Richard Phillips gives his operating thoughts on provenance!
This article appeared in the Autumn issue of Foodservice Footrint and gives a realistic revue of hands on operational environmentally conscious actions.
Sourcing good quality local produce is hard work as you have to go out and find it – it doesn’t always come to you. It is a long process, but one which over the years has enabled me to develop very good relationships with suppliers all across my home county, Kent.
To buy locally sourced ingredients means to buy seasonally, and a natural result of that is better quality food, which tastes just as it should. Anybody interested in food will share my passion in that respect. However, I am keen to take this passion further than most by actively seeking local produce to be used in all three of my restaurants. Whilst this is paramount for the newly opened ‘Richard Phillips at Chapel Down’ in particular, I will not lower the standards of my ingredients in order to do so.
Sustainability is all about sourcing locally. As well as quality, another vital factor to consider is consistency. I need to know that my suppliers are able to keep up with demand, which has not been easy for some local suppliers in the past. However, Kent has now more produce than ever to offer. This has allowed me to serve my ‘Chapel Down’ customers potatoes from just one mile up the road, as well as fish from Rye harbour and Sussex beef. I guess if we are talking ‘food miles’ I can deliver something unique. The wine used in a large number of my dishes – from the Chapel Down vineyard on site – is sourced just yards away. Does that make it a ‘food yard’? Sourcing locally has unlimited benefits for businesses in the catering industry.
Personally, I can interact directly and easily with the farmers who supply the produce. Not long ago, my potato supplier offered to grow and develop the perfect ‘chipping’ potato for me. Whatever the produce, it is in turn, fresher than that of further afield. And as it is seasonal, it is generally cheaper. These benefits are all passed on to my customers, reflected in the quality and price of their meals. Using suppliers close by helps local businesses in their bid to develop and profit, which will ultimately improve the local economy.
Knowledge of this has encouraged me to spread my wings further in the local fields. As opposed to stopping just at food, I am keen to source other materials locally. Where we could, we used British products. The rustic atmosphere generated matches that of the restaurant’s idyllic surroundings. Sustainability and provenance are hot topics, which food, naturally, has become part of, especially given today’s rising costs. I have always been an advocate for local produce and keen to back local farmers and suppliers.
This is not about me jumping on the bandwagon of a topical issue, but instead something that I am proud to have achieved in my businesses. My encouragement of sourcing locally does not match that of other related issues.
The organic fad, for example, is just that; a fad, a trend losing support. It is important to remember that farmers nowadays use as little sprays and pesticides as possible in response to peoples’ highly publicised concerns. By using organic produce in restaurants, prices unsurprisingly have to increase. And why do that to customers when quality, local ingredients can match, if not better, the experience for them? My chefs also demonstrate this enthusiasm. Shooting on a regular basis, we are eager to test the quality of local game. Just the other week we shot over 200 pigeons in Kent, which, the following day, were on the menus of my restaurants. It is so important that my team and I have involvement right the way through from the field to the plate.
Looking to the future, I will continue my efforts in sourcing local and sustainable quality produce – I am currently spending a lot of time with my suppliers to make this happen. One goal is to have 65% of the ‘Richard Phillips at Chapel Down’ menu comprised of local produce. I am also in talks with a farm in Winchelsea about farming animals solely for my three restaurants, and ‘Winchelsea Farm Kitchen’ due to open in February 2009. Here we are planning to use a mobile abattoir so that animals are not under stress during transportation. After all, a happy animal produces tender, flavoursome meat. So, is home grown always better? Yes. When you know what you are doing. I am in no way trying to preach to other chefs. Sourcing local, quality ingredients works for me, for my businesses, and for my customers. I intend to stick to it.
“If it is local, it must taste better”. A balanced response to an over indulged belief
Foodservice Footprint recently ran a competition in schools concerning awareness of locally sourced food. One young A-Level student, Archie Cosby, from Sherborne in Dorset emerged trumps, not only in his environmental opinions but also as a budding journalist.
