Progress 03/22/16 to 09/30/20
Outputs
Target Audience:Our numerous stakeholders, partners, and consumer activities can be generalized into two broad categories: 1) production/marketing/sales enterprises (primarily) and 2) consumers. Production enterprises include trade organizations, individual producers, packers, distributors, shippers, and retailers, with some attention to the regulatory agencies, certification organizations, and community organizations that support those producers. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?
Nothing Reported
How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?We provided information to 97 producers from various US states at conferences and during in-person meetings to help them assess the economic feasibility of adopting BDM in their farm operations. We also provided information to 73 Extension agents in Tennessee to support their efforts to help fruit and vegetable producers assess the economic feasibility of adopting BDM in their farm operation. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?
Nothing Reported
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Goal 1) Government and policy regulations intending to reduce plastic pollution associated with the use of polyethylene (PE) mulch in agriculture vary greatly across the US, with some states imposing costs on producers, such as high disposal costs or stronger enforcement of regulation preventing the illegal disposal of PE mulch (e.g., burning), while other states have less strict regulations aiming to disincentive the use of plastic in agriculture.Regardless of the current state of US environmental regulations aiming to reduce plastic pollution, consumers and the private industry are already demanding strategies and products that have the potential to reduce plastic pollution. Anticipating changes in regulations and consumer demand for produce grown using production practices that have the potential to reduce plastic pollution associated with the use of PE mulch, it is important to evaluate the costs and benefits associated with the adoption of more sustainable mulch products by US fruit and vegetable producers. Plasticbiodegradable mulches (BDMs) are a sustainable alternative to PE mulch, as they do not have to be removed or disposed of, rather they are tilled into the soil or composted on site. These mulches are designed to be decomposedinto water, carbon dioxide, and microbial biomass, eliminating the plastic pollution associated with the use of PE mulch. By increasing awareness about the benefits and costs associated with the adoption of BDM that have the potential to reduce plastic pollution associated with the use of PE mulch, making manufacturers aware of the potential barriers to adoption, and policymakers aware of the potential economic incentives that will promote adoption of BDM among fruit and vegetable farmers we are aiming to: Increase the adoption of sustainable mulch products among US fruit and vegetable growers. Increase the sustainability of vegetable crop production. Help policymakers design policies that facilitate the adoption of sustainable mulch options among US fruit and vegetable producers. Reduce landfill waste and air pollution, and improved soil quality. We conducted a survey of Tennessee fruit and vegetable producers to assess their use of PE mulch, BDM, and their willingness to adopt BDM at various price levels. Additionally, we conducted a partial budget and sensitivity analyses to evaluate the economic feasibility of adopting BDM at the farm level. Survey data from Tennessee fruit and vegetable farmers were collected, as well as field trial data to be used in the partial budget and sensitivity analyses. Results from the partial budget and sensitivity analyses suggest that the cost of BDM, labor costs, and sale price discounts due to mulch adhesion in pumpkin fruit have the greatest impact on profits when transitioning from PE mulch to BDM. When assuming current market prices for PE mulch and BDM, the 2019 Tennessee Adverse Effect wage rate, and no price discounts, transitioning from PE mulch to BDM results in a positive impact on profits. When assuming a 5% price discount, this transition results in a negative impact on profits. Using data from the Tennessee fruit and vegetable farmer survey and probit regressions, we evaluated the relationship between labor savings, environmental stewardship, and the use of BDM. Results suggest that after controlling for other factors, farm size, farmers' environmental stewardship or stewardship intentions, and potential labor savings from BDMs use are strongly correlated with the use of BDMs. Finally, using the Tennessee fruit and vegetable farmer survey, the contingent valuation method, and a probit regression, we evaluated farmers' preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for BDM. Results suggest price, on-farm income, and familiarity with BDM are factors influencing farmers' willingness to adopt BDM. However, results suggest producer WTP for BDM is below current BDM market prices. Through in-service trainings and producer conferences, we increased