Farmers Markets - University of California Small Farm Program - UC ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

SMALL FARM NEWS VOLUME III 2002Farmers Markets – FROM PAGE 1While California has experienced tremendousgrowth in the direct marketingof farm products, the per farm figures forRhode Island and Massachusetts point toeven greater possibilities for direct marketingof California farm products.Policy and Institutional SupportThe bulk of the credit for farmersmarkets as a marketing innovation shouldaccrue to those farmers and consumeradvocates who initiated policy and institutionalchanges that opened the way.Legislative members in some cases had tobend the rules regarding areas such asstandard packs, and we know how difficultit can be to turn the battleship even afew degrees. Nonetheless, in Californiaand elsewhere, legislation gave legal statusto farmers markets while codifying theterms and conditions for certification.These conditions include who can sellproduce at a farmers market, and the prohibitionsregarding resale of produce.More recently, certification has come torequire inspections of production plots tocertify that farmers actually grow or arecapable of producing what they sell.Early on, in the late 1970s and early1980s, the California Department of Foodand Agriculture (CDFA) deployed a cadreof staff to provide technical assistance tobeginning markets and to oversee marketgrowth and performance. Fiscal constraintshave reduced the ability of CDFAto offer the same level of technical assistanceit earlier afforded, although it stillmaintains ultimate responsibility for administrativeand legal enforcement ofregulations. The CDFA delegates manyenforcement responsibilities to the countybased agricultural commissioners.By the 1990s, the farmers marketphenomenon was no longer regarded asa sideshow, an indulgence of elite foodconscious yuppies. For thousands of familyscale farmers, it had become the mainevent. USDA began to take notice of theexistence of farmers markets and theircontributions to farm income, and consumerdemand for farm fresh foods and a‘high-touch’ relationship to their foodsources. Former USDA Secretary DanGlickman launched farmers markets outsidethe USDA building in Washington,and he and former Deputy Secretary RichardRominger participated in many highprofile publicity events to highlight andprofile farmers markets and to move themmore into the mainstream of the foodmarketing system.USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Servicebegan to allocate more effort awayfrom their traditional emphasis on brickand mortar markets and towards farmersmarkets. USDA sponsored farmers marketconferences in various parts of thecountry, such as one in Santa Fe, NewMexico. USDA also cooperated withCornell University in a project that usedfocus groups to identify issues and needsof farmers market stakeholders in 10Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states. Theyalso sponsored a session held in conjunctionwith the North American Farm DirectMarketing Association conference inGrand Rapids, Michigan, in January 2000.USDA also has set up the FarmersMarket Hotline with an 800 number (1-800-384-8704) that provides logisticalinformation on markets, and has producedthe National Directory of FarmersMarkets in 1996 and 1998. The agencyalso has conducted periodic surveys offarmers markets, and is involved in a cooperativeagreement with the UC SmallFarm Center to produce a farmers marketprofessional development trainingprogram.Patronage of MarketsCustomer demographics at farmersmarkets indicate a predominantly highincome, highly educated, and not veryethnically diverse clientele. In his studyof 21 farmers markets in San DiegoCounty in 1998, Small Farm ProgramFarm Advisor Ramiro Lobo found the followingwith regards to customer demographicpatterns: 76 percent were female;88 percent were more than 36 years old;56 percent had at least a four year collegedegree; 82 percent identified themselvesas white; 24 percent earned less than$40,000; 30 percent earned between$40,000 and $60,000; 35 percent earnedmore than $80,000; and 14 percent earnedmore than $100,000.Rutgers University extension specialistRamu Govindasamy’s 1998 New Jerseystudy found that 84 percent of farmersmarket consumers identified themselvesas white; 88 percent were older than36 years; and 54 percent were older than51 years. Similarly to the Lobo San Diegostudy, the New Jersey study indicated that83 percent were women, but 68 percenthad no children living in the household.Regarding educational level, 62 percenthad a college degree, and 55 percent hadhousehold incomes of more than $60,000.Another 24 percent earned between$40,000 and $60,000, and 21 percent hadincomes less than $40,000.In his 2000 national survey, EconomistTim Payne of the USDA AgriculturalMarketing Service found that customersspent an average of $17.30 per week inthe national survey compared with $19.25in the San Diego survey and $16 in theNew Jersey survey. Payne notes that twothirdsof customers live within 10 milesof the market and are motivated to buylocal products.Impacts on VendorsGovindasamy’s study of producers atNew Jersey’s farmers markets was basedon a relatively small sample of 36. Nonetheless,the results suggest the potentialfor enhancing sales of family farms. A reported43 percent sold over $100,000, and39 percent sold less than $15,000. Farmersutilized other marketing channels aswell. For 40 percent of the farmers, salesfrom farmers markets provided 20 percentor less of their incomes; 30 percent earnedfrom 25 – 40 percent of their income; and34 percent (approximately one-third)from 50 – 100 percent of their income.Growing PainsAs with organic foods, farmers marketshave become a trendy, hip thing, andas with organic foods, the trendy, hip thingis fraught with potential problems.4
