Progress 08/01/20 to 02/15/23
Outputs
Target Audience:The target audience for the final 8 months of the project (August 2022 to February 2023) were food safety researchers, Extension professionals, and smaller scale produce growers in Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island. In addition to two peer-review articles mentioned in prior reports, we have four additional publications in different stages of production for these audiences. Two of the publications are being revised, one is near completion, and the last addressing the contradiction in consumer perceptions and attitudes for food safety regulation and cost is still in the writing stage. We will update this report as the publications are accepted. At least 150 small-scale farm produce growers received training with the materials provided by this project. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Ph.D. candidate Alisha Utter conducted the work outlined in Objective 1. She started on the project as a Ph.D. student in the Agroecology program at the University of Vermont. She was trained to conduct in-depth semi-structured interviews and qualitative data analysis methods for this project and was able build on the competencies gained in this experience completed her candidacy exam in 2017, and conduct her own qualitative data collection and analysis for her dissertation. During this time, she was also awarded one of ten national scholarships from the James Beard Foundation National Scholars Program. Ph.D. candidate Kayla Alvis conducted the work outlined in Objective 2. She started on the project as a Ph.D. student in the Rural Sociology program at The Ohio State University and was trained to clean, prepare, and analyze survey data collected from New England consumers. Using several multivariate techniques, she expanded her expertise which prepared her to conduct her own research, contributed to her successful completion of her candidacy exam in 2022, and subsequent data collection and analysis for her dissertation. These experiences contributed to her being awarded an internship with the Health Policy Institute of Ohio and to become a Leadership Education in Neurodevelopmental Disabilities. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Findings from this project have been published in peer-review journals that are used by academics and food safety professionals. In addition, in-press and in progress work is being targeted to both academic and professional audiences using open-source publications to reduce barriers to access by eliminating the cost from pay walls. Specific data points were integrated into produce safety trainings and shared directly with growers who attended workshops conducted by our Extension team and during our teams on-farm visits. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?
Nothing Reported
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Shaping Food Safety Research and Outputs Outreach was provided to growers to assist them in understanding aspects of wash and irrigation water quality, which is described below. Additionally, smaller scale produce growers received subsidized produce safety training to remove some of the financial barrier to training, and they received instruction in cost-effective and scale-appropriate practices that further remove barriers to being compliant with FDA rules from the Food Safety Modernization Act. Responding to the extended period of the award relinquishment and transfer of the project from the University of Vermont to The Ohio State University, and the Covid-19 global pandemic, we revised our approach in 2020 to respond to changes in the state of produce safety education and outreach in New England. During the transition period, the Northeast Center to Advance Food Safety (NECAFS) used outputs from our first two objectives, which evaluated farmer attitudes and perceptions of produce safety practices and their ability and willingness to adopt them. This informed the need to evaluate specific scale-appropriate practices that smaller-scale produce growers can adopt on their farms to comply with FSMA regardless of whether they are covered by the rule. We reported in the transfer application that Objective 3 (Measure economic impact of increased regional provision of produce in New England) was no longer needed and focused our efforts on addressing other actionable areas we identified in our research. With Program Officer approval, we moved resources from Objective 3 to expand the impact of Objective 4. In doing this, we added scale-appropriate detail to the PSA training delivered by our Extension team and conducted additional field work to address irrigation and wash water concerns. We also identified barriers to complying with the FSMA rules that were unrelated to gaps in grower knowledge of produce safety practices or the introduction and spread of pathogens. Our survey and interviews identified strengths and weaknesses in knowledge and practices, but the weaknesses were not related to a lack of understanding of pathogen sources or spread, or ways to reduce them. The weaknesses where largely related to gaps in available information and the training curriculum used for small-scale operators. We identified that, while many growers were knowledgeable about and willing to do what was needed to operate a safe produce farm, they often lacked the ability to do this, which was connected to two conditions: either a lack of financial resources or a lack of scale-specific options for implementing produce safety practices. Both barriers are interconnected with the small scale at which our farmer audience is operating and the limitations of the materials and equipment, even time to spend on tasks, needed to implement many of the recommended practices that are better suited for larger-scale operations. After initially integrating our findings that included more emphasis on scale-appropriate materials, equipment, and practices, we focused on two areas that growers shared in interviews as being among the largest barriers to their successful implementation of produce safety standards: wash water quality testing and produce rinsing protocols. Growers did not lack knowledge of these being important, but