Progress 12/15/14 to 12/14/15
Outputs
Target Audience:The target audiences reached by the efforts of the project entitled, 'Identifying gaps between knowledge and practice in production and distribution of local and regional foods for a more secure food supply chain' is widespread. Over the past few years, we have worked with farmers who own small niche operations for local beef, farmers with larger commercial operations, workers in processing (harvesting) facilities, the general public who buys meat at independently owned gorcery stores and at farmers markets, and also we have reached entrepreneurs of local products that are interested in suppling local foods in general, not just red meat (beef or goat) as a personal business venture. We have reached undergraduates, graduate students and scientists. Changes/Problems:The hiring of a post-doc and the development and conductiong of thesurveys took much longer to begin than anticipated so we were about a year beind in generating that data. We have quickly caught up and are now back on track to complete the desired outcomes by the end of year 4. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?This project has provided the opportunities to attend the yearly project directors meeting in Washington, D.C. to interact with other reserach groups and generate ideas with those who are funded under the same program. There have also been opportunities to attend conferences from many disciplines to dissiminate our data and to generate ideas for the future direcdtion of the project through networking with others. We have attended and presented at animal science (both live animal production and meat science), rural sociology, agricultural economics, marketing, entrepreneur, food science, microbiology, and sustainability conferences. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?The results have been disseminated through publications in academic journals and in popular press, instituation newslettersand in a general audience book. We have presented our data at professional meetings and also at local conferences tailored to the needs of the information obtained in the grant. We have also used college coursework to share our reserach. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals??Goal 1:Identify gaps in knowledge and gaps between knowledge and practice regarding food safety and security in the production and distribution of local and regional foods. Obj1:Survey the range of current production, processing and marketing of current small farmers i An on-going needs assessment is being developed and will determine the range of current production, processing and marketing practices of animal products among small farmers in the region who sell their products locally or regionally. Obj2:Determine consumer attitudes toward and beliefs about the safety, availability, quality, affordability and desirability of local and regional foods. Identifying consumers' misperceptions about sustainable agrifood systems will help producers and vendors develop plans to use "true" information in selling a product. Data has been collected via face-to-face surveys and phone surveys. Data analysis:All data from the case studies and face-to-face interviews will be transcribed, digitized and entered into NVivo, a computer-assisted qualitative data analysis program. Data will first be coded using a standard three-part Grounded Theory process and then categorized witha prioricodes as determined on the basis of the existing literature and project objectives (e.g., identification of possible alternatives within the SBR system, specific barriers). Analysis will include a comparison and synthesis of the emergent anda priori-coded data. Raw, cleaned data has been collected from the Auburn University Center for Government Services. Goal 2:Identify gaps in food safety practices and develop best practices for production and distribution of local and regional foods. Obj 1:Identify potential microbial contamination and cross-contamination routes on farms during production and processing and throughout the supply chain. Water sampling:To monitor contamination routes of fecal coliform bacteria in farm/ranch source water, runoff, irrigation water, water in food processing, etc., three replicate samples to measureE. coliand other coliform bacteria concentrations have been collected three to four times per year from each of the study locations, using the Coliscan Easygel water-monitoring technique. Grocery store sampling:Two grocery stores will be utilized for the in-store survey locations. Ten packages of steaks and 10 packages of ground beef will be purchased and sampled from each supply channel (small, medium and large producers) during each of the four seasons (three separate trials in each season will be conducted). Samples will be collected on the day they are shipped from the processing plants, the day they arrive at the retail stores, the day they are displayed on shelves and the day of expiration. The total counts of coliform andE. coliwill be determined as described below. A total of 960 samples will be collected for this step. Obj 2:Analyze and compile data collected from animal farms on best practices. During this part of the project, collected data will continue to be analyzed to determine best practices, needs, and what steps to take to improve production and distribution of farm products. Workshops will be continuing for participating producers and interested parties such as consumers and Extension agents to discuss results. Participants will be able to voice and share their concerns and/or best practices with each other. These will be recorded to continue the evaluation process. Obj 3:Develop new or optimize existing accurate, fast, portable and easy-to-use detection methods for farmers to better monitor water safety.. Water quality:The comparability and validity of the Coliscan Easygel method is being compared to the 3-M Petri Film method and Standard Methods for monitoring food and water in a food safety context. The advantages and disadvantages of each method's cost and accuracy