“Oh but these potatoes are delicious. They come from just down the road you see”. This angle on local food is far too widespread. Why, just because it has been locally sourced, should it taste any better? I think that like organic food, the nation has overdone the whole idea that ‘local food’ is far better. It may create a community within local regions, and it may at times have less negative environmental impact, but it does not mean that it tastes better. It is an ill perceived belief that this is the case and it is something that too many chefs have become overindulged in, printing it all over menus as if it will earn them a Michelin star. This over obsession reminds me of a similar misjudgement of ingredient like that of the overly heavy use of truffle oil which they think adds to a “locally sourced” wild mushroom risotto for instance, the nutty and fragrant flavour and aroma exclusive only to an actual truffle when what it really does is just inject a vulgar, sickening taste. Anyway, why not enjoy the fruits of our labour. We spent rather a long time exploring the world, and wasteful of this hard work it would be if we weren’t to take full advantage of the pleasure existing in foods from around the world which we cannot get hold of in Britain. I do, however, concede that, opposing this view on local produce is an argument of much strength, and one that is supported by an impressive number of people. Lending their services to what has almost become a ‘movement’ in its sweeping attitudes and at times strong political arguments, is an army of – yes, I’m afraid I’m going to be highly controversial and say it – confused and aggressively passionate terriers who have become tied up in a gastronomic world of fantasy where they hope to better their own health and to establish themselves an image of supporting the local community. They have spun together this world in which they live like menacing spiders, their legs moving furiously in a motion to create their web, one which merely represents a frantic mess of false delusions. I myself realize that I too, while writing this, am weaving my own little web, one in which I am weary of becoming tired and getting stuck, except I fear not being disembodied by my hungry female counterpart. Instead, I am worried that I may find myself lying under a thick bush of nettles, with rather a hard pillow of gravel and tarmac, not thinking about making nettle soup for supper, but instead worrying more about the tire marks running across my stomach. Of course, I am eager to avoid being brutally disposed of by an over sized 4×4 on its way to the local farm shop, but I do also, to an extent, sympathise with these ‘terriers’. While I do argue that, just because it’s a potato that was grown 5 miles away, it doesn’t mean that it is any tastier, I do think it is crucial that we support our country’s agriculture. We do, after all, owe a lot to our fields. We are all familiar with that famous slogan, “Dig for Victory”, and, although we had little other choice but to grow our own vegetables in such a way during the Second World War, it was the importance of growing our own produce which was so enthusiastically embraced that was, many argue, a decisive factor in the Allies’ victory in 1945. So if not just as a patriotic salute to those wartime veg growers but also to our own farmers of today, I suppose we ought to at least consider the impact that food sourced from distant locations has on the environment. We are a country gripped by the issue of global warming, and, unlike organic food, and to a degree, ‘local food’, this is not just a chic fashion. Instead, unfortunately, it is rather more serious than such. Tony Blair was, it is only fair to say, speaking some sense when, in 2008 he encouraged the nation to “Just Ask” where the food that they were buying at supermarkets came from. Backed by Britain’s Country Land and Business Association, this campaign endorsed by Mr Blair aimed to heighten the amount of British produce being purchased by the public. For this to work, the hope was subsequently that the public would opt more regularly for the cut of gammon steak produced by British farmers, their pigs reared on the grassy moors of Gloucester. The man who introduced this scheme was, however, also the same man who planned to have all British soldiers out of Iraq by 2007. We are also, after all, British and however proud we are of our own produce, we are a nation who have been described on more than one occasion it has to be said, be it by our Gallic enemies from across the channel, as one that doesn’t ‘do’ food. This mockery is beginning to cease, and so it should be what with the outstanding advances which food has experienced in this country. The last 20 years has seen something of a revolution in Britain’s restaurants and we are now beginning to establish ourselves as a country that would confidently challenge any other in the kitchen. And, with gastronought Heston Blumenthal, whose restaurant, The Fat Duck was named the Best Restaurant in the World as ranked by an international panel of 500 culinary experts, why on earth should we not strive to compete for the culinary crown so arrogantly assumed ownership of by the French. Fine, they may have produced the likes of Herve This, August Escoffier- ‘the king of chefs and the chef of kings’, and Joel Robuchon – widely considered as the greatest of all French chefs, but we in England, in a small village called Bray have taken their prized snail and have converted it into a snail porridge. The magnificence of this dish is in its deliberately bizarre and unappealing name as it becomes triumphed and conquered by the experience of eating it. I am aware that I’m ranting. I am only an Englishmen who is eager to boast about, and to support, the food of this country. So too are nearly all of us. But it is just more costly to do so as we now find ourselves swamped by the collapse of our economy. As much as we would like to buy that cut of Gammon reared in the English midlands, our wallets simply point us instead, as shameful as it is, to that lump of ‘meat’, the label which says ‘Gammon’ merely disguising the contents of China’s bins in its clear up of Beijing in preparation for the 2008 Olympics, bins from which barks could not too long ago be heard and paws seen poking out of the top. The point is, therefore, that it is just too expensive for many to support locally sourced food even if they would ideally like to.