practical knowledge among fruit and vegetable producers and Extension agents working with this kind of growers that will allow fruit and vegetable growers to make more informed decisions about the decision to transition from PE mulch to BDM. Additionally, through the dissemination of survey results among mulch manufacturers, input suppliers, and policymakers, we have helped policymakers assess the potential plastic pollution associated with the use of PE mulches in Tennessee, as well as evaluate incentives than can promote the use of BDMs among Tennessee fruit and vegetable growers. This information also has the potential to help input suppliers evaluateinterest in BDMs among Tennessee fruit and vegetable growers. Goal 2) In the US, low-income households tend to eat less nutritious diets compare to higher-income households. This could be explained by their challenges associated with food access, their food budget allocation, the time they have to prepare healthier foods, and their perceptions of food affordability. An example of a market model trying to promote access to local and healthy foods among low-income families is the Fresh Stop Markets (FSMs). FSMs are "pop up" farm fresh markets organized biweekly for 22 weeks during the season at public spaces in food-insecure neighborhoods. FSMs provide local fresh produce to each market's shareholders on a sliding scale based on income. The relative success FSMs have had in addressing the food access needs of low-income communities in Kentucky has increased the interest in the replicability of this model among various stakeholders (e.g., non-profit organizations, government agencies, community leaders) in other states. Evaluating farmers' willingness to sell produce through FSMs is an important component for assessing the replicability of the model in other regions of the country, and one that has been limitedly explored in previous literature. By assessing farmers' willingness to participate in FSMs and understanding the financial and organizational factors affecting the sustainability of market models with a food justice mission, we are aiming to: Increase the creation of market models that promote food justice. Increase the sustainability of existent market models that promote food justice. We conducted a survey of Tennessee and Kentucky fruit and vegetable farmers to evaluate farmers' willingness to sell produce through Fresh Stop Markets (FSMs). We also gather information from various US non-profit organizations managing market models with a food justice mission, to better understand the financial and organizational factors that determine the success of these market models. Survey data from Tennessee and Kentucky fruit and vegetable farmers and case study data from US non-profit organizations managing market models with a food justice mission were collected. Preliminary results suggest survey respondents willing to sell produce through FSMs perceive reduction of marketing efforts, ability to plan before production season and to sell to low-income families as the most advantageous characteristics of FSMs. Additionally, survey results suggest more educated farmers, with annual gross on-farm revenue below $25,000, selling produce through farmers markets, who run on-farm programs to educate the community about sustainable agriculture and food systems, would be more willing to sell produce through FSMs. Through producer meetings and a presentation at a professional conference, we increased knowledge that could help various stakeholders in their decisions to create market models similar to FSMs.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2020
Citation:
Velandia, M., R. Rejesus, C. D. Clark, K. L. DeLong, A. L. Wszelaki, S. M. Schexnayder, and K. L. Jensen. 2020. Evaluating the Relationship between Fruit and Vegetable Growers use of Plastic Biodegradable Mulches, and Environmental Stewardship and Labor Savings: The Case of Tennessee Fruit and Vegetable Farmers. Sustainability 12(5): 2075 https://doi.org/10.3390/su12052075
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2020
Citation:
Velandia, M., K. L. DeLong, A. L. Wszelaki, S. M. Schexnayder, C. D. Clark, and K. L. Jensen. 2020. Use of Polyethylene and Plastic Biodegradable Mulches among Tennessee Fruit and Vegetable Growers. HortTechnology 30(2): 212-218.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2020
Citation:
Velandia, M., K. Jensen, K. DeLong, A. Wszelaki, and A. Rihn. 2020. Tennessee Fruit and Vegetable Farmer Preferences and Willingness to Pay for Plastic Biodegradable Mulch. Journal of Food Distribution Research (forthcoming).
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2020
Citation:
Chen, X., Gao, Z., & McFadden, B. R. 2020. Reveal Preference Reversal in Consumer Preference for Sustainable Food Products. Food Quality and Preference, 79, 103754.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2020
Citation:
Yenerall, J., You, W., Hill, J. 2020. Beyond the Supermarket: Analyzing Household Shopping Trip Patterns that Include Food at Home and Away from Home Retailers. BMC Public Health (forthcoming).
