks are a cost-effective and efficient
15
tactic in reducing hunger. In 1987, the Domestic Task Force of the Select Committee on Hunger
of the House of Representatives held a hearing in Washington, DC. The committee’s aim was to
better understand how government could facilitate the efforts of established gleaning networks
like the St. Andrew Society while minimizing its presence and outlay of resources. Realizing the
power of the community-based organization in the absence of bureaucratic red tape, the US
Department of Agriculture offered one-time grants to grassroots organizations that help to meet
the food needs of low-income people and increase the self-reliance of communities in providing
for their own food needs. Unlike Canada, the US government encourages corporations and the
public to donate surplus food by offering tax benefits to donors. In Canada, although direct tax
benefits do not exist for food donations, corporations save landfill tipping fees and food disposal
costs by donating (Tarasuk & Eakin 2005: 178). Both the US and Canada have legislation that
diminishes the responsibility of donors for the health and safety of the products they give to food
assistance agencies (not requiring a double test of food safety), therefore encouraging the public
and corporations to be good Samaritans and help those in need, (Tarasuk & Eakin 2005 :178). In
this context, through a number of mechanisms, government facilitates the work of good
Samaritans while remaining largely invisible. These programs thereby enable the third sector to
meet the needs of the people that the market and the government are incapable of fully
achieving.
welfare state and hold sufficient clout to carve out more room for themselves by, for example,
influencing Congress to pass a bill that enables non-profit organizations to function with more
security. In the realm of hunger, humanitarian deeds such a gleaning projects act as a bridge
between food security and the politics surrounding food production, consumption and
16
distribution at all scales. Humanitarian food politics empowers the marginalized to cross over
Modeling Gleaning
Stakeholders who would most benefit from gleaning initiatives tend to live in urban
centers. Those who respond to social problems by participating in solutions to them tend to be
sensitive to the social issues at stake. In the case of food insecurity, potential volunteers will
likely be those who reside in the same areas or work near stakeholders and may be, in fact,
stakeholders themselves. Since gleaning is an initiative driven by volunteers, one must consider
the accessibility for gleaners to reach the sites. Thus, organizing an initiative on a farm may
prove to be difficult, as the logistics of transporting gleaners to the site in a large metropolitan
area may be cost prohibitive. For example, a Toronto initiative that brings low-income
individuals to glean on farm in the Markham suburb reported that the project has been forced to
curtail the number of trips it makes due to transportation limitations, even though the demand
The variety of fresh produce available on farms surrounding urban centers tends to
outnumber the variety of fruits available in city backyards. For example, in a small regional
center like Thunder Bay, Belluz Farms is still 20 kilometres away and beyond the reach of public
transportation (other participating farms, while closer as the crow flies, present similar
difficulties), yet its bounty is unsurpassed as it grows lettuces, greens, strawberries, raspberries,
saskatoons, gooseberries, cucumbers, melons, sweet corn, yellow and green beans, peppers,
pumpkins, and squash. Homeowners in Thunder Bay tend to own only plum, pear, apple trees
17
and berry bushes. Wild foods are abundant during the spring to late summer in the city’s ample
parklands and on the college campuses and in the ravines. Urban wild food gathering includes a
heavily subscribed fishing culture in the streams and on the lakefront, especially during smelt
runs, as well as mushrooming and some wild herb and vegetable gathering. The advent of a Slow
Food convivium in Thunder Bay has gone some way in educating a limited clientele about wild
food gathering within a gastronomic paradigm, but has also made a practice of public cooking
for the poor in city parks as well. The question whether suburban/rural gleaning is better for a
given organization than gleaning urban fruit trees is contingent on both one’s mission and
resources. The latter differ widely. Here are three examples of a national society; a greater
The Society of St. Andrew advertises itself as “a grassroots hunger relief ministry that
relies on volunteers to glean nutritious produce from farmers' fields and orchards after harvest
and deliver it to people in need across the United States.” Churches from all denominations and
traditions as well as non-denominational churches provide the network of volunteers who glean
America’s fields. Pamphlets are distributed to farmers and orchard owners to advise them of the
Society’s services. Interested donors contact their regional office that dispatches a gleaning team
in the vicinity. Volunteers and/or the Society will organize transportation and distribution of
18
LifeCycles
and initiating action around food, health, and urban sustainability in the Greater Victoria
community.” In line with their mission, the organization coordinates a fruit tree gleaning project.
