Search

Food system sustainability, and ways of measuring it, are widely explored and discussed in academic literature. Measurement efforts are challenging because food systems are inherently complex and multifaceted, spanning diverse components, indus­tries, sectors, and scales. Several systems of indica­tors and metrics have been proposed to measure sustainability; however, most existing research focuses either on narrow scales (e.g., farm level or within a single supply chain), expansive scales that can gloss over complexity (e.g., national or global assessments), or limited scopes (e.g., only consider­ing environmental factors). A gap in the literature is a holistic local or regional approach to food sys­tem sustainability that integrates components across the system at a regional scale. In this reflec­tive essay, we describe our development of a framework to measure and track sustainability in such systems. We use a tiered framework that includes five sustainability dimensions and a system of indices, indicators, and metrics that allows for the measurement of important food system charac­teristics in a feasible and reproducible way. We employ a collaborative, transdisciplinary, facilitated team science process to first propose, and then refine, a sustainability assessment framework, using the U.S. state of Vermont as a case study. This paper details our process and progress, as well as reflections on challenges and recommendations for other team scientists. We further propose a plan to implement the framework, collect data, and engage with community members. The experiences and findings described here serve as a foundation for our own team’s continued work, as well as a springboard for other similar research efforts.

Agritourism is growing worldwide as farmers and ranchers seek alternative sources of revenue, and consumer demand for agricultural experiences is on the rise. Understanding this sector is important for policymakers, researchers, agricultural service providers, and others seeking to support farm viability and rural entrepreneurship. However, in the U.S., this support is hampered by the lack of a clear definition and consistent, comprehensive means for measuring the agritourism sector. The best available data for the U.S. are from the quinquennial U.S. Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA NASS)’s Census of Agriculture. However, the two questions used by the Census of Agriculture that relate to agritourism are worded in ways that limit a comprehensive understanding of the size and scope of the sector. To illustrate the limitations, we highlight cases from two U.S. states (Texas and Vermont), where different forms of agritourism are present. One such form, hunting, is included in the USDA’s economic assessments of agritourism; another, pick-your-own berries, is not. Along with tastings and purchases of locally grown products, this falls in the category of direct sales. The discrep­ancy can result in misrepresentation and misinter­pretation of the data in analyses and subsequent publications with distorted policy recommenda­tions related to agritourism. We discuss these cases alongside recommendations on how to more accurately measure, and support, agritourism development in the U.S.

The COVID-19 pandemic tested the resilience of food system actors at all levels and across all geog­ra­phies. This study focuses on the experience of Vermont local food businesses by combining two surveys conducted in the first half of 2021: one of foodservice operations that procure food locally and one of Vermont farms that sell directly to con­sumers. We analyzed descriptive statistics, open responses, and conducted Kruskal-Wallis rank sum tests to assess which factors were related to busi­nesses’ financial statuses before and since the pan­demic. Pre-pandemic financial status was related with business type, whether the business went on to receive emergency funds, and financial status since the pandemic. The only significant factor for financial status since the pandemic was prepan­demic financial status. We close with recommen­dations for policy and future research.

Agritourism has become a popular pursuit for farms and ranches in the United States, aiming to diversify revenue sources and meet agricultural edu­cation and community-building goals. How­ever, there has been limited research around the challenges experienced by operators and limited access to resources that can help address these chal­lenges. This article fills that gap in knowledge by examining the challenges agritourism opera­tions currently face in the Northeast, Midwest, South, and West regions of the U.S. In this study, we use a mixed-methods approach to the Five Dimen­sions of Access framework developed by Penchansky and Thomas (1981). We opera­tionalize their model in an ordinal probit regression to analyze data from a national survey of agritourism operators, analyzed by region. Results from the quantitative analysis are sub­stantiated using qualitative, open-ended comments from the same survey. The analyses show that agritourism operators encounter different challenges according to their region. We find that operators in most regions of the United States are concerned about agritourism liability. However, states in the West region experience more chal­lenges with regulations, zoning, and permitting, while operators in the South have more problems with e-connectivity. These results can be applied in three ways: support services for agritourism, policy and regulations, and future research.

