Progress 06/01/23 to 05/31/24

Outputs
Target Audience:The conference audience will include members of the CEA industry with the characteristics listed below, researchers and extension specialists who work with this CEA industry population, and representatives of regulatory bodies that provide regulations, policy, and/or guidance for these growers: 1. CEA Grower Industry: As described prior, the CEA grower industry consists of many types of growing units - indoor or outdoor, soil present or soilless, among more variations. The target audience for the conference are leafy green, herbs, and microgreen growers who grow in indoor and greenhouse facilities, and who identify as very small to small sized. We chose these populations as our target audience because: • Leafy greens, herbs, and microgreens: These crops are reported to have one of the highest profit margins and lowest operational costs compared with other hydroponically grown produce such as tomatoes, cucumbers, and peppers (Agrylist, 2017). Agrylist et al. (2017) reported that 62% of farms grow leafy greens, herbs, or microgreens, and 65/133 (49%) of respondents use hydroponic greenhouses as their operating system. These crops produce great profit margins even with limited space. These reasons make leafy greens an attractive crop for small operations. Notably, the global market size for hydroponic lettuce is estimated to record the fastest annual growth rate of more than 23% over the next several years (Markets and Markets, 2021). • Indoor and greenhouse facilities (including vertical farms and container units): In the 2020 State of Indoor Farming report (Artemis, 2021), 133 growers were surveyed to characterize the current state of indoor food crop production and future growth. Greenhouse type systems represent 25 to 71% of the controlled environment farming systems across the U.S., while indoor vertical farming systems are adopted by 16 to 42% of CEA producers, depending on the region (Agrylist, 2017). In addition, a majority of CEA operations are located in rural areas with the exception of the Western U.S. region. • Very small and small growers: Larger growing operations have full-time food safety personnel hired to manage a Food Safety Program, whereas smaller operations do not have the financial means to support these structures. The majority of CEA leafy greens operations that supply local and regional food systems are relatively small operations, currently averaging less than 10,000 ft2 of production space (Agrylist, 2017). Moreover, the survey by Walters et al. (2020) found 38% (16/42) of respondents produced hydroponic food crops in an area of less than 0.1 acres which is indicative of small-scale producers. 2. Researchers: This conference will benefit researchers who have conducted produce safety research in CEA systems. The conference will allow researchers to share their results, interact with the CEA industry and regulatory personnel, and develop actionable items to address identified knowledge and science gaps. 3. Extension: This conference will benefit extension personnel who are serving the food safety needs of their state/region with a specific focus on fresh produce safety. The conference will facilitate active engagement with all CEA stakeholders and allow extension service providers to identify content experts and resources to aid the development of CEA-specific curricula for training and outreach efforts in the CEA grower industry. 4. Regulatory Bodies: This conference will benefit regulatory bodies that are working with local, state, and federal agencies that conduct inspections of the CEA grower industry as it will expose them to the state of the food safety knowledge and science behind the CEA produce growing industry. We hope this will assist with providing evidence of the need for more federal, state, and local monies to conduct research to fill the identified gaps. All other types and sizes of CEA growers, researchers and extension personnel, and regulatory bodies are welcome to attend, but the emphasis of the conference will be on practical solutions for these CEA production methods for produce. Changes/Problems:The biggest problem was getting the grant established with USDA and subcontracts given out. The conference occurred in April 2023 and the final grant was not issued until June 2023 after communication about the grant funding and to proceed with the conference occurred in Janaury 2023. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?The conference provided professional development to all participants How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?One Registration and Conference Website (https://foodsafety.uada.edu/2023- safer/#:~:text=The%20Strategizing%20to%20Advance%20Future,in%20the%20CEA%20produce%20industry.) ; Dissemination 6 listservs (4 FSMA Regional Centers, 1 research group, 1 CEA Food Safety coalition, International Association Food Protection community, Center for Produce Safety, Produce Safety Alliance), one peer-review journal article (Hamilton, A., Gibson, K.E., Amalaradjou, M.A., Callahan, C.W., Millner, P., Ilic, S., Lewis Ivey, M.L., and A. Shaw. 2023. Cultivating Food Safety Together: Insights about the Future of Produce Safety in the U.S. Controlled Environment Agriculture Sector. Journal of Food Protection: 86(12):100190. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37926289/), and conference proceedings What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? Nothing Reported

