Progress 02/01/11 to 01/31/14
Outputs
Target Audience: In the final year of the project our efforts reached the following target audiences: Northern Idaho and eastern Washington Livestock producers, processors, and other partners—224 stakeholders in the study region who signed up to receive email project updates. The Greater Palouse Meat Producer Group (GMPM)—a five member committee that formed as an outcome of the project. The GMPM describes themselves as a group of local people dedicated to establishing a USDA-inspected facility that will serve local livestock producers and consumers in northern Idaho and eastern Washington. South Central Idaho Region (eight counties) meat producers who attended a regional slaughter/processing facility planning meeting and workshop in November 2013. Project Hope Director, Joel Williamson. Project Hope is starting a project exploring opportunities to develop USDA-inspected livestock processing in Spokane, WA. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? Several presentations at professional conferences and at workshops about the project were made, helping with professional development. PIs and students also toured livestock production facilities, feedlots, farms, and a rendering plant, which were great training opportunities to understand the distribution system for livestock. PIs hired, trained, and mentored three interns, and worked with several other interns and research assistants over the course of the project, helping them to learn how to interact with project stakeholders, conduct interviews, transcribe, code and analyze the results. Graduate student, William Ridley, learned about the conjoint analysis and also demand estimation. In addition, he learned about all aspects of the research process, including publications. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? Through presentations at conferences and workshops; open forum meetings in multiple locations in the study area; telephone calls with interested parties; quarterly newsletters; a University of Idaho-hosted website; emails to stakeholders who joined our e-mailing list; a publication on the overall project which has been submitted to the Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development; other peer-reviewed journal articles; and a letter sent in 2012 to over 4,000 ranchers in the study area with a link to the website where results can be found. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?
Nothing Reported
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
This project examined increased livestock production/processing for local and regional markets as an economic development strategy in rural areas of N Idaho and E Washington. No substantial, accessible feedlot or USDA-inspected processing infrastructure exists in the area, leading most small producers to sell livestock at auction with few options to participate in higher value markets. We explored USDA-inspected processing options to understand economic feasibility, environmental impacts, and the small-scale livestock production value chain. We did surveys, interviews, stakeholder forums, economic impact analysis, conjoint analysis, and life cycle assessment. Several livestock processing scenarios are socially, economically, and environmentally viable. Findings are relevant to areas with low population densities, large transportation distances, and few processing options. A producer group formed to develop business plan, seek financing and take steps toward implementation of small-scale USDA-inspected processing. 1. perform an economic impact analysis based on processing and selling beef products locally and regionally; Activities: Social accounting matrix model assessed contributions of different economic sectors with focus on agriculture, food processing and beef processing. Data collected: Minnesota IMPLAN Group’s software/data package. Statistics/discussion: Agriculture and food processing constitute about 7.2% (5,579 jobs) of actual employment and 10.1% (8,002) of the employment base. Animal processing is 0.3% (268) of actual employment and 0.7% (585) of base employment. Cattle ranching is 0.3% (252) of region’s employment and 0.2% (180) of its base. Beef consumption in the southern subset of the region is $16 million per year, meat consumption is $57.6 million per year and food consumption is $477.4 million per year. Economic impacts of proposed local processing are small, ranging from 5 to 15 employees. Factoring in multiplier effects they range from 12 to 35 jobs. Economic impact greatest if located in region’s very small towns. Outcomes: Findings are in article (Saul et al, Submitted) and in final report distributed to stakeholders via mailing list/webpage. Producer groups are applying this knowledge. 2. evaluate the effectiveness and producer willingness to participate in different producer co-op strategies; Activities/data collected: 7 forums were held in which 142 producers/processors participated. A regional forum was held where producer working group formed. Conducted 19 interviews and 3 surveys. Statistics/discussions: Key finding: sufficient producer willingness to support development of small-scale livestock processing. Producers’ interest motivated by inadequate USDA-inspected processing; time required to direct market; inadequate income; and mismatch between availability of livestock and unutilized capacity at existing processors. Producers are willing to participate in a processing (93%) or marketing cooperative (88%). Outcomes: Findings available in Saul et al (Submitted) and in report sent to stakeholders. Creation of Greater Palouse Meat Producer group. 3. conduct a life cycle analysis for potential changes in production, processing and marketing to compare environmental consequences; Activities: Compared emissions from 5 small beef operations to conventional livestock production systems (Roop, Shrestha and Saul, 2013). 2nd study assessed emissions from regional livestock system (Roop, Shrestha, Saul, and Newman, in review). Data collected: Net GHG emissions calculated for 5 small operations. 