Author Archives: Joyce Liao

Coming back from the Reading Break at the end of February, our group launched into our interview phase; the hands-on community engagement piece many of us had been longing to start. What we were not prepared for, however; was the month-long debacle of tracking down business owners and securing interview times. While we had collaboratively written a template email to send out to businesses, we found positive responses few and far in between. Despite persisting with follow-up emails and cold calls, by the 2nd week of the month we had only managed to secure half our intended number of interviews. With mild panic settling in with the lack of responses from the businesses we had contacted, we reached out to our community partner for help.

Throughout this process, Kevin was able to connect us to businesses through his personal connections. Interviews seemed to magically fall into our lap after Kevin reached into his network. With his aid, we were able to get three additional interviews to the ones we managed to secure. While our personal efforts felt like pulling teeth, we were amazed by the time and energy Kevin’s contacts were willing to take to participate in our research project.

Our experiences engaging with community members in Chinatown revealed the importance of a liaison in asset-based community development. Not only was Kevin able to secure interviews for us, but his personal connections with our interviewees made for enriching conversations that provided key information. We found his presence, as well as Christina’s, reassuring and instructive. It was fascinating to watch how easily Kevin’s personal contacts would open up, sharing key information that our individual group members would have much more difficulty capturing on our own.

The title of our “Flexible Learning” days resonated more and more as we realized the importance of embodying flexible learning. While we had created a tidy timeline for how we imagined our project would unfold, few if any of the deadlines we had previously set were met in reality. We found ourselves feeling uncomfortable with the uncertain future as the days went by with what seemed to be little to no progress. The lack of security about the future of our project was challenging to deal with, but somewhere along the way, it became inherent that embracing this factor was the pathway to our success.

Becoming “flexible learners” for us meant being nervous during our first interviews, but improving from our mistakes. It meant going out of our way to reschedule our activities for a last minute interview. It meant going off-script during the interviews to ask bold questions. It meant challenging our ideas of what was the “right” or “proper” way to do things and finding alternatives. As Shulman highlights: “without a certain amount of anxiety and risk, there’s a limit to how much learning occurs” (2005, p. 18). This became apparent as we embarked on our interviews since most of us held little to no experience conducting interviews prior to this project. As we observed Kevin and Christina’s ways of engaging with interviewees, we found ourselves learning important interview skills and applying them when we had the chance. While we had moments of anxiety and regret, (i.e. not having the boldness to probe deeper with certain interviewees), we were able to take our experience in stride and improve upon in consequent opportunities. We found that our collective confidence grew through the interview process.

The interviews were also an excellent opportunity to apply the concept of “asset-based community learning” which has been an ongoing theme throughout our course and project. Community projects, while well-intentioned can veer towards a “needs-based approach” where outside experts “play up the severity of problems” and “[present] a one-sided negative view” in order to extract results that are needed for the purpose of the study (Mathie & Cunningham, 2003, p. 476). Going into the interviews, we kept this in mind and maintained an open-minded approach, remembering that our role as outsiders was to listen and learn from the members of the community – the true experts in this scenario. Ultimately, this approach paid off well as we not only learned about inter-business relations which was the focus of our interviews, but we also gained invaluable insight into the personal growth stories of each business, and the ideals each business owner had for their community. This not only made the interviews more interesting but also gave us more insight into opportunities that utilize the community’s assets and benefit its members as a whole; something to consider as we make suggestions in our final report.  

         Infographic of our study’s findings.

Lastly, our experiences have allowed us to reflect on our own learning. Shulman (2005) asks, “are there signature pedagogies in undergraduate liberal education?”. (Signature pedagogies being distinctive teaching practices) He argues that lecture-style courses often foster environments where students are “disengaged, invisible, unaccountable, and emotionally disconnected”. However, we were able to see how the LFS 350 course and community projects reflect features of certain “signature pedagogies”. For example, Shulman (2005) notes that a universal feature of signature pedagogies is that they make students feel deeply engaged, highly visible and potentially even vulnerable. According to the article, learning requires that students feel visible and accountable – signature pedagogies tend to be interactive, so students feel accountable to instructors, as well as to fellow students. Shulman’s observations resonated with our group – we felt that the LFS 350 learning environment exemplified these aspects of the signature pedagogies through the smaller tutorial discussions, group work, and interactions with our community partners.

