24 pages, Alternative food networks (AFN) are argued to provide platforms to re-socialize and re-spacealize food, establish and contribute to democratic participation in local food chains, and foster producer–consumer relations and trust. As one of the most recent examples of AFN, Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS) have gained notable traction in attempting to redefine consumer-producer relations in the organic value chain. The participation of stakeholders, such as consumers, has been a key element theoretically differentiating PGS from other organic verification systems. While research on farmer participation in PGS is attracting interest, consumer participation is still widely overlooked. Using a mixed methods approach, this paper describes five PGS markets in Mexico, Chile and Bolivia. A survey was conducted with consumers in the PGS markets to explore their awareness of the PGS, how consumers participate in the PGS, and their level of trust in the respective PGS and its certified products. Results showed a low level of awareness of PGS among market consumers, few participation possibilities, and minimal consumer participation overall. Nevertheless, trust in organic quality was generally high. Consumers primarily relied on the direct relationship with producers and the PGS market itself as sources of trust. These results provide novel insight into PGS consumer-market interactions, and contribute to discussions concerning social embeddedness, awareness and participation within AFN.
Ercilla-Montserrat, Mireia (author), Sanjuan-Delmás, David (author), Sanyé-Mengual, Esther (author), Calvet-Mir, Laura (author), Banderas, Karla (author), Rieradevall, Joan (author), and Gabarrell, Xavier (author)
Format:
Online journal article
Publication Date:
2019-09
Published:
Springer New York LLC
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 83 Document Number: D10839
19 pages., via online journal., Soilless crops are commonly used in rooftop agriculture (RA) because they easily adapt to building constraints. However, acceptance of the produce derived from this system may be controversial. This paper evaluates consumers’ acceptance of food from RA in Mediterranean cities, focusing on the quality of the product, production system, and consumers’ motivations. We surveyed 238 respondents on the UAB university campus as potential consumers. The survey was distributed via an Internet-link that was provided along with a sample of tomatoes from RA. The results showed that most people approved the quality of RA products and perceived them to be local and fresh (94%). The respondents exhibited acceptance of soilless-produced tomatoes and considered them to be environmentally better than conventionally produced ones (69%). Cluster analysis revealed that consumers with high income levels and a university education had a better perception of the quality and proposed a higher price for RA products, but no difference was found regarding their environmental perception of this products. Moreover, people who possessed more information about the product also had a higher perception of the quality and production system (it was perceived to be environmentally friendly) and would pay more for them. The main concerns of consumers were related to food safety and the social impact of RA. Additional research is needed to improve the sustainability of RA, and the applied measures should be communicated to potential consumers to enhance their acceptance and success.
21 pages, via Online Journal, This paper explores the role of regulation and legislation on influencing the development and diffusion of technologies and methods of crop production. To do this, the change in pesticide registration under European Regulation 1107/2009 ‘Placing Plant Protection Products on the Market’ was followed through the UK’s agricultural system of innovation. Fieldwork included: a series of interviews conducted with scientists, agronomists and industry organisations; a programme of visiting agricultural events; as well as sending an electronic survey to British potato growers. The innovation system is noted to have made the legislation less restrictive than originally proposed. The most notable system response to the legislation is the adjustment of agrochemical company pesticide discovery strategy and their expansion into biologically derived treatments. There have also been other innovation responses: agricultural seed companies have been breeding in pathogen resistance in their cultivars; agricultural consultancies are prepared to recommend pathogen-resistant seeds; scientists are using the change as justification for adopting their solutions; the agricultural levy boards funded research into off-label pesticide uses; and producers, potato growers in particular, have been seeking advice, but not changing their growing practices.
Shellabarger, Rachel M. (author), Voss, Rachel C. (author), Egerer, Monika (author), Chiang, Shun-Nan (author), and University of California, Santa Cruz
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2018-10-17
Published:
United States: Springer Netherlands
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 8 Document Number: D10316
13 pages., Via online journal., The idea of a profound urban–rural divide has shaped analysis of the 2016 U.S. presidential election results. Here, through examples from agri-food systems, we consider the limitations of the urban–rural divide framework in light of the assumptions and intentions that underpin it. We explore the ideas and imaginaries that shape urban and rural categories, consider how material realities are and are not translated into U.S. rural development, farm, and nutrition policies, and examine the blending of rural and urban identities through processes of rural deagrarianization and urban reagrarianization. We do not argue that an urban–rural divide does not exist, as studies and public opinion polls illustrate both measured and perceived differences in many aspects of the lived experiences that shape our individual and collective actions. Ultimately, we suggest that the urban–rural divide concept obscures the diversity and dynamism of experiences each category encompasses. Additionally, it ignores the connections and commonalities that demand integrative solutions to challenges in agri-food systems, and draw attention to the power relations that shape resource access and use within and across urban and rural spaces.
