Revisiting "The Vertical Farm"​ - A Look Back at Dickson Despommier’s Book

In 2010, author and emeritus professor of microbiology and public health, Dickson Despommier released his book, “The Vertical Farm: Feeding the World in the 21st Century.” The concept he discusses is fairly simple. If we used hydroponic and aeroponic systems to grow fresh produce, indoors, in large cities, we could curb our environmental impact by letting our current farms return to their natural state. Being its 10th anniversary, I wanted to revisit the book and look at it in a new context.

1605160933966.jpeg

The Problem

By 2050, it’s estimated that there will be two billion more human beings than there are today. To feed that many people, we’ll need a landmass the size of South America to account for the food production. Unfortunately for everyone, they don’t make new continents anymore, and if the lack of land isn’t enough to worry about, year by year, the planet is losing arable land due to the changing climate, intensifying weather conditions, air quality, and more. 

Modern farming is also not without its issues. A large percentage of fresh produce never reaches your plate, whether that be due to harsh weather, unforeseen pests, or other factors. In some cases, transportation can be the problem, as most fresh options travel 1200 to 1500 miles to reach their final destination. 

Insecticides, fungicides, and pesticides are commonly used to kill off threats to growing produce, but water runoff with these chemicals often end up contaminating rivers, ponds, lakes, and streams. This damages natural wildlife habitats and has adverse effects on human beings. 

Despommier’s Solution?

Farm upwards in buildings and skyscrapers. Avoid the use of pesticides and other chemical agents that damage the environment. Without the potential of chemicals and weather effects, you can grow produce in a controlled, ideal environment--year-round--at a rate that today’s farms simply can’t match.  

When you’re producing food at this accelerated rate, there is no need to transport it 1200 to 1500 miles, which means fresher, tastier options arrive at the customers’ homes. You can also cut out the CO2 that would get pumped into the atmosphere if the food were to be transported long distances.

Because hydroponics and aeroponics are closed-loop systems, we could conceivably use 70-95% less water to produce the same amount of food as is currently produced. Despommier also talks about using vertical farms to eliminate food waste that attracts vermin and millions of gallons of contaminated water that pollutes large cities every day. 

An interesting omission from Despommier’s vision is the use of aquaponics. While it’s a closed-loop system like the aforementioned, aquaponic farmers cultivate fresh-water fish to provide nutrients to their plants. In a matter of months, a farmer who has produced tons of fresh, leafy greens, could also provide local restaurants or residents with high-quality fish.

What happens to old farms and farmers?

If we were able to successfully transition to growing products from vertical or urban farms, there would be little need for farms as we know them. We would have the opportunity to reforest hundreds of thousands of acres and combat a large percentage of harmful CO2 and chemical agents. That said, I’m not keen on essentially firing two million Americans whose main source of income is farming, but neither is Despommier. The author suggests a government-provided financial incentive for farmers who actively work to curb CO2 by reforesting their land. That this might cause frustrations for some, but that’s a discussion for another day.

Vertical farms could also give rise to hundreds of thousands of new jobs--many for those displaced farmers--from the managers who will keep the facilities running to the techs who will make sure no pest or pathogen breaches a micrometer of produce. You could also bet that the vertical farming industry would give rise to job opportunities in related industries and fields.

Why this is important.

It’s not lost on me that in the coming decades, as I reach my parents’ age, the quality of my life might be severely different from theirs. My children and their children will inherit a world with rising temperatures, intensifying weather patterns (like 2020’s hurricane season)environmental refugees, and--oh yes--the two billion more people that I mentioned above. The opportunity to innovate in the farming industry is, well, 10 years ago when this book came out. We’re making strides, but mainstreaming vertical farming would require a tectonic-like shift in our mindsets and priorities or at least a billionaire champion (looking at you, Bezos, Musk, Gates) to kick things off.

Not to alarm, but with every passing day, the climate crisis becomes direr, and while it’s easy to let your mind drift to the negative, I believe Despommier’s vision is that of hope and innovation. We have all the tools we need to make the shift. We just have to do it.