are being compared, as will receptivity by farmers and other end users for each method. Workshops will be held to disseminate the data collected. Goal 3:Examine the effects of implementing best practices on operations. Obj 1:Conduct economic analysis of the impact of implementing best practice recommendations. Workshops will continue to be held to discuss partial budgeting techniques to assess the effectiveness of implementing a recommended best practice. Obj 2:Describe and assess perceptions regarding implementing best practice recommendations. The team will use a survey to describe and assess perceptions on implementing a recommended best practice. Information will be sought on demographic characteristics (e.g., age, gender, education), general participant characteristics (e.g., type of enterprise, acreage) and perceptions of practices and related economic issues (e.g., "Did the recommended practice improve your operations in terms of yield or returns?"). The latter set of questions will mostly be closed-ended and based on the Likert Scale, measuring either positive or negative responses to a statement. Descriptive statistics will be used to analyze data obtained from the aforementioned questions. Multiple regression analysis will be used to assess relationships between variables. Goal 4:Develop pre-harvest and post-harvest food production and handling training, including food safety, marketing, and traceability awareness practices and certification programs, to ensure a safer and more secure food supply in the Southeast. Best practices observed during the data-collection phase will be highlighted, and participants concerns' will be addressed. The process of disseminating information will begin. Obj1:Create cross-disciplinary modules for incorporation into current university courses for food safety, marketing and food traceability. University course modules:All modules will be written as 50 to 100 minutes of lecture to assure adoption of the complete modules in existing classes. Modules will be specific to the classes and include examples of food production and handling plans, including food safety, marketing and traceability best practices. Work will also begin toward making the modules into online content. Assessment:Instructor and student summative evaluation of the modules will take place at the end of the semester in which these modules were used. Goal 5:Develop a face-to-face and Web-based information portal for use by Southeast-region food and farming industry operators. Obj 1:Create nontraditional learning-style modules, using layman's terms, for use by Extension agents to teach farmers. Extension courses:Extension programming will continue for nontraditional learners. Overview training lasting one day will provide a brief introduction to food security, introducing food production, handling, safety, marketing, and traceability plans and best practices Obj 2:Conduct training courses as a part of certification programs for farming industry operators in food production and handling practices. Train the Trainer:Extension educators, vocational agriculture instructors and health professionals will be identified to be trained and will learn to use the course modules that are prepared. Food Entrepreneur Conference:The Auburn University Food Systems Institute oversees an online Food Entrepreneur Center for those seeking to go into business as small food entrepreneurs. Obj 3:Develop web-based modules for people across the U.S. to create farm-specific plans for creating a safe and secure food supply. The building of this content will begin at the end of Year 4. Obj 4:Develop and assess teaching modules for consumers, retail employees, and hotel, restaurant and institutional employees. Web-based learning programs will be developed to fill in knowledge gaps for consumers, retail employees, and hotel, restaurant and institutional employees utilizing information gained in Goal 1.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
All parts of the research team have been working hard toward accomplishing the goals outlined in the project. We have collected data from interviews, case studies, and surveys; taken water and meat samples for analysis of bacteria; held workshops; worked on curriculum development; and implemented some curricula in classroom instructional programs. This year, we made 37 contacts, all of whom gained knowledge and skills in business planning, farm economics, market research, developing pricing strategies, pasture management, food safety principles, and prevention of disease. It is anticipated that 75% of the 37 contacts will utilize information acquired through participation in the workshops and, in the long run, 60% of those will modify practices to the extent that positive outcomes, such as an increase in efficiency of operations and a change in mindset, will result. From a food perspective, 34 contacts indicate they gained knowledge and will be more mindful about the sources of food they eat. More than 1,000 people have participated in survey data collection, and most have indicated that they will pay more attention to the source of their meats. Since fall 2014 we have sampled six slaughter facilities within Alabama and Georgia, collecting 720 samples across 20 slaughter steps at each facility. Our sampling project has resulted in over 1,000 preliminary Escherichia coli isolates. Further analysis of isolates is currently being conducted with BARDOT (light-scattering technology) and PFGE for confirmation of the isolates and persistence within slaughter facilities.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Tackie, N.O., J. R. Bartlett and A. Adu-Gyamfi. 2015. Assessing Alabama consumer attitudes and beliefs on locally or regionally produced livestock and products. Professional Agricultural Workers Journal 2(2):1-21.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Under Review
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Telligman, A. L., M. R. Worosz and C. L. Bratcher. 2015. U.S. consumer perceptions of local beef and quality. Meat Science. Under review.