2nd study included data for a cow-calf operation, 6 animal feeding operations, and a beef processing operation. Statistics/discussion: Small ranches had mean output of 13.78 kg CO2e/kg live weight output with a standard error of 1.06 kg CO2e/kg. Compared to large feedlots, small ranches had lower emissions and used less fuel per live weight output. Two system boundaries (SB) used to analyze the regional livestock system: 1 kg live weight beef was used for SB1 and 1 kg packaged beef was used for the SB2. Total emissions from SB1 and SB2 were 10.40±0.48 kg CO2e/kg LW and 18.75±0.86 kg CO2e/kg beef. Regional had slightly lower emissions than small-scale system. Small-scale and regional systems had lower impacts than conventional, national-scale systems (Saul et al, Submitted). Outcomes: Findings available in 3 articles (Roop, Shrestha and Saul, 2013; Saul et al, Submitted; and Roop, Shrestha, Saul, and Newman, in review) and in final report for stakeholders. 4. complete a distribution system analysis for the current and proposed livestock food systems, which includes moving livestock from small farm to finishing, from finishing to processing, and from processing to market outlets. Activities: Processor/producer surveys and interviews. Data collected: GHG data collected for operations in the region and producers, processors and others provided quantitative and qualitative data. Statistics/discussion: Statistics and data were incorporated into other project components. Outcomes: Findings are available in three research articles (Roop, Shrestha and Saul, 2013; Saul et al, Submitted; and Roop, Shrestha, Saul, and Newman, in review). 5. complete a market research analysis to estimate the demand for locally-produced beef, assess consumers' attitudes, determine market size, quantify the market premium, and devise policies through market surveys, estimating beef demand functions, and ascertaining willingness to pay; Activities/Data: Surveyed 342 consumers, conducted conjoint analysis to examine how locality of production, production method, and price of beef and beef products influenced purchasing preferences. Statistics/discussion: Distance of origin had strongest effect on consumer preference. On average threshold to be considered locally grown was 85 miles. Distance of origin accounted for 60% of total importance of all attributes. Consumers’ preferences for conventionally produced beef are most sensitive to changes in price. Consumers who preferred certified organic and all natural beef were generally willing to pay10% more than conventional beef (Ridley et al. forthcoming). Outcomes: One conference presentation and 2 articles submitted to peer-reviewed journals. 6. develop cost/benefit analyses of each available livestock system configuration; Activities: A cost/benefit analysis completed for 6 livestock system configurations. Undergraduate business students conducted analysis. Data collected: System/operation characteristics, economic impacts, and environmental impacts. Statistics/discussion: Key finding: no single optimal configuration. We identified tradeoffs as items rather than fixed numbers. Region can support more than one solution. There is capacity at small plants but seasonality of birthing cattle leads to a bottleneck. Without custom-exempt processors more livestock would go to industrial food system. A model that connects custom-exempt processors with a retail-exemption license and USDA-inspected mobile slaughter unit offers most flexibility and uses existing capacity to expand availability of local meat in the shorter term while a longer-term solution may be multiple small USDA-inspected plants. Outcomes: Undergraduates involved in data collection and analysis gained skills and knowledge. Results available in upcoming article and incorporated into stakeholder final report. 7. and, develop a model for integrating economic and environmental benefits and impacts. Activities: life cycle and economic analysis were conducted. Data collected: Consumer surveys; qualitative and quantitative data related to system/operation characteristics, economic/environmental impact. Statistics/discussion: Results incorporated into other project components. Outcomes: Combined treatment of economic and environmental impacts presented in Saul et al (Submitted) and explored in article currently in process.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2013
Citation:
Roop, D. J., D. S. Shrestha, D. A. Saul. 2013. Cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of locally produced beef in the Palouse region of the northwestern U.S. Transactions of the ASABE. 56(5):1933-1941.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Under Review
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Roop D. J., D. S. Shrestha, D. A. Saul, S. Newman. Cradle-to-Gate Life Cycle Assessment of Regionally Produced Beef in the Northwestern U.S. Transactions of the ASABE. Submitted for publication in Oct 2013.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Under Review
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Ridley, W., S. Devadoss, and S. Shook, Estimations of Consumer Demand for Local Beef, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, (forthcoming), 2014.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Submitted
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Ridley, W., S. Shook, and S. Devadoss, Evaluations of Consumers Preference Structure for Locally-Produced Beef, Journal of Food Products Marketing, (forthcoming), 2014.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Submitted
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Saul, Darin A., Soren M. Newman, Tracie Lee, Steven Peterson, Stephen Devadoss, Dev S. Shrestha, and Nick Sanyal. Submitted. Increasing prosperity for small farms through sustainable livestock production, processing, and marketing. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2013
Citation:
Ridley, W., S. Devadoss, and S. Shook, Estimations of Consumer Demand for Local Beef, Presented at the International Food Marketing Research Symposium, Budapest, Hungary, June, 2013.