University faculty and staff regularly participate in academic conferences as part of their professional responsibilities, yet the literature on their value is scarce, especially when examining conferences held jointly by two associations. Research is needed to help association leaders, planning committees, and attendees make informed decisions about conference organization and participation. This paper highlights the benefits and challenges of a jointly held academic conference for participants, association leaders, and organizational liaisons. In June of 2016, two Cooperative Extension associations, the National Association of Community Development Extension Professionals (NACDEP) and the Association of Natural Resource Extension Professionals (ANREP), jointly held a conference in Burlington, VT. Surveys were administered to conference participants, planning committee members, and liaisons at the United States Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) to collect data immediately following the conference and six months later. Using the Community Capitals Framework (CCF) to organize evaluation results, the authors discuss the benefits and challenges of planning, sponsoring, and attending the conference from the perspectives of these different groups. The authors focus on three community capitals: human capital, social capital, and cultural capital. Based on the findings, they offer recommendations for future evaluation of jointly held academic conferences.

Owners of small- and medium-sized farms are increasingly interested in engaging in agritourism and direct sales in order to increase income, provide family employment, and educate the public about agriculture, among other reasons. Prior research on agritourism operator motivations largely focuses on economic goals and benefits, while acknowledging the strong influence of non-economic factors. However, more research is needed to better understand the nuances and breadth of non-economic motivations underlying agritourism operator decisions. In addition, research on U.S. agritourism tends to be at the state level, which raises questions about overall national trends and inter-study comparability. To address these gaps, we analyzed transcripts from semistructured interviews with small- and medium-sized farm owners engaged in agritourism from five states across the U.S. We examined the results through the theoretical lens of Allport’s “contact hypothesis” in order to further understand how agritourism helps operators meet stated goals. Our results suggest that consistent with previous literature, nonmonetary motivations are high priorities for farmers engaged in agritourism. In particular, motivations related to community engagement/leadership and quality-of-life emerged as forceful and reoccurring themes. We found that although Allport’s contact hypothesis holds some important explanatory power for understanding agritourism operators’ community-related goals—including reducing prejudice and increasing understanding between farmers and consumers in relation to agriculture—increased inter-group contact also has potential to create new conflicts between farmers and neighbors related to tourism. These findings have important implications for future research as well as for policies and programs aimed at supporting agritourism.

This commentary identifies the variability in definitions of agritourism that exists in a variety of different countries, discusses reasons why this variability might produce problems, and provides examples of efforts to harmonize these definitions, including an ongoing international dialogue on the topic.

The Farm Fresh Food Box (F3B) project is a mar­ket innovation that aims to capitalize on successful characteristics of direct-to-consumer (DTC), values-based supply chains (VBSCs), and tradi­tional supply chains with the goals of expand­ing producer sales and improving rural food access. In the F3B model, farmers sell boxes of fresh pro­duce in rural retail outlets to bring food to custo­mers with limited access to locally grown foods. We present pilot findings on indicators of relation­ship quality, communication of embedded value, and food environment, and compare these with extant research to assess whether F3B behaves like a DTC, VBSC, a traditional supply chain, or some­thing else entirely. Unlike much of the previous value-chain research, this work places a unique emphasis on the importance of the farmer-retailer relationship. We merge existing knowledge of DTC strategies and barriers with those of VBSCs and traditional supply chains to understand better the process of expanding into new outlets and con­sumer populations. We find that while the F3B model reduces some resource constraints, it adds a layer of complexity that requires time and expertise to develop a quality relationship between producers and retailers. Additionally, it is apparent that the F3B model must be tailored to fit local contexts of farmers and retailers participating in F3B market innovations.