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2020
Citation:
Denton, R., M. Velandia, Z. Hansen, and D. Lockwood. 2020. Sample Budgets for Blueberry Production under Various Integrated Pest Management and Marketing Strategies. 2020. UT Extension.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2020
Citation:
Velandia, M., and A. Wszelaki. 2020. Comparing the Economic Feasibility of using Plastic Biodegradable Mulches in Vegetable and Cannabis Production. Cannabis Research Conference, August 12, 2020.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2020
Citation:
Miles. C., A. Wszelaki, L. Devetter, S. Ghimire,and M. Velandia. 2020. Economics of Soil-Biodegradable Mulch Use. Biodegradable Mulch Professional Development Workshop, November 18, 2020. (Washington State University Collaboration).
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2020
Citation:
Velandia, M., X. Chen, J. Yenerall, S. Schexnayder, C. Trejo, K. Tanaka, H. Hyden, K. Rignall. Factors Influencing Fruit and Vegetable Farmers Willingness to Participate in Market Outlets with a Food Justice Mission: The Case of Fresh Stop Markets. Presented at the 2020 Food Distribution Research Virtual Conference, October 13, 2020. (University of Kentucky Collaboration)
|
Progress 10/01/18 to 09/30/19
Outputs
Target Audience:We targeted U.S. fruit and vegetable producers. We also targeted Extension personnel working with fruit and vegetable growers. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?
Nothing Reported
How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?We have disseminated research results through in-service trainings and producer conferences. During the reporting period, we provided information to 27 producers from various U.S. southeastern states at conferences or during in-person meetings to help them assess the economic feasibility of adopting biodegradable mulches (BDM) in their farm operations. We also provided information to 31 Extension agents in Tennessee to support their efforts to help fruit and vegetable producers assess the economic feasibility of adopting BDM in their farm operations. We also disseminated research results through extension publications and fact sheets. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?*We will investigate the costs of soil plastic pollution generated by the use of polyethylene (PE) mulch by fruit and vegetable producers, and evaluate the potential costs and benefits associated with more strict regulations aiming to reduce the use of PE mulch among fruit and vegetable producers. *We will investigate the costs of soil plastic pollution generated by the use of PE mulch by fruit and vegetable producers, and evaluate potential costs and benefits associated with more strict regulations aiming to reduce the use of PE mulch among fruit and vegetable producers.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Currently, polyethylene (plastic) mulch is widely used by fruit and vegetable farms across the United States (US). It is estimated that US agriculture uses about one billion pounds of polyethylene (PE) mulch per year. PE mulch is popular among fruit and vegetable growers because it offers an array of benefits at relatively low cost, including the suppression of weeds, regulation of soil temperature and moisture, and minimization of nutrient loss, reduction of disease pressure, and ultimately, enhanced crop yield and quality. However, the widespread use of PE mulch by fruit and vegetable growers poses short- and long-term challenges to the sustainability of fruit and vegetable production in the US and around the world. These challenges primarily revolve around the disposal of and the poor degradation of PE mulch after use. Because these plastics remain in the environment for long periods of time, the pollution PE mulch generates imposes costs on growers and communities, potentially reducing soil productivity over the long term and accumulating plastic in the environment. Government and policy regulations intending to reduce plastic pollution associated with the use of PE mulch in agriculture vary greatly across the US, with some states imposing costs on producers, such as high disposal costs or stronger enforcement of regulation preventing the illegal disposal of PE mulch (e.g., burning), while other states have less strict regulations aiming to disincentive the use of plastic in agriculture.Regardless of the current state of US environmental regulations aiming to reduce plastic pollution, consumers and the private industry are already demanding strategies and products that have the potential to reduce plastic pollution. Anticipating changes in regulations and consumer demand for produce grown using production practices that have the potential to reduce plastic pollution associated with the use of PE mulch, it is important to evaluate the costs and benefits associated with the adoption of more sustainable mulch products by US fruit and vegetable producers. Plasticbiodegradable mulches (BDMs) are a sustainable alternative to PE mulch, as they do not have to be removed or disposed of, rather they are tilled into the soil or composted on site. These mulches are designed to be decomposedinto water, carbon dioxide, and microbial biomass, eliminating the plastic pollution associated with the use of PE mulch. In the current reporting period, we surveyed Tennessee fruit and vegetable growers to assess their