“The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a previous ruling that found organic growers had no reason to try to block Monsanto from suing them as the company had pledged it would not take them to court if biotech crops accidentally mix in with organics.”
sure a “pledge” should be fine; why worry?
Organic growers lose decision in suit versus Monsanto over seeds | Reuters.
Gave this presentation recently to the University of Virginia Morven Institute’s “Farmers Markets and Applied Food Systems Research” course. Slideshow
Here is more on this exciting summer course that I am thrilled to be associated:
More quotes and odds and ends from the Nutrition Assistance Project Report. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Office of Research and Analysis, Nutrition Assistance in Farmers Markets: Understanding Current Operations by Sujata Dixit-Joshi et al. April 2013.
I hope this is helpful to those readers that don’t have the time to read 799 pages!
Here is a link to my original post about this report
———————————————————————————–
Stated purpose of project:
“To seek innovative ways to increase SNAP participants access to farmers markets (fms) and direct marketing farmers (dmf)”
Questions being asked in this project:
1. What are the characteristics of fms and dmfs and do they vary by SNAP authorization status?
2. What procedures are being used to add SNAP programs at fms and dmfs?
3. What is the nature of incentive programs?
4. What organizations serve fms and dmfs?
Three studies to be done in next few years:
FM Operations (was completed 2013)
FM Client Survey
Orgs administering SNAP at FMs Survey
—————————————————————————————
Details from FM Ops study:
2 phases of Operations study:
1. Nine markets were interviewed in depth, selected by FNS based on regions and demographic of poverty level in area.
2. 1682 farmers markets and 570 direct marketing farmers were surveyed between January and May 2012, Organized in 4 study strata:
Stratum 1: Snap authorized FMs and DMFs with redemptions from July 1, 2010- August 31, 2011
Stratum 2: SNAP authorized FMs and DMFs with no redemptions from July 1, 2010-August 31, 2011
Stratum 3: SNAP authorized FMs with redemptions from July 1, 2007- August 31, 2010 but none since in 2011. (FNS did not track DMFs separately before 2010.)
Stratum 4: Never SNAP authorized
————————————————–
3.9 Farmers Markets Operating Budget
“In CY 2011, farmers markets relied on multiple funding sources for their operating budget. A vast majority of the markets depended on vendor fees: only 10 percent of the markets did not collect any vendor fees. Sponsorship from business organizations (28.7%), fundraising events (24.7%), and government organizations were also important sources of funding for the markets’ operating budgets. About 10 percent of the markets received funding from State government.
About 76 percent of the farmers markets charged the vendors a flat fee. Among the farmers markets that charged vendors a flat fee, almost one-half implemented a flat fee per season while about 40 percent implemented a flat fee per market day. Fewer than 10 percent of the markets assessed vendor fees as a percentage of sales, and less than 2 percent charged vendors based on the size of their rental space.”
5.3.1 Type and Characteristics of Outlet Where Direct Marketing Farmers Reported the Most SNAP Sales
“In CY 2011, a majority of the direct marketing farmers selected farmers markets as the outlet where they had the most SNAP sales.
… data suggest that direct marketing farmers who had prior certification may discontinue SNAP participation because they sell at outlets where they can use the market’s authorization to redeem SNAP. A sizeable majority of the direct marketing farmers in all three strata used their own authorization to redeem SNAP benefits at the outlet (Table 5-12).
In all three strata, receiving retail value of products was cited by 54 percent of the respondents in strata 2 and 44 percent of respondents in Stratum 1 (as reason for using the direct marketing outlets). About one-third of the direct marketing farmers in Strata 1 and 2 indicated that convenience was the most important driver for selling products at the outlet. A few reasons included location of the market (proximity to the farm, busy area, etc.); high volume of customers, particularly SNAP, WICFMNP and SFMNP customers; role in starting or operating the market, and to serve the local community.”
———————————————————————————–
Details of benefit programs at market (fms) and with direct marketing farmers (dmfs):
In 2009, 18% of the markets had access to card processing; by 2011, it was 35% (Briggs et al)
In 2011, 71.8 billion was redeemed in SNAP benefits and 11.7 million at farmers markets which is .016%
Markets with no incentive program had an average of $867 per season in SNAP sales and those with incentives averaged $2587 per season (p38)
(Expect more to come on this blog from this report….)
I often have discussions with people about the term public markets, I assume partly because it is on my business card! I wanted to share these two market definitions: the first done by Project for Public Spaces and the second, by the Farmers Market Coalition:
1. A public market is a public and recurring assembly of vendors marketing directly to consumers, engineered by a neutral regime.
• have public goals;
• are located in the community and/or create a public space in the community; and
• are locally owned, independent businesses.