- Type:
Book Chapters
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Auburn Speaks: On Food Systems. 2014. Multiple articles related to our research published by our research team in this book.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Corkran, S. 2015. Transmission of Escherichia coli in local and regional food systems. Industrial Fellows Annual Review. West Lafayette IN.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Yuan, J., L. Wang and E. Reutebuch. 2014. Water quality indicator microorganism enumeration for sediments and surface water by using 3M Petrifilm" and Coliscan Easygel. 28th Alabama Water Resource Conference. Orange Beach, AL. Sept. 3-5, 2014.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Bartlett, J. R., N. O. Tackie, M. N. Jahan and A. Adu-Gyamfi. 2014. Economics and marketing characteristics and practices of Alabama small livestock producers. Professional Agricultural Workers Conference. Tuskegee, AL. Dec. 7-9, 2014.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Walters, M. A., A. L. Telligman and M. R. Worosz. 2014. Understanding the term local beef: an examination of conceptions from Alabama farmers market consumers. Professional Agricultural Workers Conference. Tuskegee, AL. Dec. 7-9, 2014.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Jahan, N., J. R. Bartlett, N. O. Tackie and A. Adu-Gyamfi. 2015. Examining selected characteristics and practices of Alabama small livestock producers. Southern Rural Sociological Association Annual Meeting. Atlanta, GA. Jan 31.-Feb. 3, 2015.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Tackie, N.O., J. R. Bartlett and A. Adu-Gyamfi. 2015. Alabama consumer attitudes and beliefs on local and regional livestock products. Southern Rural Sociological Association Annual Meeting. Atlanta, GA. Jan 31.-Feb. 3, 2015.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Telligman, A. L., M. R. Worosz, M. A. Walters. 2015. Understanding the term local beef, a comparison between farmers market and grocery store consumers. Southern Rural Sociological Association Annual Meeting. Atlanta, GA. Jan 31.-Feb. 3, 2015.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Telligman, A. L. and M. R. Worosz. 2015. Salient beliefs about local beef, results from a qualitative study in rural grocery stores. Agriculture and Human Values Annual Meeting. Pittsburgh, P.A. June 24-28, 2015.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Corkran, S., J. Brar, M. Bailey, H. Oliver, J. Waddell, L. Wang, C. L. Bratcher, and M. Singh. 2015. Prevalence of Escherichia coli in small and very small beef slaughter plants. International Association for Food Protection Annual Meeting. Portland, OR. July 24-28, 2015.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Yuan, J., E. Reutebuch and L. Wang. 2015. Comparison of different enumeration protocols for indicator microorganisms in water and sediment. International Association for Food Protection Annual Meeting. Portland, OR. July 24-28, 2015.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Telligman, A. L. and M. R. Worosz. 2015. Food safety beliefs underlying the purchase of local beef, a comparison of farmers market and grocery store consumers. Rural Sociological Society Annual Meeting. Madison, WI. Aug. 6-9, 2015.