VOLUME III 2002SMALL FARM NEWSWhereas the original motive for certifiedfarmers markets was to enhance the performanceof small farmer marketing byproviding a direct avenue to consumers,motivations for starting a farmers markethave become much more diverse.For example, agencies involved inurban redevelopment see farmers marketsas another tool to revitalize central cities;food security advocates see them as amethod of providing low income householdswith access to farm-fresh, nutritiousfoods, and innovative entrepreneurs seethese markets as a profit making opportunity,and some are not certified farmersmarkets. The blurring of purpose can leadto a disjunction between the welfare offarmers and the interests of the market’ssponsors or operators. Even in the caseof certified farmers markets, which predominatein California,there is evidence thatthe interests of marketmanagement and interestsof small familyscale farmers are not alwaysin total alignment.Thus, a significantemerging challengeis the clarificationof the purposes offarmers markets andthe optimization of theinterests of family scalefarmers, consumers,communities and marketmanagement.In his 2000 national survey, Paynefound that 63 percent of farmers marketshad vendor-operated boards of directors;18 percent were operated by governmentorganizations, and 42 percent were runby non-profits.In another study by Govindasamy inNew Jersey, 4 percent of a sample of 24market managers or operators reportedthat they were self-employed, 37.5 percentwere employed by a city, townshipor county; 29.2 percent were employedby markets, chambers of commerce ornon-profits; and 29 percent were volunteers.A vendor rearranges fruit at aCalifornia farmers market.With this diversity in structure, purposeand governance, one would reasonablyexpect that the performance of marketswould be quite variable. In the NewJersey study, 83 percent of managers whoresponded to the study had no farmingexperience. This might lead to the disjunctionwe alluded to earlier between theinterests of management and the interestof farmers.The Issue of IntegrityFarmers markets, particularly “certified”farmers markets, present a set ofproduct attributes to customers that goesbeyond the produce per se. Farmers marketspurport to sell farm-direct products,with exceptions for some non-farm productsallowed into the market. The datafrom consumer surveys indicates that consumersperceive the farmdirectproducts as denotingfreshness and quality. Moreover,many consumers wantto support family farmers.But enforcement of thisdictum of farm producedproducts sold by farmers isproving problematic, andthe issue of market integrityhas consumed substantialenergy, and generated muchanguish amongst marketmanagers, farmers, vendors,agricultural commissionersand CDFA. In California, farmers musthave their production certified and shouldhave a list of products on their certificate.They are allowed to sell products on behalfof one other certified producer. Butthere is much talk, if not documentation,of vendors reselling products not producedon their farms.CDFA has proposed a schedule ofpenalties for various violations, with finesranging from $50 for minor infractionsto $1,000 for more serious ones. But theability to enforce these regulations is inquestion. Agricultural commissioners,who comprise the second line of defenseafter market managers, have a substantialworkload, and farmers markets areonly one component of their responsibilities.And an increased level of administrativefatigue appears to be emerging.To the extent that farm-direct is a keyattribute for consumers to patronize farmersmarkets, and to the extent that directmarketing is a key method of improvingthe performance of family scale farms, theissue of reselling is not trivial and continuesto warrant concentrated attention.Given the administrative constraints derivingfrom budgetary and resource limits,markets will have to develop supplementarymeans of maintaining marketintegrity. This will require a more cohesiveand coordinated strategy amongst theseveral hundred markets in California.The Southland Farmers MarketAssociation’s Code of Ethics provides atemplate for self-governance as a complementto the CDFA enforcement system.Southland’s Value Statement also clearlyoutlines what consumers can expect anddemand from their member markets, andin turn, what farmer-vendors and communitiescan expect from Southland markets.ProspectsThere clearly is a valued niche forfarmers markets in the food distributionsystem, as indicated by the robust rate ofgrowth during the past 20 years, and inthe equally impressive geographic spreadacross the urban and rural landscape.Consumers identify farmers markets witha number of positive attributes. In fact,large numbers of supermarkets have developedproduce merchandising systemsthat mimic, to the extent possible, farmersmarkets. But with growth comes challenges.The farmers market system hasreached a level that demands higher levelsof management, greater coordinationand more effective governance. Some ofthe spontaneity may be lost in this process,but what may be gained issustainability and high levels of customersatisfaction. One would have to judge theprospects for continued growth as bright,providing that the challenges are met in atimely, forthright manner.5
Page 1 and 2: Small Farm NewsVOLUME III2002SMALL
Page 3: VOLUME III 2002SMALL FARM NEWSprogr
Page 7 and 8: VOLUME III 2002SMALL FARM NEWScal f
Page 9 and 10: VOLUME III 2002SMALL FARM NEWSFood
Page 11 and 12: VOLUME III 2002SMALL FARM NEWScalen

Farmers Markets - University of California Small Farm Program - UC ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?