did lack knowledge about how to do them. Specifically, information on testing locations or companies, testing parameters needed for their operation, testing costs, and water sample collection practices were a barrier. Farmer Outreach and Training With these approaches as part of our plan of work, dozens of small-scale produce growers received training in scale appropriate methods, including wash and irrigation water testing, setting up and operating a triple wash station, and personal hygiene in the field. On-farm food safety education was conducted on 20 farms in Maine and New Hampshire (10 farms per state). Additional produce safety trainings were conducted as workshops in these states and in Massachusetts and Rhode Island. These include the following: University of Maine Extension provided training using the Produce Safety Alliance (PSA) curriculum and provided training manuals to 50 growers. During these and other trainings, growers in Maine and New Hampshire also received instruction on record keeping, produce rinsing, and hand washing hygiene in the field using inexpensive materials and supplies. Demonstration materials and supplies were provided to reify how FMSA standards can be achieved at smaller scales and reduce the economy of scale barrier they often face. (Materials and supplies include: 70 5-gallon buckets, 35 clipboards with record storage, 40 bungee cords, 60 food-grade commercial cleaning brushes, handwashing pump soaps) UMass Extension provided trainings to smaller scale growers using the same PSA grower training manuals (50 growers), and training that incorporated 50 food-grade commercial cleaning brushes that highlight the importance of sturdy, anti-microbial materials. The University of Rhode Island Extension provided similar training to smaller scale growers using the same PSA grower training manuals (50 growers), and hands-on instruction for using food-grade commercial cleaning brushes. Record keeping instruction was provided and 50 clipboards with record storage were provided to growers. Understanding Consumer Willingness to Pay for Safe Produce Analysis of our New England consumer survey identified two interconnected data points related to the produce growers operating costs from food safety regulation. First, New England consumers were very interested in labeling that would identify whether specific produce was grown following produce safety standards; many wanted to know that the produce they purchase is was certified safe. Second, a majority of those consumers who want certified safe labeling are also willing to pay for labeling. These two data points help address the often unasked and mostly unanswered question regarding produce safety: who pays the additional costs incurred by growers when margins are thin? Anecdotal accounts from Extension and industry experts was that consumers were unlikely to be willing to pay, however, our findings indicate that they are willing, and that the amount they are willing to pay varies depending on whether the market is a farmers market to supermarket. One qualifier that needs mentioned is that this research was conducted prior to the current economic inflation affecting all consumers and growers, local, regional, and global. The results of these two studies are in peer-review. Finally, our consumer survey research identified a major contradiction in consumer behavior. Consumers seem aware of the constraints of small-scale growers as they implement produce safety on their farms, yet most consumers also want to see growers implement the same practices regardless of the size of the farmer or the cost. Economies of scale affect the costs a farmer incurs for meeting produce safety standards, with smaller scale growers paying more per acre/practice while also having smaller operating budgets. This is a circumstance many consumers are aware of, however, many of those consumers want to see all farmers implementing the same practices. A majority also want to see all farms, regardless of scale, regulated the same. There are many questions from these findings that need answered in order to better understand and interpret this contradiction: 1) To what extent are consumers aware of the role that farm scale plays in food safety practice implementation? 2) To what extent do consumers understand the need for nuance in food safety regulation to ensure scale-appropriateness? 3) Are consumers appreciating the distinction between standards (the objective) and practices (means to achieve the objective) when responding about their preferences for food safety regulation, farm scale, and costs?
Publications
|
Progress 08/01/21 to 07/31/22
Outputs
Target Audience:There are three primary target audiences. The first audience are farmers attending Extension programming; we renewed contact with farmers in each of our project states, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island. The second audience are other Extension professionals and organizations with an interest in fresh produce safety being made available to small and mid-sized produce farmers/growers. The third audience are social scientists and other academics engaged in food systems research with interests in fresh produce production and food safety of small and mid-sized farms. Changes/Problems:We encountered several issues involved in paying for trainings and other items on the project due to restrictions imposed by our grants staff. We were unable to use grant funds to pay for additional trainings specifically for small-scale farmers. To meet our goals, we shifted our focus from hosting trainings for specific audiences to providing teaching materials and teaching aids for attendees who represent smaller-scale farms. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Graduate Student Alvis participated in a summer internship with a rural healthcare policy group in Ohio while also working on this project part time during the summer months. Student Alvis was able to combine experiences and expertise in farmer produce food safety, consumer perceptions research, and rural health policy as part of her career development and achieving progress towards completion of her Ph.D. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?
