And a decentralized system seems to mean lots and lots and lots of businesses. So as a young farmer-in-training with aspirations to start and run her own business, I really liked the direction Rob Smart was going. I also love his coverage of cool sustainable food ventures. And on first read, I liked the analogy which "Pro Food" to the Internet back in the day.
"In some very interesting ways, Pro Food draws parallels with the early years of the Internet, when it was still isolated from the mainstream in government and university labs. People, especially entrepreneurs, were starting to eye the Internet as something that could revolutionize communications and collaboration, that could democratize things long centralized. At first, they had no idea what was going to stick, but began applying time, energy and money in search of winning formulas."
I still agree with the idea that both movements have the power to "democratize things long centralized" and that in both cases, entrepreneurs need to "apply time, energy and money in search of winning formulas." But after thinking about it, I wonder if there aren't also significant differences (I haven't yet thought all the way through their significance, but here are some preliminary ideas):
-- The current food movement is often envisioned (both correctly and incorrectly) as a "return to the old ways," before the intense industrialization of food that resulted both from the development of synthetic fertilizers, and improved food preservation techniques of the 40s and 50s. The internet, on the other hand was something totally new, and therefore, perhaps, more open and ripe for innovation.
-- A Pro food movement would be a move away from a way of doing things in which people are invested (consumers like cheap meat, Conagra likes profits)... whereas it doesn't seem like there were really any norms associated with the internet and what could or couldn't be done. (Maybe the comparison isn't to the internet itself, but the reaction of the music industry to the internet?)