use of PE mulch, BDM, the difference in the characteristics of those using BDM and those who have never used them, and interested in using BDM based on price. Our results indicated a large percentage of Tennessee fruit and vegetable growers have used PE mulch compared to BDM. In general, BDM users tend to have more acres in fruit and vegetable production, have used dumping and burying as PE mulch disposal methods, and have spent more hours removing and disposing of PE mulches. Finally, results indicate that even atprices higher than the current average market prices for BDM ($220/roll), there is a percentage of Tennessee fruit and vegetable growers interested in using BDM. Additionally, we evaluated the factors associated with the economic feasibility of adopting BDM in pumpkinproduction using a partialbudget analysis. Results suggest that the cost of BDM compared to PE mulch, labor costs, and potential discounts in sales prices due to mulch adhesion in pumpkin fruit have the greatest impact on the changes in net profits when transitioning from PE mulch to BDM. Through in-service trainings and producer conferences, we increased practical knowledge among fruit and vegetable producers and Extension agents working with this kind of growers that will allow fruit and vegetable growers to make more informed decisions about the decision to transition from PE mulch to BDM. During thisreporting period, we provided information to 27 producers from various US southeastern states at conferences and during in-person meetings to help them assess the economic feasibility of adopting BDM in their farm operations. We also provided information to 31 Extension agents in Tennessee to support their efforts to help fruit and vegetable producers assess the economic feasibility of adopting BDM in their farm operation. Additionally, through the dissemination of survey results among mulch manufacturers, input suppliers, and policymakers, we have helped policymakers assess the potential plastic pollution associated with the use of PE mulches in Tennessee, as well as evaluate incentives than can promote the use of BDMs among Tennessee fruit and vegetable growers. This information also has the potential to help input suppliers evaluateinterest in BDMs among Tennessee fruit and vegetable growers, andtherefore, help them evaluate the market potential for BDMs in Tennessee. Survey results are in the hands of three mulch manufacturers interested in expanding the BDM market in Tennessee.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Under Review
Year Published:
2019
Citation:
Velandia, M., S. Galinato, and A. Wszelaki. "Economic Evaluation of Biodegradable Plastic Films in Tennessee Pumpkin Production."Agronomy.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Under Review
Year Published:
2019
Citation:
Velandia. M., R. Rejesus, C.D. Clark, K. DeLong, K. Jensen, S. Schexnayder, and A. Wszelaki. "The Role of Environmental Stewardship and Labor Savings in the Use of Plastic Biodegradable Mulch in Fruit and Vegetable Production." Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Under Review
Year Published:
2019
Citation:
Velandia. M., S. Schexnayder, K. DeLong, K. Jensen, C.D. Clark, and R.J. Menard."Use of Plastic Mulches and Willingness to use Biodegradable Mulches among Tennessee Fruit and Vegetable Growers."HortTechnology.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2019
Citation:
Velandia, M., Wszelaki, A., and Debruyn, J. Biodegradable Mulches: What are the effects on the ground, on the crop, and on your pocketbook. 2019 Ohio Ecological Food and Farm Association (OEFFA) conference, in Dayton, OH, February 16, 2019.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2019
Citation:
Velandia, M., A. Smith, A. Wszelaki, and S. Galinato. 2019. The Economics Feasibility of Adopting Plastic Biodegradable Mulches in Pumpkin Production. W844, UT Extension [Refereed]. Collaboration between University of Tennessee and Washington State University.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2019
Citation:
Velandia, M., A. Smith, A. Ahles, Z. Hansen, F. Hale, A. Wszelaki, and J. Moore. 2019. "Sample Budgets for Large-scale Bell Pepper Operations and the Impact of Phytophthora Blight on Farm Revenue and Costs, 2019." W831, UT Extension [Refereed].
- Type:
Websites
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2019
Citation:
Velandia, M. Report prices at Tennessee Farmers Markets Tennessee Farmers Markets Price Reports http://www.uky.edu/ccd/pricereports/TNFM. Collaboration with University of Kentucky.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2019
Citation:
Velandia, M. Use of plastic mulch among fruit and vegetable producers: Survey results. Eastern and Central Regions Fruit, Vegetable and Food Safety In-service. University of Tennessee, March 12, and March 26, 2019.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2019
Citation:
Galinato, S.P.; Velandia, M.; Ghimire, S. Economic feasibility of adopting alternative plastic mulches: case study for pumpkin in Western Washington. Working Paper, School of Economic Sciences, Washington State University, 2019, Pullman, WA.
|
Progress 10/01/17 to 09/30/18
Outputs
Target Audience:We targeted US aspiring,beginner,and experienced, fruit and vegetableproducers. We also targeted Extension personnel working with fruit and vegetable growers. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?