Nothing Reported
What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?As we wrap up the project and close out the award in the next three months, PI Parker and NEEL Bolton and Co-PI Machado will collect stories from farmers about their experiences using the low-cost food safety materials on their farms. We will also revise and resubmit the papers in review as needed, and work toward completing the manuscripts in progress. Our final act will be a team evaluation of the successes and challenges experiences on the project for our final report.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Publications. In addition to the two previously published articles (one analyzing grower food safety practices, and the other the economic components of the grower survey), we have made significant advances on four additional manuscripts. In our last report, we discussed writing a manuscript that completed the research and outputs for Objective 1 using qualitative data and analysis of farmer interviews revealing several themes or topics that effect farmer adoption of produce safety. This was co-authored by PI-Parker and Graduate Student A. Utter (a Ph.D. student at the University of Vermont). This article identifies several themes shaping grower perceptions and beliefs regarding food safety that will be used by our Extension team to shape their conversations and training workshops. While the article was largely completed, the findings section needs rewritten and student Utter and PI Parker have not made time to collaborate on this. The target journal is still Human Organization where it will highlight the very nuanced ways in which small and mid-sized New England farmers respond to and make decisions about on farm food safety. We have made significant progress on three additional manuscripts using data from the New England consumer survey that was analyzed this past year. Two manuscripts were written and submitted for review. One is in review and focuses on the significance of markets in influencing consumer interest and preferences for produce safety information of fresh produce. Another article, also in review, focuses on consumer willingness-to-pay more for produce that has been safety certified. One final article has much of the introduction, literature, and methods written and will focus on the contradictions among consumers in their desire to support safe, local fresh produce production and the belief that all farms need the same regulations regardless of farm scale. Extension Activities The New England Extension Leader (NEEL) position funded by this grant was hired and completed the tasks in their plan of work, including identifying regional water quality testing labs and developing materials to share with farmers on costs, locations, and best sampling practices, etc. Several Extension programs were delivered to provide food safety trainings that were supported by findings from our research - main topics such as costs and access to various water quality testing services to assess irrigation and rinse or wash water safety. In collaboration with the PI, the NEEL assisted in coordinating the purchase of teaching aids and training materials for use by Extension agents to use at each partner institution. These materials were selected by our produce safety experts for their low cost and ease of procuring, simplicity and durability of design, and DIY (do it yourself) for busy small and mid-sized farm operators. These include: Wash buckets for each trainee to learn and demonstrate triple-wash practices Materials for building a low-cost, DIY portable handwashing station (both sets of items were purchased for use by University of Maine Extension) Food-grade cleaning brushes for sanitation (50 per state) Fifty copies of the Produce Safety Alliance Grower Training Manuals were purchased for Extension partners in Maine, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. These manuals are $50 each and significantly reduce the cost of training for smaller scale farm operators.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Under Review
Year Published:
2022
Citation:
K. Alvis, J.S. Parker, F. Becot. Mind the GAPS? Consumer Perceptions and Purchasing of Safety Certified Produce in Two Market Contexts . Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Under Review
Year Published:
2022
Citation:
J.S. Parker, K. Alvis*, and F. Becot. Consumers prefer safety certified foods, but are they willing to pay? Food Control.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2023
Citation:
Nearing completion. J.S. Parker, K. Alvis, and A. Utter. I understand The Rule, but how does it apply to my small New England farm? Evolving understandings of food policy in the prolonged roll-out of the 2011 Food Safety Modernization Act Agriculture and Human Values.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2023
Citation:
In development. "Regulate them All: Consumer Understandings of Food Safety and Farm Scale in Food Safety Regulation." Agriculture and Human Values.