To participate in the initiative, fruit tree owners must register their trees with the organization,
which then schedules a team of volunteers to glean the trees. One quarter of the crops go to fruit
tree owners, gleaners, food banks and the organization itself. The quarter which goes to the
organization is then converted into preserves like cider, jams, jellies, juice, etc. These are sold to
the public in an effort to raise funds to sustain the organization. In some cases, a portion of the
gleanings will go to the local businesses that convert the crops into products that meet their
demands.
The Thunder Bay Food Action Network (FAN) “ is non-profit coalition that works to
improve access to safe, personally acceptable, nutritionally adequate food through a sustainable
local food system.” Clients are referred to the network through agencies that serve low-income
families. FAN organizes transportation for delivering and returning clients to and from local
farms after the harvest. Clients glean a wide variety of fresh produce for their family members
and neighbours. FAN partners with a number of agencies listed on the District Health Unit’s web
19
Gleaning Survey Results
With the goal of understanding the organizational and operation dimensions of urban fruit
tree gleaning projects, four gleaning initiatives across the United States and Canada were
contacted. The west coast is blessed with a climate that can support a variety of plant species.
Most of the gleaning projects were located there. In addition, gleaning projects have sprouted up
The open-ended survey was conducted by telephone and structured in a manner that
promoted information exchange and fact-finding. In order to simplify the presentation of data,
All respondents identified community volunteers as the backbone of their efforts (along with
fruit tree owners). The volunteers are the ones who make the collection and distribution of
thousands of pounds of fresh fruits possible during each harvest. Each project began with
volunteers who took the coordination role upon themselves. After a few years of growth, in some
20
Respondents unanimously advised us that no specific pattern existed in the demographics
of their volunteers. All age groups were evenly represented. The nature of the initiative attracts a
variety of volunteers whose interests are diverse but manage to intersect. One respondent
mentioned that the beauty of randomly organizing groups is that they become socializing events
that allow individuals to meet their neighbours for the first time. At times, friendships develop or
recipes are exchanged. One organization that welcomes all volunteers attempts to raise youth
awareness of local poverty issues and coordinates them into gleaning teams to make them into
Some respondents informed me that, at first, when they had very modest resources, they
started their initiative from a private home. All that was required to get the initiative going was a
phone and computer. After gaining some momentum and making more connections in the
community, some organizations were able to obtain the use of community facilities while
remaining independent entities. One extremely well organized and productive organization
One popular method is to divide the gleanings into thirds. One third of the harvest is
distributed to the homeowner; one third to the volunteers’ and one third to local food banks.
Another model is to allow low-income participants to take as much gleaning home as they wish,
and the balance is then distributed to food banks. Lastly, some models simply ensured that the
21
5. How did you approach fruit tree owners to ask them to donate their fruit?
newspapers, placing posters targeted towards tree owners on local sounding boards, knocking on
doors, or placing door-handle flyers where fruit trees were visible, they were able to get positive
feedback from homeowners interested in the initiative. In the US, homeowners who donate their
trees are eligible to receive receipts that are tax deductible. Canada does not have such a
provision because it deems the donation to have no market value, unlike donations from farmers
(Canadian Revenue Agency 2009). However, most homeowners participate simply because they
were contributing to a good cause and at the same time solving the problem of having to deal
In some cases, once word went around that the organization’s service helped
homeowners with their fruit trees, owners voluntarily telephoned to notify them of the existence
of fruit trees on their property. In other cases, trees were mapped by volunteers who walked
around local neighborhoods. However, it is common courtesy to get consent from the owner to
map the tree and to advise the owner of the difference between consent to map and consent to
glean.
7. How does your organization protect itself from liability issues if a gleaner is injured or a
homeowner’s property is damaged?
All respondents said that they insist that volunteers sign some sort of general
waiver/disclaimer to reduce liability in the event of an accident while on duty. However, good
22
ways to reduce safety hazards are by training every volunteer prior to working for the
organization and always having a gleaner with substantial experience to guide new volunteers. In
order to protect homeowners’ trees or other property from damage, it is highly advisable for any
organization to obtain commercial liability insurance. It not only protects against lawsuits
stemming from property damage, but also protects the individuals working for the organization.