|
Progress 02/01/12 to 01/31/13
Outputs
Target Audience: Project activities addressed a number of audiences. Livestock producers of small and medium-sized operations: 4 producer forums in the second year of the project involved approximately 80 producers in conversations and feedback on their operations, needs, and willingness to participate in cooperative efforts to develop processing infrastructure and other outreach and research objectives. A mix of small and medium-scale livestock producers, agricultural professionals, and economic development professionals: two newsletters, a livestock summit, and presentations at the 2012 WSARE conference in Portland, Inland Northwest Small Farms Conference, Idaho Extension Annual Livestock conference, and a number of smaller venues such as Clearwater RC&D, Latah Economic Development Council, Palouse Food Policy Coalition. Small-scale livestock processors: interviews, phone conversations and meetings provided a means to provide information to small-scale processors as to options, problems and opportunities to expand operations or access new markets. Professionals and academics: Two submitted journal articles began the process of publishing project results in peer-reviewed journals; three conference presentations by project co-principal investigators also introduced findings to interested professionals and academics. General public: press releases, websites, press interviews and other activities led to a number of local and state level newspaper articles. Changes/Problems: A no-cost extension added a third year to the project, with the new completion data as January 31,2013. Almost all project activities are completed, with most of the third year activities focused on publication of project results. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? The project has supported 2 masters degrees and a Ph.D.All three students will finish summer 2013. The project has employeed in research positions 3 undergraduates, who participated in implementing project activities for 1-2 years. During this time period, the project also involved student groups from Business 378 in implementing survey and focus group activities, and in research supply chain variables. Additional students in a 400 level business simulation class modeled small scale processing operations as part of projectsupply chain research. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? Preliminary results have been presented at five conferences this year and a producer summit. Results have also been shared with producers through newsletters, forums, a website and other presentations. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? The supply chain analysis and overall feasibility and impacts modeling are expected to be completed by August 2013. Five additional journal articles are in preparation and will be submitted, covering all main components of the project. Four additional conference preseentations are planned as well. Two additional newsletters, an updated website, and a report for producers will be distributed to complete project diseminiation activities.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
1. The economic impact analysis has been completed. The analysis found that while developing small-scale livestock processing would have negligible economic benefits regionally, it would have signfiicant benefits in small rural communities. 2. Survey, focus group and interviews have been completed, processed, and are in the process of being written up for two journal submissions, and for a report for producers on project findings. Research on producer interests, attitudes and knowledge found strong support among considerably more producers than needed for a number of scenarios. USDA mobile slaughter units, small-scale fixed facilities, and marketing cooperatives were all of interest.A producersteering committee formed as a result of a project coordinatedproducer summit on small-scale livestock processing. The steering committee ismoving forward on next stageplanning for developing a producer cooperative owned small-scale, USDA inspected processingfacility. 3. The life cycle analysis portion of the research is complete. The analysis found that emissions from small-scale producers was slightly below the average for large operations, but highly variable, with several operations using minimal fossil fuels or purchased feed as part of their operations. One journal article has been submitted, and one more is being written on project findings. 4. A distribution analysis has been completed. This analysis is feeding into the remaining project synthesis analysis. 5. The market research analysis is complete. The analysis found that the most valued attribute of beef purchased at retail outlets was whether it was local or not. Consumers valued price, but a considerable portion were willing to pay 10% more for beef with additional attibutes including local, natural and organic. The average distance consumer considered local was 85 miles. One journal article has been accepted and is forthcoming. Activities to address objectives 6 and 7 are scheduled for completion during the summer of 2013.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2013
Citation:
Ridley, W., S. Shook, and S. Devadoss, Evaluations of Consumers Preference Structure for Locally-Produced Beef, Journal of Food Products Marketing, (forthcoming), 2013.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Submitted
Year Published:
2013
Citation:
Roop, Daniel, Dev Shrethna, Darin Saul. Cradle to Gate Life Cycle Assessment of Locally Produced Beef in the Palouse Region of the Northwestern U.S. In review at American Society for Agricultural and Biological Engineers.
