Search

Urban farming is an important component of California agriculture, but lack of agricultural census data or common definitions makes it difficult to track and understand. In 2017–2018, a team of University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources (UC ANR) researchers and extension professionals developed a workshop series for urban farmers in California based on results of a prior needs assessment. After conducting 16 workshops in the state's largest urban centers, the team evaluated what participants learned and how they put their knowledge into action. The evaluation highlighted urban farmers' ongoing challenges and found that economic issues such as profitability and land access are some of the greatest barriers for urban farming in California. An unexpected positive outcome was the opportunity for participants to network and meet other farmers. Urban farmers expressed the need for more opportunities for mentoring and building partnerships with other farmers and organizations. Evaluation results suggest that California's urban farmers may be more diverse than California farmers as a whole, and that they are often beginning farmers.

California Agriculture - All Issues

California Agriculture - All Issues

California Agriculture - All Issues

California is a landmark setting for studying produce recovery efforts and policy implications because of its global relevance in agricultural production, its complex network of food recovery organizations, and its environmental and public health regulations. Through a series of focus groups with organizations involved in produce recovery (gleaning organizations) and emergency food operations (food banks, food pantries), this study aimed to deepen our understanding of the current produce recovery system and determine the major challenges and opportunities related to the produce recovery system. Operational and systematic barriers to produce recovery were highlighted by both gleaning and emergency food operations. Operational barriers, such as the lack of appropriate infrastructure and limited logistical support were found to be a challenge across groups and were directly tied to inadequate funding for these organizations. Systematic barriers, such as regulations related to food safety or reducing food loss and waste, were also found to impact both gleaning and emergency food organizations, but differences were observed in how each type of regulation impacted each stakeholder group. To support the expansion of food recovery efforts, participants expressed need for better coordination within and across food recovery networks and more positive and transparent engagement from regulators to increase understanding of the specifics of their unique operational constraints. The focus group participants also provided critiques on how emergency food assistance and food recovery are inscribed within the current food system and for longer term goals of reducing food insecurity and food loss and waste a systematic change will be required., Competing Interests: Conflict of interestThe authors have no financial or non-financial conflicts of interest related to this work., (© The Author(s) 2023.)

In a meta-analysis, the authors compared the effectiveness of psychological and pharmacological treatments for panic disorder. Percentage of agoraphobic subjects in the sample and duration of the illness were unrelated to effect size (ES). Type of dependent variable was generally unrelated to treatment outcome, although behavioral measures yielded significantly smaller ESs. Dependent measures of general anxiety, avoidance, and panic attacks yielded larger ESs than did depression measures. Choice of control was related to ES, with comparisons with placebo controls greater than comparisons with exposure-only or "other treatment" controls. Psychological coping strategies involving relaxation training, cognitive restructuring, and exposure yielded the most consistent ESs; flooding and combination treatments (psychological and pharmacological) yielded the next most consistent ESs. Antidepressants were the most effective pharmacological intervention.