But there’s one more reason I think that this book is more important now than it was at the time of its release. The passage in the book that stuck out to me most is this: 

“All life on the Earth is linked either directly or indirectly to each other in mutually dependent life-renewing cycles. It is the foundation upon which that science is built. Without our interference, life would go on in an equitable manner, with all forms living within a given eco-zone sharing their part of the energy budget provided to them each day by the sun.”

This quote needs to be seen with 2020 vision. At the time I’m writing this, there are more than 242,000 Covid deaths in the United States and 1.28 million worldwide. Some scientists suggest that Climate Change has played a role in the spread of Covid-19. Others suggest that the agony and anguish of Covid-19 pale in comparison to the devastation the Climate Change will inflict on us in the future. 

As the quote suggests, everything is connected. When you've tampered with one thing (like the environment), you've tampered with everything. We are the planet’s stewards. I don’t blame anyone specifically for Covid-19, but perhaps if we take larger steps to tackle the climate crisis, it will help us prepare for the next pandemic, either directly or indirectly. 

The Greater Impact

Despommier leaves no stone unturned. He discusses vertical farming's local, national, and global impacts on our health, habits, and societies. He explains that, with trial and error, vertical farming can produce any crop you can imagine, and he provides technological and architectural blueprints necessary for success. He provides a broad overview of the benefits, many of which I've mentioned, but in much greater detail. Honestly, if someone has the money and ambition to start a vertical farm, conceptually, he's done most of the heavy lifting for them.

He also gives you the sense that with vertical farming, the quality of life could improve for everyone, and makes a case for allowing financially or food-insecure countries to rely on foreign providers. Naturally, there would be major pushback from those opposed to globalization, but Despommier's position is to advocate for environmental equity and sharing resources. In some cases, vertical farming could become a significant tool in avoiding major world conflicts.

Final Thoughts

I’m no farmer. I'm certainly not a scientist. I’m just a guy concerned about the days ahead. Ten years ago I heard about an exciting, inspiring concept and wanted to revisit it. That said, I won't presume that a hypothetical shift toward vertical farming wouldn't be met with significant challenges and resistance--many for legitimate reasons.

Finally, I don’t know if New York City, Hong Kong, Dubai, Mexico City, or Shanghai will ever have sprawling districts with skyscrapers that produce millions of pounds of fresh, healthy food each day. It’s simply a hopeful future and in terms of solving tomorrow’s problems, I think vertical farms are an excellent place to start. 

_______

When it comes to vertical farming, urban farming, and modern farming techniques, here are just a few companies that are ahead of the game:

The End of Advertising: Why It Had to Die, and the Creative Resurrection to Come - A Book Review

Originally published on LinkedIn, 1/20/18

I browsed the Barnes & Noble shelves, looking for something that might give me some different insights into the ad industry, so Andrew Essex's "The End of Advertising: Why It Had to Die, and the Creative Resurrection to Come" stuck out like a sore thumb. I'm sure I smiled nervously, before picking it up, reading more and deciding to purchase it.

Essex, a former executive with Droga5 (and a magazine publisher before that), begins his book, describing his dilemma--an ad exec of more than 10 years having reached the point where he disliked advertising, or most facets of it. He prides himself on having been with Droga5, because it always produces top-notch work, or as he says, "ads that don't suck," as opposed to the overwhelming majority of ads that do.

With Essex's sometimes sarcastic tone, his thinking here could be misconstrued as hubris, but I understand it to be the way he empathizes with people who feel inundated with TV commercials, web ads, radio spots and everything else that he feels is a product of artifice; lacking authenticity and creativity. The book, then, builds on the history of ad block technology, Essex's own adoption of it, how it will eventually spell the end of traditional advertising.

I have avoided ad blockers, even while a good friend remains adamant I add one to my web browser. I think I have a subconscious understanding that I would be undermining hard work done by those of my ilk. That mindset, however, hasn't stopped Essex. As he explains, an instance with the New York Times app was once interrupted by an advertisement so poorly conceived, tone deaf, annoying and unfunny, that he was so bothered by it, he gave in and downloaded the software.

What follows are a series of advertising history lessons, Mad Men references (which I'm 100% okay with), and deeper looks at how in the era of streaming, traditional ads are becoming more annoying, yet avoidable with ad blockers (or by paying a premium). In a number of instances, Essex talks about how his young children have grown up without exposure to TV commercials, something "appointment TV viewers" won't be able wrap their heads around. Yet the lack of exposure hasn't stopped brands from reaching his children in making strong impressions.