In our collaboration with the hua foundation, we felt connected and engaged with the work we were doing because it was a real-life application of the topics we have been learning in class. Working with the organization and conducting interviews also put us out of our comfort zones (as Shulman noted, making us feel “vulnerable”) and challenged us to develop new skills. This course made us feel visible in comparison to a typical lecture-style course – we felt more deeply involved in the course and the learning materials because of the class structure and community partner project. 

In preparing for the final report, we know that there will likely be roadblocks along the way. The questions our research project asks do not have simple answers and will require wrestling with complex ideas and concepts. Especially as the end of the term increases in workload for all of us, we will need to continue to be “flexible learners” and embrace the uncertainty of what this project entails.

We will be able to take the skills we gained throughout the interview process and apply them to future interviews and similar situations. While Kevin and Christina’s expertise helped us probe deeper during our research phase, it also introduced a certain amount of bias to the answers through leading questions, which will be acknowledged in our final report. Additionally, of the seven interviews we conducted, many had prior connections to the hua foundation or a personal connection to Kevin. As a result, the data collected may not be representative of all new Chinatown businesses and may be biased towards values of the hua foundation.

As highlighted in the “Writing Up Science-Based Practical Reports” (Harper Adams University, n.d.) guide, we must write objectively, removing bias, emotions and subjective writing.  In future interviews, we will not have the luxury of having someone with a wealth of knowledge present. However, this highlights the need for having an in-depth understanding of the local history and context of wherever our projects may take place. Furthermore, the essence of asset-based community development involves the mobilization of community members and their assets (Mathie & Cunningham, 2003), and it will be our duty to empower community members and aid them in building on their current strengths. It will be a lengthy and potentially unsmooth process, as cooperation requires mutual trust, and trust requires time, commitment and mutual understanding. Hopefully, in future situations, we will have more time to gain this understanding by connecting with local stakeholders and community members.

Where we were this week and where we will go next week

References: 

Harper Adams University. (n.d.). Guide to Essay Writing 2017/18. Retrieved March 30, 2018, from https://cdn.harper-adams.ac.uk/document/page/127_Guide-to-Essay-Writing.pdf

Mathie, A., & Cunningham, G. (2003). From clients to citizens: Asset-based Community Development as a strategy for community-driven development. Development in Practice, 13(5), 474–486

Shulman, L. S. (2005). Pedagogies of uncertainty. Liberal Education, 91(2), 18–25. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ697350.pdf

Hello! Welcome to our LFS350 Blog! Team 13 is comprised of Jimmy, Farron, Chloe, Joyce, Jianru, and Meryn. This semester, we will be working with the hua foundation on “Food Access Issues in Vancouver’s Chinatown”. Follow along as our project unfolds!

First, a little bit about us:

Jimmy: I am a third-year Nutritional Sciences major. As someone with strong ties to both Canada and Asia, I have great confidence in communicating with locals from both sides and have always been interested in opportunities to connect the two backgrounds. I look forward to working with more people with different backgrounds and stories this term on this project. I also enjoy eating international foods and marvelling at old buildings.

Farron: I am a third-year Global Resource Systems major! As a fourth-generation Japanese-Canadian whose family was impacted by the Japanese internment, I am interested in the intersections of space and identity – in particular how food systems and cultural food assets can help strengthen communities. I am looking forward to working with the hua foundation, Chinese community members and businesses, and incoming businesses. I hope to learn more about facilitating social cohesion – I would love to use the “Asset-Based Community Development” approach in order to pinpoint the strengths and unique skill sets of the community that can contribute to this project.

Chloe: I’m a third-year Nutritional Science major! As a Chinese immigrant,  it warms my heart to walk through Chinatown, a place with so much Chinese culture. However, it seems difficult when two different cultures try to get along with each other; one of the most significant sign is when it comes to food security. I see this project as an opportunity to join hua foundation to investigate the ongoing conflicts in Chinatown, with the emergence of new businesses in the area. Also, as LFS students, my hope is that we are not only learning about ways we can combine in-class knowledge with real-life issues, but also how we can look for solutions that may improve food security in Chinatown in the process.

Joyce: I’m a third year Global Resource Systems student, studying “food systems planning”. The focus of my studies has been on the intersection between food and urban systems and investigating the areas of overlap through a social justice lens. I have a strong interest in pursuing social planning which has led me to investigate topics of spatial equity, universal design and more recently, the role youth play in shaping civic discourse. I find Chinatown a fascinating place of community activism and hope as it has shown continued resistance to encroaching development (albeit small resistance). I hope to learn more about bridging the chasms between formal and informal planning, and how they inform one another in the creation of social ties. In my spare time, you can find me biking around the city, drawing, and thinking deep thoughts about how to make happy, healthy cities.