Archie’s article will also be published in the up and coming edition of the Foodservice Footprint journal. Well done Archie, box of organic vegetable sourced from North Dorset coming your way. We look forward to hearing more from you!
How local is LOCAL? And who really means it?
Read this very interesting blog published on The Guardian’s site yesterday. It reflects our views at FF entirely and underlines what we have been arguing for years.
Although it is retail focused, I feel the same applies to much of the foodservice industry. Even those with sophisticated green mandates and CSR policies seem to take localism very seriously from a marketing point of view but how local is LOCAL? We are clearly abusing the word local as merely being from ‘Britain’ is simply not true to the definition of the word.
Manifest to the, shall we say, flakeyness of Corporate ecological consciousness was an article published in The Times on the 12th of April stating that firms have moved away from Carbon Off-Setting as a result of the recession:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6078141.ece
This, once the scheme to be involved in, has proven somewhat fickle, it seems. One thing, I would argue is happening is that the men are starting to emerge from the boys! Who is really serious about making a difference!
UK policy mechanisms deterring investment in environmental technologies
The concept of climate change is not new. The fundamental notion on which the idea is based, the greenhouse effect, was first discovered in 1827. Despite our long-standing knowledge of the potential climate change problem, the need for climate change mitigation is more important than ever, not only for our own future but also for the benefit of future generations.
The fact that we are already beginning to see examples of the effect of climate change on our natural environment today reinforces the urgency and magnitude of the problem. Some examples of the effects we have already noticed include a reduction in arctic sea ice, rising sea levels, melting of glaciers and permafrost and droughts in sub-Saharan Africa leading to conflict.
Environmental challenges are a spur to innovation and potentially the solution to the economic downturn. However, UK has to develop policies to stay in the forefront.
Mr Sippitt proclaims that the issue underpinning the climate change problem is energy:
“It is the root cause that has resulted in today’s circumstances due to our reliance on fossil fuels since the industrial revolution and it is vital to turn to renewable energy as much as possible and invest in low-carbon technologies. However, our experiences through managing The EIC Environmental Investment Network, unambiguously suggest that current climate change policy in the context of environmental technologies is ineffective, both domestically here in the UK as well as at the European level.”
The clean technology sector seems to be experiencing a global funding gap, especially in the midst of the current recession and this problem seems to be particularly acute in the UK. Firms are finding inadequate responses from government in providing the necessary support needed for commercialisation and dissemination of their technologies. This is an especially hard pill to swallow as many countries around the world begin to implement significant economic stimuli simultaneously geared to kick start the environmental revolution.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that $22 trillion will need to be invested in energy supply infrastructure between 2006 and 2030 ($900 billion annually); this figure does not include necessary expenditures on demand-side technology improvements which are estimated to be in the trillions of dollars.
However, Mr Sippitt attributes the main factor deterring investors as the lack of stable long term policy mechanisms that enable them to reduce the risk of their investment. “As this is a relatively nascent sector, investors are aware that the time frame for the potential return on investment may be longer than other nascent sectors have been in the past (e.g. IT). Although not always the case, certain aspects of the sector may require significant amounts of initial investment. Currently, most policy mechanisms implemented in the UKand the EU consider the short to medium term time frame. The long term policy requirement from investors goes hand in hand with the long term requirements for effective climate change mitigation, especially considering that the effects of climate change will continue even if all emissions were to cease today.”