|
Progress 08/01/20 to 07/31/21
Outputs
Target Audience:The transfer for this project from the University of Vermont to Ohio State University was completed in August/September 2020. By October of the same year, accounts were set up at OSU, and subawards were issued. As we continue to emerge from lockdowns and university research restrictions, and move back to engaging our communities, we have just started to resume in person contact with farmers in each state. As such, our target audiences in this period have been food systems practitioners and academics. Changes/Problems:The research period of 2020 to 2021 has had considerable interruptions in research and Extension activities from the Covid-19 pandemic. To minimize further disruption to our work, we have adjusted to these events by prioritizing the work that can be accomplished with the existing team and resources and by hiring and training a graduate student whose expertise complements the project. We have not made any changes to the plan of work, only to the timeline for achieving our Extension goals. In the final year of the project, we are confident that the remaining activities of Objective 4 will be completed. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Graduate student K. Alvis was trained in multiple quantitative data analysis procedures, including: data cleaning, data preparation, recoding and transforming variables, and computing target variables. K. Alvis then was trained to use the regression and cluster analysis (data reduction) features of STATA statistical analysis software. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Online Extension workshops and trainings continue to be offered using Zoom and other online platforms. Our Extension team has incorporated existing findings from our research into those trainings as appropriate. We still have work to do to continue generating salient outputs for small and mid-sized farmers. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Our final project year will focus on two broad goals: completing the two manuscripts outlined previously from the completed research phases of the project (Objectives 1 and 2), and translating the findings into salient outputs for small and mid-sized farmer target audiences, which will complete Objective 4. We will develop water quality and safety case studies of farmers in all New England states. The NEEL will formulate a Water Testing/Safety focused case study assessment in each state using the needs assessment tool discussed earlier to examine the perceptions of The Rule for water use and the needs of farmers. Our NEEL will then develop materials to assist them in complying with The Rule water requirements. Three farmers from each state (CT, MA, ME, NH, RI, VT) will be interviewed late summer and early fall 2021 to learn about their experiences and perceptions specific to irrigation and wash water quality, safety, and testing. These case studies and used as specific training examples, and a Journal of Extension publication. Using the updated mapping tool created with NECAFS, we will produce a list of state certified water quality testing labs, requirements including procedures, and fee structures for required testing parameters for access by all farmers in a fact sheet, in trainings, and online. We will create seminar and webinar materials to support farmers and inform water quality labs on testing needs for The Rule. These materials will be designed to both complement the monthly Produce Safety Alliance (PSA) webinars, and to stand-alone for use by Extension educators and consultants.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
In addition to the two previously published articles (one analyzing grower food safety practices, and the other the economic components of the grower survey), we have made significant advances in writing two additional manuscripts. The first will complete the research and outputs for Objective 1 using qualitative data and analysis of farmer interviews to reveal several themes or topics that effect farmer adoption of produce safety. This is co-authored by PI-Parker and Graduate Student A. Utter (who received support from this project and is now nearing completion of her doctoral degree in agroecology at the University of Vermont). This article identifies several themes shaping grower perceptions and beliefs regarding food safety that will be used by our Extension team to shape their conversations and training workshops. The target journal is Human Organization and will highlight the very nuanced ways in which small and mid-sized New England farmers respond to and make decisions about on farm food safety. Data from the New England consumer survey was cleaned and had new variables calculated and added to the dataset to prepare it for analysis in January thru March 2021. The analysis was conducted in March through June of the same year resulting in descriptive data and two multivariate statistical models of consumer perceptions, beliefs, and willingness to pay - one logistic regression and one cluster analysis. The findings from this research is currently being prepared for the journal Rural Sociology. Once the manuscript has been submitted this fall (target date to submit is September 30), an outreach report will be written, and a module created for use by our Extension team in food safety workshops to assist farmer attendees in understanding the consumer side of food safety. Using the findings from Objective 1 (wash water and irrigation water quality posed the most significant barriers to farmers complying with the Produce Safety Rule - barriers to compliance were knowledge, and perceived cost), work has started on the needs assessment for growers regarding wash and irrigation water information, and for identifying and assessing the capabilities and costs of regional water quality specialists and lab fees. Our Extension team identified and have hired a New England Extension Leader (NEEL) position funded by this grant. This person is Jason Bolton, one of our Co-PIs. Because of the pandemic hiring freezes and limited remaining time for the project, we decided that buying some of Co-PI Bolton's time would both save a lot of time searching for a person and allow this phase of the project to begin. There was too much uncertainty regarding when the hiring freezes would end and when, or if, we could identify an appropriate candidate during the Covid-19 pandemic. Progress was made by our Extension team in identifying and collecting information on regional water specialists and lab fees. The Extension team has been working with the FDA FSMA regional center, Northeast Center for Advanced Food Safety (NECAFS) to ensure their water testing lab location interactive map is updated for Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont, Massachusetts, and Connecticut. A webinar is planned for the fall 2021 to help educate water testing labs in New England, about farmer's knowledge of the produce safety rule water testing requirements. In addition, our Extension team developed a targeted wash and irrigation water quality needs assessment (a questionnaire survey for farmers) to assess farmer's knowledge and comprehension of the produce safety rule proposed requirements. Several farmers have been contacted for the interviews with additional interviews planned for late summer and fall 2021. This will help the NEEL to coordinate the efforts of our group to enhance outreach programing with specific information on irrigation and wash water quality, safety, and testing. In gathering more detailed information from farmers on wash and irrigation water, we will develop outreach materials to assist them in finding a path to compliance through the following activities.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Accepted
Year Published:
2020
Citation:
2020. F. Becot, J. S. Parker, D. Conner, L. Pivarnik, N. Richards, and D. Hirsch. "Financially Willing and Able to Invest in Food Safety Practices? The example of produce growers in New England states (USA)." Food Control 119: 1-10 #107451.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2020.107451
|
|