 

Jianru: I am majoring in Food Science. When I was walking along the Chinatown, I was surprised by its traditional style as I am used to a modern style of Chinese architecture. I was shocked by the severity of drug issues in the area, but also am interested in the innovations in the Downtown Eastside, such as InSite.  I am also interested in the stories about the first wave of Chinese-Canadian immigrants that call Chinatown home. In my spare time, you’ll find me reading, meeting with friends, painting and learning new languages!

Meryn: I am a third-year student in the Global Resources Program focusing on food systems sustainability from the background of nutrition and sustainable agriculture. The more I’ve learnt about food security, the more I’ve realized the subtleties and different aspects of it. I am excited to learn more about cultural food security and Asset Based Community Development; although I acknowledge I have a lot to learn in these subjects, I hope my experience from on-campus initiatives will transfer over smoothly.  I enjoy running up and down mountains, bad jokes and eating good food!

 

About Our Community Partner–Hua Foundation

For this project, we will be working with the hua foundation. Kevin Huang, the co-founder, will be our community liaison and insider/in-sighter while we develop our research focus throughout the course of the semester. Since 2009, the hua foundation has been working at the “intersection of where environmental issues and cultural traditions meet” (hua foundation, n.d.). The hua foundation began working in an advocacy role regarding the issue of shark fin soup but have since transitioned to focusing on work with Asian youth and policy change promotion. The hua foundation’s mission statement to “empower youth in the Asian diaspora to fully participate in advancing social change through exploring […] racialized identities and building resilience in communities” (hua foundation, n.d.) is embodied in their various initiatives such as the Choi Project, a program designed to empower Chinese families toparticipate in their local food system through vegetable guides, cooking workshops and market signage. Another initiative they support include Chinatown Today, a local publication that shares stories of Chinatown heritage and community knowledge.

Kevin Huang, hua foundation co-founder,

Photo from hua foundation website 

Most recently, the hua foundation published a report titled the Vancouver Chinatown Food Security Report that outlined the food landscape in Chinatown, highlighting the the loss of 50% of food assets in Chinatown since 2009 (Ho & Chen, 2017). Many of the terms we have become familiar with in LFS 250 and 350 have renewed meanings to us now, such as “food assets” and “food security”. After reading the hua foundation’s report we have seen the importance of expanding our knowledge of “cultural food assets” and “cultural food sovereignty” for discussions about food systems. The Vancouver Food Strategy defines food assets as “resources, facilities, services or spaces that are available to Vancouver residents, and which are used to support the local food system” (City of Vancouver, 2013 in Ho & Chen, 2017). Cultural food assets build on this by providing “spaces that support the maintenance and transmission of culture. In the case of Chinatown, this includes greengrocers, fishmongers, barbecue meat stores, butcher shops, dry goods stores, and traditional Cantonese bakeries and restaurants (Ho & Chen, 2017).

LFS students are very familiar with the standard definition of food security – however, “cultural” food security emphasizes it being a state where “people are able to acquire food in ways that are culturally acceptable, empowering, and personally dignifying” (Ho & Chen, 2017). The findings of this report led to the hua foundation’s contribution to reshaping municipal definition of food assets to be more holistic. We are excited at the prospect of contributing to the conversation of food access in Chinatown, a topic that is largely undocumented in academia.

Vancouver Chinatown Food Security Report (Ho & Chen, 2017).

Our interests and why we chose this project:

• A desire to expand our understanding of food security and learn about the implications of cultural food literacy and cultural food assets
• The ability to situate ourselves as youth from the Chinese diaspora to have a better understanding of personal and collective identity
• An interest in the different factors and dynamics that shape the current food system landscape in the Chinatown area (eg. language, taste preference, storefront look etc)

This opportunity provides a space for us to expand our existing skill sets. We hope to gain skills and knowledge related to:

• Interview, communication skills
• Greater understanding of some of the socioeconomic, policy, cultural and language-related barriers to food access
• Improved cross-cultural dialogue skills
• Better understanding of the Chinese parallel food system in Vancouver
• Appreciative inquisition and developing an “asset-focused” approach to addressing food system issues
• Assessment and evaluation of social value

Project Description

Acknowledging the current dynamic nature of Chinatown’s food assets, there is an apparent opportunity to foster partnerships within the neighbourhood’s various food suppliers to facilitate points of connection between new and old businesses. The goal of our research project is to investigate current examples of social cohesion between Chinatown food assets. This will provide insight on the connectedness of the Chinatown food system and increase understanding of parallel food systems and their manifestation in the business landscape of Chinatown.

