DefiantDandelion on Nostr: So from the content I have seen so far it sounds like I pay someone to improve their ...
So from the content I have seen so far it sounds like I pay someone to improve their soil with regenerative agriculture, “here is my $100 or equivalent in BTC to increase the organic matter in your soil from 3% to 4%.” This pays the farmer to do the service of improving their soil with rotational grazing. (Purchase sheep, and pay labor to move the sheep, fence, etc) I get an ownership claim to a percentage of the surplus? How real is the claim Or is this marketing?. (lamb from rotational grazing).
Is this a reframing of what is actually like a co-op CSA for marketing purposes. Or are their really qualitative differences. Like the measurement metrics are actually on the soil quality with the surplus food being unmeasured and uncertain.
If it is how I have described it, I could see it working in the same way that people would pay to have trees planted on their behalf in a non profit donation kind of way. But hard to imagine real food showing up on my table when I need it. It feels like a perishable food equivalent of the tote bag gift for donating to a cause.
I’m sure if there was firm predictable examples it would make more sense to me. And I personally love the idea of regenerative agriculture CSAs. If that’s what this is I’m all for it, and apologies for the questions. You’ve said some things about the commodification of food that I would need to think about more if it’s really always exploitive of the soil if you sell the food as opposed to “giving it away” I get the idea that you improve what you measure, and if soil quality isn’t what you are explicitly buying then you aren’t going to get soil quality. If I’m buying a steak I will get the steak. But I want a steak in a visceral, I got to eat kind of way. I’m glad the farmers soil quality is increasing, I want to buy food from that kind of farmer, but I don’t want to buy soil improvement in the same kind of way.
Am I near the mark or am I confused on how it works.
🙏😅
Is this a reframing of what is actually like a co-op CSA for marketing purposes. Or are their really qualitative differences. Like the measurement metrics are actually on the soil quality with the surplus food being unmeasured and uncertain.
If it is how I have described it, I could see it working in the same way that people would pay to have trees planted on their behalf in a non profit donation kind of way. But hard to imagine real food showing up on my table when I need it. It feels like a perishable food equivalent of the tote bag gift for donating to a cause.
I’m sure if there was firm predictable examples it would make more sense to me. And I personally love the idea of regenerative agriculture CSAs. If that’s what this is I’m all for it, and apologies for the questions. You’ve said some things about the commodification of food that I would need to think about more if it’s really always exploitive of the soil if you sell the food as opposed to “giving it away” I get the idea that you improve what you measure, and if soil quality isn’t what you are explicitly buying then you aren’t going to get soil quality. If I’m buying a steak I will get the steak. But I want a steak in a visceral, I got to eat kind of way. I’m glad the farmers soil quality is increasing, I want to buy food from that kind of farmer, but I don’t want to buy soil improvement in the same kind of way.
Am I near the mark or am I confused on how it works.
🙏😅