————————————————————————–
2. A farmers market operates multiple times per year and is organized for the purpose of facilitating personal connections that create mutual benefits for local farmers, shoppers and communities. To fulfill that objective farmers markets define the term local, regularly communicate that definition to the public, and implement rules/guidelines of operation that ensure that the farmers market consists principally of farms selling directly to the public products that the farms have produced.
————————————————————————–
What is interesting to me about these two descriptions is that the public market definition may not encompass all farmers markets, since a “neutral regime” may not always be found, nor is the concept of public goals (transparency if you will) expressly outlined in the farmers market version.
Conversely, the farmers market definition explicitly defines the “principal” role of farmers selling products produced from their farms while the public market definition does not stress product origin.
Both assume that the market will define what local means, both mention direct sales and stress the concept of recurring.
What would you add or change? Does one seem more appropriate to you?
Is there a need for more markets definitions or for less? Do stakeholders within your region agree on the definition of a market?
Is this where typology could be most helpful, especially within a region with many markets?
I’d love to hear people’s opinions on these definitions and whether these seem accurate or relevant for their own regional definition.
Each year the Crescent City Farmers Market selects a local food hero to feature on wooden tokens that may be purchased at the market welcome tent using credit or debit cards, then spent with vendors at the market. Other local food heroes memorialized on CCFM tokens include Commander Palace Chef Jamie Shannon (1961-2001), Mississippi farmer and CCFM vendor James “Billy Corn” Burkett (1928-1995) and cooking school pioneer Lee Barnes (1951-1992) and Eula Mae Doré (1929-2008).
2013’s token honors Jim Core, who passed away during 2012 after a long illness. His wife Gladys and grandson A.J. continue to run the family market business, assisted by sister-in-law Gay. The Cores are anchor vendors at both the Crescent City Farmers Market and the Covington Farmers Market.
Gladys Core, Jim’s widow and herself a mainstay at the markets for their farm’s many years as anchor vendors.
Jim Core, LA farmer honored on 2013 CCFM token
Well done critique of the food politics that we currently live and die with. Yes instead of encouraging “fencerow to fencerow” agriculture (even for seemingly well meaning reasons), we need to assess our true needs and grow the proper food accordingly and grow it well with less inputs and environmental destruction in every succeeding generation. And instead of running into each other over middling legislative issues, we need a movement of big ideas like food sovereignty and human rights to push fairness for all that allows everyone to chime in as needed and to allow us to move past crisis campaigning. When, for example, will the US food organizers work side by side with the rest of the world’s organizers? When will we embrace true import-replacement strategies? When will all pieces of the food chain be valued?
Farm Bill Fiasco: What is Next for the Food Movement?”, a Food First Spring Backgrounder
By Christopher Cook
Deciding how America will nourish itself and sustain its farms would seem a top policy priority— yet as the US Farm Bill demonstrates, sustainably grown, healthy food and livable incomes for farmers and workers remain an afterthought in a process controlled almost entirely by agribusiness and a handful of farm-state legislators. Despite strong public opinion supporting local food, farmer’s markets, organic agriculture, food workers’ rights and access to fresh produce, agribusiness and commodity interests continue to dominate food and farming policy.
That’s largely due to their prodigious lobbying clout: agribusiness spent $137 million last year muscling Congress to do its bidding and another $46.6 million on federal candidates (about 60 percent Republican) in 2010. This phalanx of power includes commodity producer groups like the American Corn Growers Association; corporate food processors and purveyors such as Kraft and Dean Foods; the Farm Bureau; dairy and meat industry giants; and seed and petrochemical corporations like Monsanto.
On the other side, armed with ideas and passion but little money, stand hundreds of groups from across the US pressing Congress on an array of policies—including commodity subsidy reform, fair prices for farmers, public monies for local foods and small farmers, and conservation and nutrition funding. With a handful of lobbyists and diverse interests, they fight doggedly for small wedges of the Farm Bill pie.
But is the Farm Bill a productive venue for food movements to make meaningful change in food and farming policy?
…Seers, contrarians, architects, mentors , connectors, bushwalkers, guardians, citizens….
Which are you?
And what about those others in your organization and market?
http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2013/05/how_to_lead_when_youre_not_in.html
Food Tank, one of my favorite new think tanks, is highlighting organizations worldwide doing good work. It’s a good list, although a bit of a surprise what is here and what is not…
http://foodtank.org/news/2013/05/forty-organizations-that-are-shaking-up-the-food-system
This week, the full Senate will take up the Farm Bill and $4.1 billion in cuts to SNAP are included.
You can join advocates in opposing these cuts here:
http://www.phi.org/policy-advocacy/take-action-oppose-cuts-to-snap-and-snap-ed/
Why not adapt this style for current farmers market initiatives?
WW 2 Victory Garden poster
If the market only speaks with its supporters, then it runs the risk of arming its detractors.
Richard McCarthy, MarketUmbrella founder and its E.D. for 18 years, now Slow Food USA Executive Director
Helping Farmers Markets Grow 