|
Progress 02/01/11 to 01/31/12
Outputs
OUTPUTS: To determined economic impacts of increasing locally-produced, processed and consumed livestock IMPLAN data at county level was purchased and modeled with variables including unemployment, income, distribution, and value-added products. To estimate demand and potential revenue for locally-grown beef, a consumer survey assessed consumer preferences for various beef products and consumer perceptions of local livestock products. A survey was distributed December 2011 and January 2012 and a conjoint analysis of the survey has been completed. To involve producers in the project, we developed a list of livestock producers in the study area, and held six livestock producer open forums. To determine supply of livestock available, we surveyed ranchers with a Livestock Producer Survey in Spring 2011, a Rancher Survey, distributed at each livestock producer open forum, and a Livestock Supply Survey, distributed Spring 2012. We collaborated with USDA NASS to distribute the Livestock Supply survey to all livestock producers in the study area. We conducted four meat processor case studies and developed process diagrams of cattle movement through alternate scenarios. To determine environmental pros and cons of small-scale livestock processing we completed six detailed local small-scale ranch studies between May and November of 2011. To determine the feasibility and costs associated with different scenarios for livestock processing plant development, we completed an analysis of expansion costs for a federally inspected plant (Vandal Meat), an analysis of costs to convert a custom-exempt plant to federally inspected (Garfield Meats), an analysis of costs to build, equip, and operate a federally inspected small plant (4000 head/year) in Lewiston/Clarkston. Additional analyses include costs and timing to feed cattle to slaughter weight, and move cattle from ranch to feedlot, or ranch to processing plant. We also conducted personal interviews with 5 local processors, and with a regional-scale feedlot company and with a regional scale processing plant. Additional outputs include a project contact, presentation of the project at Whitman County Grazing Workshop (11/17/11), and at the North Idaho Grazing Conference (1/10/11), a poster for AFRI Project Director Meeting (11/7/11), and a poster for UI Legislative Day at the Idaho Legislative Session (1/25/12). This event was attended by state legislators and many others. During the event, at least a dozen state legislators visited the table, including Senator Dan Schmidt who sits on the Senate Agriculture Committee. One conference paper was presented: Cradle-to-gate Life Cycle Assessment of Locally Processed Beef in the Palouse Region of Northwestern U.S. 17 January 2012. A revised version will be presented in August at the ASABE 2012 Annual Meeting. The project was awarded University of Idaho 2012 Interdisciplinary or Collaborative Efforts Excellence Award, April 2012. PARTICIPANTS: Darin Saul, Project Director, tracked progress of all Co-Pis, developed supply survey instruments, oversaw supply survey and willingness to participate data collection, oversaw literature reviews, collection and analysis of supply data, coordinated and facilitated producer forums, presented project poster at PD meeting, presented meetings, to media and other outside audiences. Saul also connected other PIs to livestock producers, processors and other contacts in the livestock industry, both local and regional. Tracie Lee, Co-PI, coordinated processor case studies, helped facilitate producer forums, and coordinated College of Business interns in developing models for different value-chain scenarios. Nick Sanyal, Co-Pi, provided guidance and assistance with development of survey instruments and participated in several producer forums. Co-PIs Stephen Devadoss and Steven Shook developed the market survey and analysis. Steve Peterson developed the economic impacts model. Dev Shrestha developed the LCA of small ranches and regional processing infrastructure. All PIs participated in team meetings, worked on their own research thread, and are participating in preparations of synthesis, multidisciplinary publications. Advisor/Collaborator Cinda Williams, UI Extension, has participated in planning the producer forums and was lead facilitator for two forums. Jim Church, UI Extension, provided contact information for livestock producers in N. Idaho. Partnership Organization include Palouse Conservation District, which helped set up the second producer forum in Whitman County. USDA NASS mailed invitations to producer forums and survey information to all livestock producers in 11 counties for the project. Cattle Producers of Washington is housing and collaborating with a project intern conducting a case study of the small scale processing plant they are building summer of 2012. The project is involving three graduate students: LCA, market research and supply research. The project has involved 5 undergraduate interns in processor case studies, supply survey work and in helping with the producer forums. Students in two business classes researched costs associated with upgrading facilities and identifying costs and profits at each stage of the value-chain for several production, processing, marketing and distribution scenarios. TARGET AUDIENCES: The target audiences for this project include people involved or interested in locally-oriented livestock value-chain. This includes small and medium size livestock producers, existing small-scale processors, economic development professionals, grocery store, food coop, and other marketers of local foods, and consumers of local livestock products. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Because of the timing of the contracting process, we were unable to bring graduate assistants onto the project until Summer of 2011. This delayed the start of a number of research threads until August 2011. We expect to request a no-cost extension so that these research threads can be completed with the full two academic years needed for these masters level graduate students. We expect to request the extension for a project completion date of August 2013.
Impacts
This is year one of a two year project. The different analyses will contribute to the outputs in year two which will generate project outcomes. The project has expanded the conversation in the area and interest by livestock producers in developing small scale USDA inspected processing, value-added products and direct and cooperative marketing efforts, as evidenced by the volume of communication and participation of producers with the project. Although anecdotal at this point, the Project PD has been invited to speak at three regional conferences and at meeting such as Whitman County Cattleman's Association meetings during year two of the project. Few tangible outcomes can be reported at this time because, although most of the research as been complete, it is being written up and interpreted over the summer of 2012.
Publications
- Evaluations of Consumers Preference Structure for Locally-Produced Beef. Submitted for International Food Marketing Research Symposium (June 2012) in Philadelphia. Under consideration for publication in Journal of Food Products Marketing or Journal of International Food and Agribusiness.
|