Nothing Reported
How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Results have been disseminated through field days and Extension presentations: Velandia M. "Farmers' Markets Price Reporting Mobile Application." Area Specialists Workshop, University of Tennessee. Murfreesboro, TN, May 22, 2018 (Participants = 12).? Velandia, M. "True Costs and Profitability in Vegetable Production." Organic Crops Field Tour, University of Tennessee. Knoxville, TN, October 26, 2017 (Participants = 40). What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?We obtained funding from Southern Sustainable Agricultural, Research and Education (SARE) to implement a project aiming to expand Fresh Stop Markets (FSMs) as a mechanism that enables farmers to achieve both agricultural sustainability and social justice in the food system across the southeast region. FSMs are "pop up" fresh farm markets organized biweekly for 22 weeks during the season at local churches, community centers, and other public spaces in food insecure neighborhoods. FSMs provide local fresh produce to each market's shareholders on a sliding scale based on income. Unlike traditional community supported agriculture (CSA) schemes, there is no expectation for shareholders to purchase all shares at the beginning of the season, nor are they committed to participate in every market day. FSMs offer farmers a low-risk outlet which helps them diversify their marketing portfolios and transition from farmers' markets and CSAs to wholesale markets. FSMs allow farmers to become active leaders in their community to build food systems that promote environmental stewardship and social equity. To understand the economic viability of FSMs, we will conduct a survey of farm enterprises from the 14 existing FSMs and 5 case studies.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
• In recent years, a large number of consumers have shown increased interest in foods produced in unique ways, including locally grown foods. These consumers are also fueling changes in the food system as they seek to purchase their produce through diverse channels ranging from direct-to-consumer market outlets (e.g., on-farm markets, farmers' markets, community supported agriculture, pick-your-own, and roadside stands) to more traditional supermarkets, warehouse clubs, and big box stores. This evolution has led to a higher number of farmers to consider new ways to market their produce such as farmers' markets, farm-to-school, and farm-to-institute programs, food hubs, and CSAs. One of the challenges fruit and vegetable producers face, especially small and mid-sized scale farmers, is identifying the optimal combination of market outlets that maximize short-term profits but guarantee the long-term sustainability of their farm businesses. The optimal combination of the various market outlets can make the difference between survival and failure of small and medium-scale produce farm businesses. Helping producers understand the factors that influence the long-term sustainability of their farm businesses when selling fresh produce using local food marketing practices is critical for the long-term survival of local food systems in regions of predominantly small and medium-sized fruit and vegetable producers. • One of the challenges face by fruit and vegetable producers selling their produce at farmers markets is how to price their produce making sure they cover their cost of production and still make a profit. Prices in this market outlet are mainly determined by consumer preferences and their willingness to pay for locally grown products at these outlets. Producers usually use wholesale, retail, and other vendors' prices as a reference to set their prices. Part of setting prices correctly is knowing and understanding their cost of production. Small and medium-sized farms are those most likely to use farmers markets as a market outlet to sell their products and those are also the ones lacking budget tools to better understand their production and marketing costs. What has been done? • Through field days and workshops we provided producers with tools and information aiming to help them identify market outlets that guarantee long-term sustainability of their farm businesses. • Through train-the-trainer activities and presentations at professional conferences, we have informed Extension personnel and other researchers working with or producing information for fruit and vegetable producers about the factors influencing prices at farmers markets and how these factors could help asses these types of producers how to set their produce prices at farmers markets. IMPACT • We generated a change in knowledge in Tennessee fruit and vegetable producers as they became aware of the factors they need to consider when selecting marketing strategies and pricing their products. Additionally, we made aware of the factors they need to manage to guarantee the long-term sustainability of their farm business.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2018
Citation:
Holcomb, R.B., C.L. Neil, J. Lelekacs, M. Velandia, T.A. Woods, H.L. Goodwin, and R.L. Rainey. 2018. A Local Food System Glossary: A Rose by Any Other Name. Choices 33(3). Available online at https://bit.ly/2Q0yBNk.