|
Progress 12/15/13 to 12/14/14
Outputs
Target Audience: The target audiences reached by the efforts of the project entitled, Identifying gaps between knowledge and practice in production and distribution of local and regional foods for a more secure food supply chain is widespread. In the past year, we have worked with farmers who own small niche operations for local beef, farmers with larger commercial operations, workers in processing (harvesting) facities, the general public who buys meat at independently owned gorcery stores and at farmers markets, and also we have reached entrepreneurs of local products that areinterested in supplinglocal foods in general, not justred meat (beef or goat) as a personal business venture. We have reached undergraduates, graduate students and scientists. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? This project has provided the opportunity for some of the PI's to attend professional conferences to present abstracts. We have also hosted two Food Entrepreneur Conferences to help those who desire to get their products into the marketplace, understand the business and regulations involved in achieving their goals.There have been face-to-face surveys with farmers and with consumers which have helped the investigators understand what direction the needs are for this projecta little better. Also, in quarterly meetings, we have a great exchange of ideas that are taking place to develop our project even more. Attending the annual Project Diretor's Meeting is a very beneficial exchange of information relevant to the project outcomes also. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? The results have been disseminated by way in presentations at the Food Entrepreneur Conferences. Data collected via survey and sampling instruments have not been shared in a public forum or presentations, however they have been shared inacademic professional meetings. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? We will continue to collect on farm sampling data. We have begun harvest facility sampling. We have also gotten the survey instrument for the consumers polished and to the point where we should be starting telephone and internet surveys within the next 6 months. We will continue all of the data collections and will also begin developing the teaching and training modules over the next year.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
GOAL 1: This study was undertaken to identify the meanings, salient beliefs, and attitudes consumers associate with the purchase of local beef. We use an attitude-behavior framework, the reasoned action approach (RAA), to identify the meanings, salient beliefs, and attitudes consumers associate with the purchase of local beef. The RAA is a method commonly used to identify and explain consumer’s food choice behavior and its predictive utility is well-established. In this model, behavioral intention (i.e., intention to purchase local beef) is determined by three factors: an individual’s attitude toward the behavior; perceived social pressure to engage or not engage in the behavior; and self-efficacy or perceived behavioral control. Underlying each of these factors are beliefs. In this poster, we present original findings from face-to-face intercept-surveys conducted in several types of Alabama popular grocery stores where open and closed-ended questions were posed to beef consumers. Transcribed data were analyzed to identify the range of meanings and determine the variety and frequency of beliefs consumers have for the term local beef. Chi-square analysis was used to discern any demographic variation among the different meanings and beliefs. Results from this study indicate that local beef was not a top of the mind belief when shopping for beef products. Fifty-one percent of the sample was familiar with the term local beef and familiarity with the term did not vary by social or demographic characteristics. Findings also revealed that consumers define the term local beef in a variety of ways. Results from this study will be used to develop valid constructs for a larger regional survey about local beef. GOAL 2: Data has been collected and raw numbers indicate that there is a presence of e. coli in fecal matter, as expected. There is also a presence of e. coli in water, bedding and hides, but not on metal barriers or in the feed stuffs. There is a greater prevalence overall at all collections sites of e coli on one of the lager farms that was sampled, but alsothere was a tremendous presence on the hides of cattle atone of the small farms. Thewater data indicates thatthere is a greater load of e. coli at the point that a water source leaves the cattle containment areas over the point at which the water source enters the containment areas of all farms sampled regardless of size of operation and number of cattle. GOAL 3: According to data collect via a survey instrument, 75% of contacts will utilize information (knowledge and skills) acquired through participation in workshops to disseminate best practices. It is expected that 60% of contacts who were impacted will change operations/behavior to the extent that it will cause permanent changes in behavior and outcomes such as increase in incomes, efficiency of operations, and a change in mindset.
Publications
|