Without giving away major spoilers, this isn't just a former ad exec complaining about what he feels doesn't work over the span of 240 pages. The first two-thirds of the book pay off when Essex gives great examples of how Citibank, LEGO and other companies are rethinking their approaches; going in unconventional, yet exciting, new directions.

The book is filled with small pieces of wisdom that will stick with the reader, from David Ogilvy quotes to Essex's own revelations. My biggest takeaway is that advertising can no longer be seen as "the thing that sells the thing." Essex challenges the industry and his readers to let advertising "be the thing, not the thing that sells the thing." It's a simple enough idea, but in the broader context, it pushes advertisers to reach customers in authentic ways, while creating quality experiences rather than interruptions.

For young (or experienced) advertisers, marketers or PR folks, I recommend "The End of Advertising." I feared that by the end of the book, I would feel punched in the face by a guy who has been where I am and grew to hate it, hence my nerves when I first read the title. Instead, I enjoyed reading the unique perspective of someone who is more enthusiastic about the numerous possibilities advertisers have to innovate and reach customers. There are also of lot of great laughs along the way.


A brand is what the audience thinks it is

James Bond is known to drive Aston Martins. In doing so, Astons became the “heroes’ cars.” Jaguar, another English luxury automaker, doesn’t want you driving its rival, Aston’s. That means if you’re not the hero, you must be the villain. In recent years, the company has done an excellent job playing with that brand strategy, featuring popular actors we recognize as movie villains in a series of ads. The company is not really out to incite global mayhem, but inspire you with a bit of fun.

I sat in Jaguar’s gorgeous F-Type Coupe at this year’s Kansas City Auto Show, and I’ll be the first to admit that the car caused me to smirk, villainously. I wished there was a key fob close by so that I could drive it out of Bartle Hall. I love Jaguar’s ads, but it wasn’t until this week that I realized the brilliance of the automaker’s strategy.

A brand is what the customers and audiences think

I started a free online marketing course, and in a short period of time, I have heard a lot about branding, strategy and messages. The instructor, in a series of videos, explained something I wish I had realized,”The real definition of a brand is whatever the customer thinks it is.” She hit it on the head with pinpoint accuracy. We all have perceptions of a brand. Our experiences with the brand shape those perceptions. It was shown, over time, that Jaguars were the cars of the mischievous, so sitting in the F-Type, I wanted to cause some trouble. That can make things tough for PR and marketing folks.

The Challenge, The Solution

More than 6.6 million people like Jaguar on Facebook. That’s a lot of differing opinions and expectations. Therein lies an exciting challenge. How do you help the customer understand the brand as you see it? The answer isn’t villainous mind games, but creating a solid brand foundation.

Whether you are branding a start-up or re-branding a well-established company in need of updates, there are questions marketing and PR pros must consider. Here are a few:

  • Why does the company exist and who is it meant to serve?
  • How is the brand positioned in the marketplace?
  • What are the competitors doing? What will you do differently?

More specifically for PR folks, how will we communicate with the people who matter most? What tactics should we implement? When the brand is established, the communication needs to be consistent and built to help the company achieve its objectives.

Jaguar, founded more than 90 years ago, isn’t really set on blowing up major cities and manipulating world leaders. Its corporate values are integrity, understanding, excellence, unity and responsibility. That said, it’s a British luxury car company with competitors. When you consider the association between Aston Martin and James Bond, you forgive Jaguar for playing the anti-hero.

I implore you not to hatch any evil schemes. Instead, find Innovative PR on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

(Originally published on UCMInnovativePR.com)

Dealing with the declining number of journalists

by Jonathan Haile

If you have ever plunged into a program such as Cision, you understand there are thousands of media outlets covering hundreds of topics. That said, you might have a hard time believing that the number of journalists working today is at its lowest since 1978, says Pew Research. With the number of journalists and media contacts on the decline, PR professionals need to maximize their media relations efforts.

Mickie Kennedy of eReleases speaks to the impact of declining number of journalists on PR pros, so I offer a few suggestions in response to his PR Daily article.