- Type:
Theses/Dissertations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2018
Citation:
Bellingham, S. 2018. Factors Influencing Tomato Prices at Tennessee Farmers Markets. MS Thesis, University of Tennessee, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2018
Citation:
Bellingham, S., M. Velandia!, C. Boyer, and C. Hellwinckel. 2018. Factors Influencing Tomato Prices at Tennessee Farmers Markets. 2018 Southern Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Jacksonville, FL, February 3 6 [Refereed].
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2018
Citation:
Velandia, M., D. Hinton, and T.L. McKinley. Farmers Market Price Reporting App. The purpose of this app is to facilitate the collection of farmers markets prices at Tennessee farmers markets. Available online at https://iiwgbt.app.appery.io/apperyio-app.html.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2018
Citation:
Guest Lecture: True Costs and Profitability in Vegetable Production presented to Internship in Horticulture and Plant Sciences PLSC492, University of Tennessee, Spring 2018.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Velandia, M. True Costs and Profitability in Vegetable Production. Organic Crops Field Tour, University of Tennessee. Knoxville, TN, October 26, 2017 (Participants = 40).
- Type:
Other
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2018
Citation:
Velandia M. Farmers Markets Price Reporting Mobile Application. Area Specialists Workshop, University of Tennessee. Murfreesboro, TN, May 22, 2018 (Participants = 12).
|
Progress 10/01/16 to 09/30/17
Outputs
Target Audience:During this reporting period we targeted individual producers and community organizations that support those producers. Specifically we targeted US fruit and vegetables producers. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?
Nothing Reported
How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Results have been disseminated through extension presentations and extension publications: Velandia, M., and T. Marsh. "Economic Considerations for the Adoption of Biodegradable Plastic Mulch in Vegetable Production." International Symposium: Biodegradable Mulch Film, June 30, 2017, Novara, Italy - Collaboration with Washington State University. Velandia, M. "True Costs and Profitability in Vegetable Production." Organic Field Day, October 26, 2017. Velandia, M. "The Use of Biodegradable Mulch Films in Vegetable Production." Agricultural Economics Market Outlook In-service trainings, Knoxville, TN, October 31, 2017; Murfreesboro, TN, November 1, 2017; Jackson, TN, November 2, 2017 - Collaboration with Washington State University. Kuan-Ju Chena, Suzette Galinatoa, Shuresh Ghimireb, Stuart MacDonaldc, Thomas Marsha, Carol Milesb, Peter Tozerd, and Margarita Velandiae. "Using Biodegradable Plastic Mulch." Washington State Extension Publication. In Review. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?• We submitted agrant proposalthat will help us explore and potentially expandnew coordination and supply management strategies among small and mid-sized scale fruit and vegetable grower in the southeast region. Additionally we submitted a grant proposal that will help us evaluate potential alternatives to address the labor issues among small and mid-sized scale fruit and vegetable producers, and therefore guarantee the survival of this type of farms in the fruit and vegetable sector: Tanaka, K., K. Moskowitz, M. Velandia, C. Trejo-Pech, and S. Muntz. 2017. "Extending Roots of Fresh Stop Markets across the Southeast Region." Southern SARE (Sustainable Agriculture Research & Education) - Collaboration with University of Kentucky. Velandia, M., C. Boyer, S.A. Smith, C. Stripling, C. Clark, A. Wszelaki, K. Tanaka, F.L. Stribling, J.P. de Koff, and E. Bidgood. 2017. "Farm Human Resource Access Programs for Sustainable Local and Regional Food Systems in the Southeast Region." Southern SARE (Sustainable Agriculture Research & Education) - Collaboration with University of Kentucky.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