If a new organization seeks to obtain such insurance, it may receive a high premium quote, as it
has no history in the eyes of the insurance company. A method to avoid this is by starting the
8. Is the demand for fresh produce sufficient that food banks can re-distribute perishables before
they begin to spoil or must they be preserved and given over an extended period?
To avoid preserving fresh produce, most organizations were affiliated with several food
banks and had become familiar with the traffic patterns of their clientele. This information
enabled them to gauge the supply, which would meet the demand. At first a lot is left to chance,
9. Does your organization or any other gleaning initiative that you may know about convert
produce into edible foods such as apply pies or jams?
Only one organization identified that they convert some gleaning into jams. The
preserves are sold for fundraising purposes in the community. Another organization was
interested in starting a like-minded pilot project but nothing had been put into place. In general,
although many liked the idea, they feared the complications that may arise in terms of food
safety issues.
23
The one organization that facilitates preservation seminars had to align its practices to the
standards of the regional health code. In addition, certain individuals in the organization had to
acquire food and safety certification by an external regulatory board. This was very important, as
they had to be knowledgeable of appropriate pH levels and other nuances that go into producing
jam. Although the organization is a charity, it must comply with the same health codes that
commercial preservative companies are expected to meet. To minimize costs, the organization
operates out of a community kitchen in a church. Another organization advised that they juice
their fruits and sell them in order to secure funds to support themselves. This same organization
also distributed some of its fruits to profitable businesses that independently produced food for
sale.
Conclusion
The responses in this brief survey begin to identify the many issues related to creating an
urban gleaning initiative. Gleaning is an ancient practice that has moved between profit and
charity. Historically, in France farmers carried the burden duty by being forced to abandon
profitable crops to the poor; whereas in England, although gleaning contributed up to one-eight
of annual household earnings of the labouring poor, a 1788 ruling banned all persons from
harvesting fields. Private property trumped gleaning. Urban gleaning in contemporary focus is a
complex act because it is about survival as much as a kind of alternative politics. Although
gleaning is not the sole answer to food insecurity, it may empower individuals to be active in the
process of securing food for themselves in a dignified and sustainable way, and participate in the
life of their community. Gleaning may operate at a variety of scales, but urban gleaning is local,
24
organic and extremely sustainable. Gleaning may be modeled in a variety of ways in relation to
local configurations of non-governmental agencies and public level of consciousness about food
This research project has isolated several key factors for further study. Decisions taken
about these factors will inform action on how gleaning is modeled in your community.
volunteers must be at the forefront of any organization’s efforts. Liability issues must be
addressed before they arise, especially when the health and welfare of volunteers is at stake, not
Public education of our political leaders needs to be undertaken since, while farmers are
eligible for tax deductions for participating in gleaning, individuals are not. Fruit philanthropy
might take off if the conditions were ripe! (Brown 2008) In a number of US states, for instance,
non-cash charitable contributions of crops are tax deductible. Currently in Ontario a proposal by
the provincial Association of Foodbanks (Fighting Hunger with Local Food) based on US
models is circulating but does not deal with individuals; rather, the tax credit scheme it is aimed
at producers and processors and is a farm to food bank project. This unnecessarily excludes
urban gleaning.
In urban fruit tree initiatives, tree-mapping services will be vital to any organization’s
long-term success. Digitized maps will help coordinate multi-agency initiatives and share
knowledge.
Gleaning initiatives will best succeed when they are coordinated, like-minded multi-
agency efforts with clear divisions of labour and set project budgets. Sustainable, earmarked
resources for transportation are a vital issue when it comes to urban-rural gleaning outings.
25
Training and certification by local standards boards in food handling and processing
represent an advanced step in extending any gleaned harvest. These are highly valuable for
maximizing a harvest’s reach. Perhaps of equal importance on the organization level is that
preserved foods may be used generate income that will help to make a gleaning initiative self-
sufficient. This is one of the many important lessons of urban agriculture like Growing Power in
Milwaukee, which is not self-sufficient financially but sells compost in addition to generating
$30USD per square foot in produce sales (Royte 2009). More alternatively however, food
activists can partner with missions, churches or shelters to use their kitchens to small batch
Gleaning engages the knowledge of alternative lifestyle activities like wild food
gathering adequate to the growing zone and local flora. Although there is a long tradition in wild
food gathering of protecting special sites, the use of public green spaces for individual and small
group efforts can enhance personal, social and environmental ecologies. Personal empowerment
26
References
Brotchie, Karli (2007) Poverty in Thunder Bay: Rich Conversations with the Poor. A Project of
the Thunder Bay Economic Justice Committee.
