Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T06:43:51.415Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Impact of marketing channels on perceptions of quality of life and profitability for Wisconsin's organic vegetable farmers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 May 2014

Erin Silva ,
Fengxia Dong ,
Paul Mitchell  and
John Hendrickson
Erin Silva*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706, USA.
Fengxia Dong
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706, USA.
Paul Mitchell
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706, USA.
John Hendrickson
Affiliation:
Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706, USA.
*
*Corresponding author: emsilva@wisc.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A recent increase in programs supporting the entry of organic farmers into direct market channels, such as farmers' markets and community-supported agriculture has occurred in the USA. In order to better implement these programs and to design better outreach and educational support activities for direct market farmers, understanding farmers’ perceptions of success in these marketing channels is valuable. To this goal, Wisconsin-certified organic vegetable farmers were surveyed in order to investigate the relationships between farm characteristics, marketing strategies, and farmer's perceptions of their profitability and quality of life. The data collected from this survey indicate that farmers selling into farmers' markets and through community-supported agriculture tend to be more likely to be dissatisfied with their profitability. Conversely, however, the survey data indicated that farmers selling into other markets, particularly wholesale markets and restaurants/institutions, are significantly more likely to be dissatisfied with their quality of life. Thus, it appears that farmers are making trade-offs with respect to entering markets that allow for greater financial rewards but may lead to a lower quality of life. These results point to the potential benefit of outreach efforts to assist farmers to increase their profitability in market channels that also provide a higher quality of life.

Keywords

marketing channelorganic farmingprofitabilityquality of lifeattitudes
Type
Research Papers
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 30 , Issue 5 , October 2015 , pp. 428 - 438
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Organic Trade Association. 2010. Organic food facts. Available at Web site http://www.ota.com/organic/mt/food.html (accessed April 3, 2014).Google Scholar
2 Silva, E.M., Paine, L., Barnidge, M., Carusi, C., and McNair, R. 2012. Organic Agriculture in Wisconsin: 2012 Status Report. Available at Web site http://www.cias.wisc.edu/crops-and-livestock/organic-agriculture-in-wisconsin-2012-status-report/ (accessed February 3, 2014).Google Scholar
3 United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2012. Farmers Markets Growth: 1994–2012. Available at Web site http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/ams.fetchTemplateData.do?template=TemplateS&navID=WholesaleandFarmersMarkets&leftNav=WholesaleandFarmersMarkets&page=WFMFarmersMarketGrowth&description=Farmers%20Market%20Growth&acct=frmrdirmkt (accessed June 21, 2013).Google Scholar
4 United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2009. 2007 Census of Agriculture—State Data. Available at Web site http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Full_Report/Volume_1,_Chapter_2_US_State_Level/st99_2_044_044.pdf (accessed February 5, 2014).Google Scholar
5 USDA-NAL. 2014. Community Food Systems and Civic Agriculture. Available at Web site http://afsic.nal.usda.gov/farms-and-community/community-food-systems-and-civic-agriculture (accessed February 5, 2014).Google Scholar
6 USDA-AMS. 2013. Farmers Markets and Local Food Marketing. Available at Web site http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/fmpp (accessed February 5, 2014).Google Scholar
7 USDA-AMS. 2013. National Organic Program 2013 Organic Certification Cost Share Program. Available at Web site http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/ams.fetchTemplateData.do?template=TemplateQ&leftNav=NationalOrganicProgram&page=NOPCostSharing&description=Organic%20Cost%20Share%20Program (accessed February 3, 2014).Google Scholar
8 Hardesty, S. 2007. Producer Returns in Alternative Marketing Channels. Available at Web site http://sfp.ucdavis.edu/events/07specialty/07hardesty.pdf (accessed February 3, 2014).Google Scholar
9 Ostrom, M. 2007. The contribution of community supported agriculture (CSA) to movements for change in the agri-food system. In Hinrichs, C. and Lyson, T. (eds). Remaking the North American Food System. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NE. p. 99–120.Google Scholar
10 Tegtmeier, E. and Duffy, M. 2005. Community Supported Agriculture in the Midwest United States: A Regional Characterization. Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture, Iowa State University, Ames, IA.Google Scholar
11 LeRoux, M., Schmit, T., Roth, M., and Streeter, D. 2010. Evaluating marketing channel options for small-scale fruit and vegetable producers. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 25:16–23.Google Scholar
12 Morgan, J.Q., Lambe, W., and Freyer, A. 2009. Homegrown responses to economic uncertainty in rural America. Rural Realities 3:16–28.Google Scholar
13 United States Government Printing Office. 2011. Chapter 64—Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching. Available at Web site http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title7/html/USCODE-2011-title7-chap64.htm (accessed February 4, 2014).Google Scholar
14 Meares, A.C. 1997. Making the transition from conventional to sustainable agriculture: Gender, social movement participation, and quality of life on the family farm. Rural Sociology 62(1):21–47.Google Scholar
15 Arbuckle, J.G. Jr and Kast, C. 2012. Quality of life on the agricultural treadmill: Determinants of subjective well-being among Iowa farmers. Journal of Rural Social Sciences 27:84–113.Google Scholar
16 Greene, W. 2012. Econometric Analysis. 7th ed. Prentice–Hall, NJ.Google Scholar
17 StataCorp. 2013. Stata Statistical Software: Release 13. StataCorp LP, College Station, TX.Google Scholar
18 Greene, W. and Hensher, D. 2010. Modeling Ordered Choices: A Primer. 1st ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
19 Hardesty, S. and Leff, P. 2010. Determining marketing costs and returns in alternative marketing channels. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 25:24–34.Google Scholar
20 Molnar, J. 1985. Determinants of subjective well-being among farm operators: Characteristics of the individual and the firm. Rural Sociology 50:141–162.Google Scholar
21 Diener, E. and Ryan, K. 2009. Subjective well-being: A general overview. South African Journal of Psychology 39(4):391–406.Google Scholar
22 Coughenour, C.M. and Swanson, L. 1992. Determinants of farmers' satisfactions with farming and with life: A replication and extension. Southern Rural Sociology 9:45–70.Google Scholar
23 Rickson, R.E., Saffigna, P., and Sanders, R. 1999. Farm work satisfaction and acceptance of sustainability goals by Australian organic and conventional farmers. Rural Sociology 64(2):266–283.Google Scholar
24 Schwarzweller, H. and Davidson, A.P. 1997. Perspectives on regional and enterprise marginality: Dairying in Michigan's North Country. Rural Sociology 62:157–179.Google Scholar