ISSUE • In recent years, a large number of consumers have shown increased interest in foods produced in unique ways, including locally grown foods. These consumers are also fueling changes in the food system as they seek to purchase their produce through diverse channels ranging from direct-to-consumer market outlets (e.g. on-farm markets, farmers' markets, community supported agriculture, pick-your-own, and roadside stands) to more traditional supermarkets, warehouse clubs, and big box stores. This evolution has led a higher number of farmers to consider new ways to market their produce such as farmers' markets, farm-to-school and farm-to-institute programs, food hubs, and CSAs. One of the challenges fruit and vegetable producers face, especially small and mid-sized scale farmers, is identifying the optimal combination of market outlets thatmaximize short term profits but guarantee the long-term sustainability of their farm businesses. The optimal combination of the various market outlets can make the difference between survival and failure of small and medium-scale produce farm businesses. Helping producers understand the factors that influence the long term sustainability of their farm businesses when selling fresh produce using local food marketing practices is critical for the long term survival of local food systems in regions of predominantly small and medium-sized fruit and vegetable producers. •In recent years consumers have indicated their desired to identify not only where the fruits and vegetables they consume come from but also how they are produced. Some fruit and vegetable buyers have started to pay more attention to the way fruits and vegetables are produced to satisfy consumer preferences.Therefore, producers are more motivated to identify environmentally friendly production practices that can have a positive impact on theenvironmental sustainability of their farm but also that can attract consumers and let them access specific markets. The use of polyethylene plastic mulches in fruit and vegetable acrossthe world has shown to be very detrimental for the environment because of the way they are disposed at the end of the growing season. Alternative technologies have been identified such as biodegradable mulches. A recent study suggest consumers may be willing to pay a premium for produce grown using biodegradable plastic mulches. WHAT HAS BEEN DONE? • Throughfield days and workshops we provides producers with tools and information aiming tohelp them identify market outlets that guarantee long term sustainability of their farm businesses. • Through extension publications and train-the-trainer activities we have made fruit and vegetable producers aware of the potential applications of biodegradable plastic mulches in vegetable production as well as the economic implication transitioning from polyethylene plastic mulches to biodegradable plastic mulches. IMPACT • We generateda change in knowledge in Tennesseefruit and vegetable producers as they became aware of the factors they need to consider when selecting marketing strategies as well the factors they need to manage to guarantee the long term sustainability of their farm business in a new market environment. • We generated a change in knowledge among Extension personnel regarding the use of biodegradable mulches for vegetable production.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Under Review
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Arana-Coronado, J.J., C.O. Trejo-Pech, M. Velandia, J. Peralta-Jimenez. 2017. Factors Influencing Organic and Fair Trade Coffee Grower Level of Engagement with Cooperatives: The Case of Coffee Farmers in Mexico. Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing. In Review.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Under Review
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Kuan-Ju Chena, Suzette Galinatoa, Shuresh Ghimireb, Stuart MacDonaldc, Thomas Marsha, Carol Milesb, Peter Tozerd, and Margarita Velandiae. "Using Biodegradable Plastic Mulch." Washington State Extension Publication.
|
Progress 03/22/16 to 09/30/16
Outputs
Target Audience:During this reporting period we targeted individual producers, retailers, regulatory agencies, and community organizations that support those producers. Specifically we targeted Tennessee fruit and vegetables producers using direct-to-consumer market outlets to sell their products locally. Additionally, we targeted organizations and government agencies interested in the development of local food systems in Tennessee. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?