Brown, Patricia Leigh (2008) “Food Banks Finding Aid In Bounty of Backyard,” The New York
Times (Sept. 14): 14.
Brown, Sarah E. (2008) ”Hungry for Help,” The Chronicle Journal, September 23rd.
Office of Nutrition Policy and Promotion (2007) Canadian Community Health Survey. Cycle 2.2
Nutrition (2004): Income-related household security in Canada. Ottawa: Office of Nutrition
Policy and Promotion, Health Canada.
Domestic Task Force of the Select Committee on Hunger of the House of Representatives (1987)
Role of Gleaning in Efforts to Alleviate Hunger. Washington, DC. No. 100-14.
Douglas, J. (1983) Why Charity? The case for the third sector, London: Sage.
Herbert, Robert, L. (1966) “Millet Reconsidered,” Art Institute of Chicago Museum Studies 1:
28-65
Hoisington, Anne., Sue N. Butkus, Steven Garrett, Kathy Beerman (2001) “Field Gleaning as a
Tool for Addressing Food Security at the Local Level: Case Study,” Journal of Nutrition
Education and Behaviour 33(1): 43-48.
Guest, Dennis (1997) The Emergence of Social Security in Canada, Vancouver: UBC Press.
Jarosz, Lucy (2008) “The City in the Country: Growing Alternative Food Networks in
Metropolitan Areas,” Journal of Rural Studies 24(3): 231-44.
Kantor, Linda S., Kathryn Lipton, Alden Manchester and Victor Oliveira (1997) “Estimating and
Addressing America’s Food Losses,” Food Review. United States Department of Agriculture.
King, Peter (1992) “Legal Change, Customary Right, and Social Conflict in Late 18th century
England: The Origins of the Great Gleaning Case of 1788,” Law and History Review 10(1): 1-
31.
--- (1991) “Customary Rights and Women’s Earnings: The Importance of Gleaning to the Rural
Labouring Poor,” The Economic History Review 44(3): 461-76.
27
McIntyre, Lynn, Sarah Conor, and James Warren (1998) A Glimpse of Child Hunger in Canada,
Ottawa: Applied Research Branch Strategic Policy, Human Resources Development Canada.
Ogilivie, Megan (2007) “Reaping a harvest of goodwill: Whittamore’s Farm invites inner-city to
glean its fields and take home the free pickings,” The Toronto Star (August 8th).
Ontario Association of Food Banks (2009) Fighting Hunger with Local Food.
http://oafb.ca/assets/pdf/TaxCredit.pdf
Portugues, Catherine (2001) “Untitled Review,” The American Historical Review 106 (1):305-6.
Rainville, Bruno and Satya Brink (2001) Food Insecurity in Canada 1998-1999, Ottawa:
Applied Research Branch Strategic Policy, Human Resources Development Canada.
Royte, Elizabeth (2009) “Street Farmer,” The New York Times Magazine (July 5): 22-5.
Simonton, Deborah (1998) A History of European Women’s Work: 1700 to Present. New York:
Routledge.
Terasuk, Valerie and Joan M. Eakin (2005) “ Food Assistance Through “Surplus: Insights from
an ethnographic study of food bank work,” Agriculture and Human Values 22: 177-86.
Thunder Bay District Health Unit (2009) “Gleaning: Neighbours picking together.”
http//tbdhu.com/HealthyLiving/HealthyEating/FoodSecurity/Gleaning.htm.
Tillotson, Shirley Maye (2008) Contributing citizens: modern charitable fundraising and the
making of the welfare state 1920-66, Vancouver: UBC Press.
Varda, Agnes (2000) The Gleaners and I [Les Glaneurs et la Glaneuse], Zeitgeist Films.
Vardi, Liana (1993) “Construing the Harvest, Farmers, and Officials in Early Modern France,”
The American History Review 98(5): 1424-47.
Weisberg, Garbriel (1980) The Realist Tradition, French Painting and Drawing 1830-1900.
Cleveland: The Cleveland Museum of Art in cooperation with Indiana University Press.
28