Mr Sippitt identified examples such as the $80-85 billion proposed by the USA and $38 billion in Korea to clarify this comparison. “The Environmental Audit Committee has just reported that the UK’s green stimulus package at £535 million is meagre, especially considering that only approximately £100 million of the package is actually newly pledged money – the rest is money that was simply brought forward from future budgets he quoted from the report.”
The addition of fresh capital to aid commercialisation of new environmental technologies will not only aid in mitigating climate change but also aid in mitigating the recession and securing a future in the sector for the UK by allowing the UK’s natural advantages and skills to be exploited (e.g. Wave/tidal and CCS). Inaction in the past resulted in industries such as wind and photovoltaics being successfully developed in other countries (e.g. Solar in Germany and wind in Denmark, Spain and Germany), who are now market leaders in these fields.
According to the Department of Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR), the Global market in low carbon and environmental goods and services sector is worth £3 trillion as of March 2009. In comparison, the UK market was worth £106.5 billion in 2007/8, representing a market share of 3.5%. An increased share of even 0.1% would be worth £3 billion to the UK.
The UK is ideally placed to export expertise and technology within the environmental sector. The global economy is seeking world leaders to develop the environmental technology sectors and overcome the impact of climate change for this and future generations. The time to act is now and politicians are key to driving the investment for our entrepreneurs to shine.
For more information please visit http://www.environmentalinvest.com/
Michael Sippitt was speaking to The Consular Association in Wales on “The global and geopolitical issues of climate change.”
Network
The EIC Environmental Investment Network is an investment network designed to facilitate the raising of finance for the commercialisation of environmental technologies and services, specifically for start-up companies, SMEs and academic spin-outs, which have traditionally struggled to attract investment.
Established by leading commercial law firm Clarkslegal LLP and The Environmental Industries Commission (EIC) in 2007, the EIN has received over £300 million of potential investment opportunities covering a range of sectors including renewable energy, automotive, water and waste management.
Very, Very interesting
Footprint Blog 
Double Standards in the On-Trade
Can anybody help answering a burning question that we have?
One would have thought the notion of supplying restaurants with bottles that are either shipped or flown to our shores and then have to be loaded onto lorries and driven to the final destinations, would have involved some form of green consciousness or at least some form ecological mandate?
The water industry, ostensibly in the same logistical sphere, get constant flack and are constantly having to defend themselves by making their environmental policies as transparent as possible. So why, oh why, does the wine trade not follow suit?
Looking at the websites of the main players in the wine trade, no supplier that I came across mentions anything about the environment. Is it me, or is this strange?
A father had four sons: When they left school one went into the City, one into the Clergy, the other joined the Army and poor old Rupert didn’t quite know what to do so he joined the Wine Trade. As vivid as this cliche may be those days have simply gone by.
What has emerged is a global, enlightened industry that is no longer French-centric and is very keen on bringing the idea of wine and all its mystery to the people – effectively decoding the enigma previously only accessible to the privileged. We now have brand managers and on-trade sales managers who understand not only the wines that they are selling but also the intricacies of the markets that they are selling to. The stuffy stereotype wine merchant and sommelier of days of old, does not have a place in the modern day wine trade. And those that once could have been in these ranks are now mature enough to have adapted to the modern business environment. This is why it is so surprising.
Bio-dynamic and organic wine making methods are as ancient as the production of wine itself, yet the branding of these methods is new! I suspect vintners who engage in these methods believe that it produces a better wine and that the environmental sustainability is merely a symptom rather than a cause but should those involved in the logistics of buying and selling wine not follow this example and focus on a positive impact of the environment? Or at least let its customers know that they are aware of a movement?
I would like to know that the wine served at my table in a restaurant has got there by an on-trade supplier that does not consider itself immune to the general cause of environmental consciousness and is addressing points on a greener path.
I am not a tree hugger and I don’t want bio-dynamic and organic wines shoved down my throat but whilst the bottled water industry is taking huge amounts of flack, these arguements are one of foodservice’s great inconsistencies in its quest for a greener industry and I believe that the on-trade’s green integrity needs to be addressed.
This criticism is in many ways directed at those who pay lip-service to green fad’s and will pick holes in perhaps the more obvious areas. But before criticising the usual suspects of the water industry, livestock farming, fisherman etc, maybe these should look at the less obvious areas with equal interest and be more consistent in their criticisms and arguments.