Nothing Reported
How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Results have been disseminated through presentations at extension, local organizations, and government agencies' meetings: Velandia, M., C.O. Trejo-Pech, D. Morris, A. Wszelaki, K. Niewolny, and L. MacAuley. 2016. "Evaluating Financial and Economic Factors Contributing to the Sustainability of Beginning Farms in Tennessee and Virginia." Presented at the Eastern, Central, and Western Regions Agricultural Economics Market Outlook In-service training, University of Tennessee; Knoxville, TN, November 1, 2016; Murfreesboro, TN, November 2, 2016; and Jackson, TN, November 3, 2016. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? Prepare and submit at least one multi-state grant proposal to a USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture program based on one of the team's specific objectives. Conduct at least two additional trainings targeting fruit and vegetable farmers, and community-led organizations.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
ISSUE In recent years, a large number of consumers have shown increased interest in foods produced in unique ways, including locally grown foods. These consumers are also fueling changes in the food system as they seek to purchase their produce through diverse channels ranging from direct-to-consumer market outlets (e.g. on-farm markets, farmers' markets, community supported agriculture, pick-your-own, and roadside stands) to more traditional supermarkets, warehouse clubs, and big box stores. This evolution has led a higher number of farmers to consider new ways to market their produce such as farmers' markets, farm-to-school and farm-to-institute programs, food hubs, and CSAs. One of the challenges fruit and vegetable producers face when using alternative market outlets such as farmers markets is how to price their produce making sure they cover their cost of production and still make a profit. Additionally, the optimal combination of the various market outlets can make the difference between survival and failure of small and medium-scale produce farm businesses. The optimal combination of market outlets, and pricing products in an optimal way can guarantee the long term economic sustainability of a farm business. The market for local produce is constrained by lack of infrastructure and the difficulties faced by local food producers in penetrating conventional markets. Efforts to address these constraints recently focus on the development of food hubs. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) defines a food hub as "a business or organization that actively manages the aggregation, distribution, and marketing of source-identified food products primarily from local and regional producers to strengthen their ability to satisfy wholesale, retail, and institutional demand." Although a food hub may be a potential solution to strengthen local food systems, specifically those associated with fruits and vegetables, they are not a single handed solution and may not be the right answer for some groups. Organizations and government agencies interested in supporting the development of local food systems in Tennessee need to better understand how public and private resources could be efficiently allocate to improve fruit and vegetable producer access to market opportunities and consumer access to fresh produce. WHAT HAS BEEN DONE? We collected farmers markets price information from five farmers markets in Tennessee. This information helped us better understand the factors influencing produce prices consumers paid at farmers markets. This information was available for fruit and vegetable producers and extension personnel through in-service and producer trainings. Additionally, farmers markets prices are available on a weekly basis through the Center for Crops Diversification at University of Kentucky. We completed seven case studies of small beginning farms producing fruits and/or vegetables. We evaluated their key success factors, specifically we evaluated the roll market outlets play in the economic sustainability of their farm businesses. This information was available for fruit and vegetable producers and extension personnel through in-service trainings and an Extension publication. We observed an overall trend in market outlets used by the farms included in the case studies: All farms included a direct-to-consumer component to their market outlet mix. Most of the farms started with a larger percentage of sales made through farmers markets and later began diversifying their portfolio of market outlets by increasing percentage of sales made through other, more profitable, market outlets such as CSAs. We conducted a food-hub feasibility study that helped East Tennessee organizations and government agencies asses the need a food hub for this region. IMPACT Views of the Tennessee Farmers Markets Price Report Website page were around 1,901 and price reports downloads from May to November were about 734. The reports help producers formulate pricing strategies and avoid losses based on unrealistic expectations. Therefore price information resulted in a change of knowledge, as we made produce farmers aware on how to use price report information to set optimal prices. Although every farm is unique, our economic and financial analysis of beginning farms may provide helpful insights (change in knowledge) regarding necessary resources to start a farm business that is economically sustainable over time. Results from the food hub feasibility study helped East Tennessee organizations and government agencies to not invest in a full-service food hub hence saving at least $200,000 in public and private funding for other local food efforts. Therefore, this study resulted in a change of action by organizations and policy makers.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Edwards, M., M. Velandia, D. M. Lambert, W. H. Pepper, C. D. Clark, and K. L. Jensen. 2016. Production Liability Insurance use Among Tennessee Fruit and Vegetable Farmers. Journal of Food Distribution Research 47(2): 127- 137.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Velandia, M., T. Woods, E. Bendfeldt, J. Lelekacs, R. Holcomb, M. Palma, D. Lamie, R. Dunning, L. Meyer, H.L. Goodwin Jr., R. Rainey, A. Collart, and D. Fields. 2016. Opportunities for Local Food Systems Research and Extension in the South A Land Grant University System Initiative. Journal of Food Distribution Research 47 (1): 73 - 75.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Under Review
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Velandia, M., Trejo-Pech, C., Morris, D., Wszelaki, A., Niewolny, K., & MacAuley, L. 2016. Evaluating Financial and Economic Factors Contributing to the Sustainability of Beginning Farms in Tennessee and Virginia. Extension Publication, University of Tennessee Extension.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Hellwinckel, C., and M. Velandia. March 2016. Knoxville Regional Food Hub Feasibility Study. Final Report. Institute of Agriculture, University of Tennessee; and Knoxville Metropolitan Planning Commission.
|
|