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? A stakeholder advisory group of five individuals from the grower industry and meet three times in March of 2023. The conference planning committee included grant members along with the Ohio State University faculty and staff meet as a committee five time between February and April of 2023 (February 8th, February 20th, March 10th, March 21st, and April 7th , 2023). The agenda was finalized on March 15th to disseminate through the conference website. Pre- and post-impact surveys were developed in February and March of 2023. The team also met on May 19th, 2023 after the conference to determine the actions to ensure dissemination of the conference materials. Promotion of the course began in March of 2023 through sending to a listserv of CEA stakeholder groups, industry partners, and food safety personnel. Beginning in March of 2023, through the CEA researchers listserv, a request for research and extension powerpoints and CEA industry videos began. These were compiled and placed on a free dissemination website and posted prior to the meeting. Promotion of these items was done before, during and after the conference. On April 12th, the pre-conference tours included 21 participants, and tour locations were Fresh Harvest Farm LLC, the Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition at the Ohio State University, and Bright Farms. The conference occurred on April 13th and 14th, 2023 at the Ohio Controlled Environment Agriculture Center in Columbus, Ohio. The pre-conference tours on April 12th, 2023 included tours to Fresh Harvest Farm, LLC, The Ohio State University Greenhouses, and Bright Farms. Introduction remarks on April 13th, 2023 were delivered by Drs. Chieri Kubota, Director of Ohio Controlled Environment Agriculture Center (OHCEAC) and Angela Shaw, Project Director of the grant project. Closing day remarks on April 13th, 2023 were delivered by Dr. Gary Pierzynski, Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Education Director. Participants collaborated to identify the major themes for research and extension outreach challenges and opportunities. Forty-seven participants were in attendance. The conference included in-person and virtual presentations followed by large and small group activities. The two-day conference was organized wherein the morning speakers provided an overview of the available evidence and described the workflow of the discussions to follow. The afternoons were dedicated to small group discussions (see agenda below). During the small group discussions, participants self-organized into groups based on relevant expertise and backgrounds. Because groups were self-organized, the size of the groups varied and ranged from 4 to 10 individuals, organized in 6 to 8 groups at a time. Each group was tasked with identifying and outlining the prominent research and extension/outreach knowledge gaps and needs prevailing within the CEA industry. These gaps, collectively compiled on an online document using Google Docs (Google LLC, Menlo Park, CA), were subsequently shared with the entire audience fostering a collaborative exchange of insights. Through these discussions, a priority list of research and extension needs concerning CEA food safety emerged. There were talks from Kristen Gibson (University of Arkansas), Chris Callahan (University of Vermot), Sanja Ilic (The Ohio State University), Angela Shaw (Texas Tech University), industry partners (Jessica Dyszel, Mitch Kirby, and Simon Yeczelman), government partners (Michelle Smith, Jill Dunlop, Audrey Draper, Trevor Kerr). Immediately after the conference 21 participants indicated that the conference was 9.29 out of 10 (10 excellent and 1 terrible). All sessions received between 3.9 to 4.5 rankings (1 not useful, 3 moderate, and 5 extremely useful), and all participants felt that the presentations were of interest, the event was welcoming, their voices were heard, they felt close to the conference participants, and there were opportunities to network. There were sixteen positive comments. Here are a few comments: "The conference was fantastic. It allowed me to hear and understand different perspectives from the growers and academia." "I was able to see the gaps my research would address through the eyes of the industry and academia." "I think when we look back on this first SAFER conference, we'll note that it led to a critical, initial convening discussion that helped to concentrate focus and coordinate efforts in an otherwise divergent and confusing industry. I appreciate the organizers' efforts to allow for small group discussions and exploration of highly nuanced topics. This was really important. The detailed plans and projects will come. Nice work." "This was the most useful conference I've attended so far in my career--I had never before been in a room with so many other people who specialize in the same area." "I feel like I'm leaving with a better understanding of CEA and more questions. I would LOVE to see a second conference sponsored. I would attend and bring colleagues." "Yes, developed partnerships that will aid in additional guidance and outreach materials to the industry." "Yes, especially the funding opportunities and the chance to plan proposals with other researchers." Eighteen participants indicated that they made new connections and/or collaboration as a result of the conference (average was 9.6 connections). Four-month postconference survey revealed four participants shared that they have used the material provided to share with others, and seven indicated that they collaborated since the conference (at least eight new collaborations and 54 projects). Six participants have submitted grants since the conference to six different USDA programs, and four indicated that they have success stories to share about collaborations from the conference. A four-month post conferenceassessment was completed the following are the major take-aways form the conference from 9 participants: 1) The need for collaboration within engineering, water science, omics, and food safety; 2) there are lots of opportunities for education and communications; 3) CEA provides a unique challenge and there needs to be more collaboration across research, academia and industry; 4) Identification of research gaps; 5) Need for indicator organisms and training for workers; 6) need for more reach on the supply chain inputs (such cleaning and sanitizing of transport vehicles, substrates; wildlife; and water; and 6) Need to consider equipment and facilities in the risk assessment. The following are outputs from the grant: 1) Established communication system for researchers, extension, industry, and government; 2) List of CEA food safety peer-reviewed research & extension publications; 3) 45 participants at a 2-day CEA Food Safety Conference; 4) 6 Grant Leadership and Conference Planning Committee meetings; 5) 2 Stakeholder Advisory Board meetings; 6) 1 Registration and Conference Website; 7) A priority setting for research and extension needs; 8) Disseminate of CEA Food Safety resources to stakeholders through 6 listservs (4 FSMA Regional Centers, 1 research group, 1 CEA Food Safety coalition, International Association Food Protection community, Center for Produce Safety, Produce Safety Alliance) and partners; 9) one peer-review journal article; 10) conference proceedings. As a result of this grant, there was increased knowledge and list of CEA food safety research and outreach needs, increase in the submission of federal and commodity proposals on CEA food safety topics, an established communication system between industry, academia, and government on CEA food safety, easy access to food safety published journal articles and extension publications on CEA, and enhanced relations between the CEA industry, academia, and government.

Publications

• Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2023 Citation: Hamilton, A., Gibson, K.E., Amalaradjou, M.A., Callahan, C.W., Millner, P., Ilic, S., Lewis Ivey, M.L., and A. Shaw. 2023. Cultivating Food Safety Together: Insights about the Future of Produce Safety in the U.S. Controlled Environment Agriculture Sector. Journal of Food Protection: 86(12):100190. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37926289/