1. Don’t forget about bloggers

While the number of journalists is declining, bloggers are enjoying their days as online influencers. As they build their audiences, build your relationships with them. Building these relationships can be as simple as sharing their content on social media sites, a suggestion from digital marketing analyst Brian Solis, or as involved as meeting up for coffee to discuss what topics they would be most interested in covering and how and when they would prefer to receive the pitches you want them to cover.

In the event that the blogger shares your story, be sure to acknowledge them on social media with a mention. For instance, “Check out what ‘xyz blogger’ had to say about our new product. Thanks for the shout out!”

2. Make sure your website has a “News” section

By this, I mean publish your own content. When you need to release information, post it on the news section or blog section on your website, and share that page on the social media platforms you utilize. Most large organizations have press sections on their sites, but if you’re working for a small company or with a small client as their representative and public relations council, you should recommend the client adds the feature to their site if they haven’t already done so.

3. Simply ask to whom you should send your pitch

In my Strategic Planning course, like all my peers, I was taught to pitch to one person at each media outlet. In my most recent internship, I was told to pitch to more than one contact at an outlet. Certainly, there are different schools of thought. Maybe the answer is calling the news desk and asking for suggestions about the best person to receive pitches for articles. Once you have that name, you’re set. Of course, if there are other contacts at the outlet who you know will be interested in your story, send it to them as well.

4. Leverage your relationships

You might be pitching to a journalist who hasn’t been receptive to your attempts in the past, but you know that a coworker has had success reaching that journalist, and they might be successful again in the future. Have the coworker pitch your story. They already have the rapport and it’s possible they can introduce you to the journalist, helping you build that relationship for yourself.

If you look around, you’ll find plenty of ways to deal with the declining number of journalists, but I hope I have provided you with four tools you can use in the meantime. Being a PR professional at a time when the number of journalists is decline is a challenge, but as with any challenge, there are exciting opportunities and different methods for getting your story or news to the masses.

For more from Innovative PR, “like” us on Facebook and “follow” us on Twitter and Instagram.

(Originally published on UCMInnovativePR.com)

Brand Journalism and Content Marketing: What’s the difference?

This semester started with a question for Innovative PR: what is brand journalism? Just when we thought we had the answer, we scratched our heads and realized there was more to it. Ultimately, we concluded that brand journalists provide readers with different stories that cover different aspects of a brand. When readers piece these stories together, they have a general understanding of the brand’s image and values.

Our best example was Coca-Cola, which takes brand journalism to a new level with a site that looks similar to Mashable, but features all Coke-relevant content. While I’m a huge fan of what Coke is doing, I couldn’t help but think that “brand journalism” is just a fancy word for content marketing. So what’s the difference?

What is Content Marketing? 

My commutes to and from Warrensburg are filled with the words of Joe Pulizzi, the author of Epic Content Marketing. Pulizzi is credited with coining the term. In his book, he explains that the content marketing, in the grand scheme of things, is about getting leads and driving sales. Business 2 Community, another great resource, agrees with Pulizzi and explains that content marketing involves a “customer” relationship:

“Content marketing goal: Influence audience behavior by publishing useful content that supports the customer journey, encourages loyalty and enables amplifications.”
Joe Pulizzi, founder of Content Marketing Institute

Joe Pulizzi, founder of Content Marketing Institute

When you start a content marketing campaign, Pulizzi suggests you begin with a “pilot,” which he compares to that of a new television series. The pilot is an example of what your readers should expect, and is accompanied by sales measurable objectives. With a successful content strategy, you will always understand why and how your content is driving the audience to make purchase decisions.

Working together

The two concepts have inherently different objectives, but are great compliments to each other and share similarities. Brand journalists and content marketers need to be strategic in their posts—knowing what is relevant to the reader and where the post will get the most exposure.

Both tools should function to strengthen the relationship between customers and brands, lower brands’ advertising costs, and be beneficial for brands’ internal audiences. They reinforce corporate values and keep employees updated with company happenings.

As a PR student, what is more appealing? Would you rather tell the unique corporate story as a brand journalist or drive sales and build leads as a content marketer? Let us know. “Follow” Innovative PR on Twitter and Instagram, and “like” us on Facebook.

(Originally published on UCMInnovativePR.com)