Our main objectives:

1. Identify what new businesses have already established connections with existing distributors and greengrocers.
2. Interview key business owners.
3. Analyse results from interviews to establish what methods work for business owners, and identify challenges and next steps.
4. Create document/infographic to share our findings.

The outcomes of our project include creating a resource for new businesses in Chinatown based off of the needs identified through interviews. We will also create a map of connections between businesses and distributors.

First impressions on the process to date

For some of us, it was the first time setting foot in Chinatown, or even the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver (DTES). The UBC Learning Exchange workshop helped to contextualize the neighbourhood and its key features. A presentation video on the importance of asset-based community development (ABCD) addressed some of our worries about working in a sensitive environment, such as the DTES. An ABCD approach recognizes that community members have existing, unique skill sets to contribute to the project (Mathie and Cunningham, 2003). In the paper by Wittman and Gibb (2013) we were assigned, one of the key insights on the Chinese-Canadian community was the ingenuity of the Chinese distribution network born out of a system of oppression; a parallel food system that operates in conjunction, but separate from the mainstream local food system.

The UBC Learning Exchange workshop was particularly helpful in positioning our role as external researchers. We acknowledge that there is no such thing as a neutral space and that the neighbourhood of Chinatown is set within a greater narrative of historical, collective, and social trauma. Within these histories, structural inequalities of race and class have been embedded and now inherited by the present. We must recognize that citizens of the community are at the centre of development and meaningful engagement with the community occurs through dialogue and active listening (Mathie and Cunningham, 2003; Sirolli, 2012). After the presentation, we felt more at ease about the area we would be working in, but still held questions about the realities of working with vulnerable communities.

Kevin, our community partner, was able to provide more insight as he toured the group around Chinatown. While it was brief, we found his insider knowledge eye-opening and nuanced. We were enchanted by the charming mom-and-pop shops and surrounded by the lively activities both inside the shops and on the streets. Stores lined the streets with fresh produce, large signs with Chinese characters donned open containers of herbs and dried goods, much like in Chinatown’s depicted popular media. The traditional stores of the area provide fresh produce, meats and dried goods for residents in the direct periphery and surrounding areas like the Strathcona community and the DTES. We expressed concerns about what food justice in the neighbourhood looks like and how our project could seek to “eliminate disparities and inequities that constrain food choices and access to good food for all” (Gottlieb and Joshi, 2010).This was reflected upon when we observed which goods were offered at a fair and affordable price, and if workers in the local Chinatown food system were being paid living wages.

We also noticed an astonishing number of vacant stores that were no longer in business, despite still having signage displayed. Most of these stores had been out of business for upwards of 1 year, due to a compounding of factors such as increasing rent and lack of successors to run the stores. There was a distinct contrast between the newer businesses and the older, traditional Chinese businesses – from the demographics of clientele served to the variety of food options available, ranging in price and cuisine. We left feeling somewhat overwhelmed with the challenges that the area faces, but were also hopeful about what opportunities laid ahead. Regarding the contrast between new and old businesses, we believe there are solutions to be found where the two are compatible, and realistically, the future of the community necessitates their cooperation. New and old, they both have insights to offer the community and do not have to be mutually exclusive.

References:  

Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO). (2006, June). Policy Brief: Food Security. Retrieved February 8th, 2018 from http://www.fao.org/forestry/13128-0e6f36f27e0091055bec28ebe830f46b3.pdf

Ho, Angela & Chen, Alan. (2017, August). Vancouver Chinatown Food Security Report. Retrieved February 4, 2018, from http://www.huafoundation.org/foodreport/read-vancouver-chinatown-food-security-report/

hua foundation. (n.d.). Our Mission, Vision, and Values. Retrieved January 26, 2018, from http://www.huafoundation.org/our-mission-story/

Gottlieb, R., & Joshi, A. (2010). Food Justice. MIT Press.

Mathie, A., & Cunningham, G. (2003). From clients to citizens: Asset-based Community Development as a strategy for community-driven development. Development in Practice, 13(5), 474–486.

Sirolli, E. (2012, August). Ernesto Sirolli at TEDxEQChCh. Retrieved January 26, 2018, from https://www.ted.com/talks/ernesto_sirolli_want_to_help_someone_shut_up_and_listen