First paragraph: The U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service’s Food Expenditures by Outlet data provide insight as to why the lockdowns related to COVID-19 have been so devastating for U.S. farmers. In 2018, American consumers bought a total of $628bn[1] worth of food, of which $460bn was spent at grocery stores and $168bn at warehouse clubs and supercenters (see Figure 1 and Table 1). But expenditures on food away from home exceeded that amount: $680bn was spent at restau­rants, $337.8bn at full-service restaurants and $340.2bn at limited-service restaurants.[2] The social distancing and stay-at-home orders related to the COVID-19 pandemic have forced many restaurants to close and those remaining in business to switch to pick-up or delivery only options. Because restaurant supply chains are highly specialized and time sensitive, reallocation of these supply chains has not come quickly enough to accommodate the shifts in consumption toward at-home eating patterns. . . . [1] All amounts are in U.S. dollars. [2] Not all of this represents the value of agricultural products; a large share of this is value-added in the form of rents and wages.

First paragraph: Our food system has been disrupted. Shopping at a grocery store during the COVID-19 pan­demic is not a pleasant experience, and, for some of the most vulnerable, it can be outright dangerous. It may become worse. How long will supply chain disruptions continue and what are upcoming challenges? From illness in the fields where agricultural workers pick our food and the closing of food processing facilities to the threat that trucking lanes may be shut down, the possibilities seem real right now. . . .

First paragraphs: I was packing my suitcase to fly to Italy for the 1st World Congress on Agritourism when a large brown envelope showed up in my mailbox. I rip­ped open the package to find Susan L. Slocum and Kynda R. Curtis’s new textbook, Food and Agricul­tural Tourism: Theory and Best Practice. Perfect reading for my flight to Europe! Flying over the Atlantic Ocean, I flipped through the book and was immediately drawn in by the colorful case studies of food tourism around the world. The study questions for students had me hooked: How would you define authentic food from your area? How does globalization lead to specialization in agricultural production? What does “rice for life” mean? How can the Rattlesnake Hills Wine Trail enhance the visitor experience? . . .

The production of maple syrup is an important cultural and economic activity directly related to the climate of northeastern North America. As a result, there are signs that climate change could have negative impacts on maple syrup production in the next decades, particularly for regions located at the southern margins of the sugar maple (Acer saccharum Marsh.) range. The purpose of this survey study is to present the beliefs and opinions of maple syrup producers of Canada (N = 241) and the U.S. (N = 113) on climate change in general, its impacts on sugar maple health and maple syrup production, and potential adaptation measures. Using conditional inference classification trees, we examined how the socio-economic profile of respondents and the geographic location and size of respondents' sugar bushes shaped the responses of survey participants. While a majority (75%) of respondents are confident that the average temperature on Earth is increasing, less than half (46%) believe that climate change will have negative impacts on maple syrup yield in the next 30 years. Political view was a significant predictor of these results, with respondents at the right right and center-right of the political spectrum being less likely to believe in climate change and less likely to anticipate negative effects of climate change on maple syrup production. In addition, 77% of the participants indicated an interest in adopting adaptation strategies if those could increase maple syrup production. This interest was greater for respondents using vacuum tubing for sap collection than other collection methods. However, for many respondents (particularly in Canada), lack of information was identified as a constraint limiting adaptation to climate change.

Maple production is an important part of local food systems in the Northeastern U.S. and Canada, where producers rely on maple as a source of income and as the basis for longstanding family and community traditions. Like many other sectors of the food system, maple production is vulnerable to climate change because of its potential impacts on forest type, tree health and vigor, and timing of sap flow. Since maple producers depend on the health of sugar maples for their livelihood and cultural traditions, adapting to changes in maple production will likely be necessary in the future and will require planning. The goal of this study is to assess the perceptions of maple producers and engage them in the development of strategies for adapting to the potential impacts of climate change. The mixed methods research approach for this study included interviews and a survey of maple producers in the Northern Forest region of New York and Vermont. Results indicate that more than half of the maple producers who responded to the survey expressed concerns about climate change, and more than two-thirds had already made or were planning to make modifica­tions to their businesses. Two factors that were identified as most important to respondents when assessing adaptability to climate change are resili­ency of the maple producers’ sugar bush and the producers’ ability to adopt new technologies. These findings are not just relevant for maple production; they have important implications for climate change adaptation of food systems.