The Bush administration recently informed America’s poorest senior citizens that the trial programme which has been handing them food coupons is to come to an end. But what will this mean for the nutritionally needy? And what will it mean for the nationwide network of farmers markets, which are fast becoming an integral backbone of the lives of the majority of American farm owners?
Go deeper with GlobalData
Discover B2B Marketing That Performs
Combine business intelligence and editorial excellence to reach engaged professionals across 36 leading media platforms.
Farmers markets are an age-old means to sell agricultural produce, admittedly, but nonetheless they remain big news in the US. Propelled by a consumer desire to know where their food has come from, such markets are growing in popularity and agricultural producers across the US consider direct marketing of produce through farmers markets an important sales outlet.
Between 1994 and 2000, the number of farmers markets in the US increased by 63%, and according to the 2000 National Farmers Market Directory, there are over 2,800 farmers markets operating nationwide. Over one million shoppers visit the markets every week.
As an integral part in the urban/farm linkage then, the promotion of farmers markets is a large part of the work being carried out by the Agriculture Marketing Service (AMS), a branch of the US Department of Agriculture (USDA).
The AMS explains that the markets form the “backbone” of its effort to make sure the “American family farm” survives. An incredible 94% of all the farms in the US fall under the AMS’ definition of “Small Farm Operator”, that is generating under US$250,000 in annual receipts, and the growth of the markets clearly indicates the importance of a sales outlet for these farmers, who are frozen out of the billions of dollars worth of crop subsidies picked up by large farm operators.
US Tariffs are shifting - will you react or anticipate?
Don’t let policy changes catch you off guard. Stay proactive with real-time data and expert analysis.
By GlobalDataWhile US farmers markets are not necessarily local government operations, government or independent associations certify many. Certification means that the market is able to maintain its local identity as it guarantees the products’ local origins. An important element of the funding however is two state-sponsored schemes to improve nutrition amongst America’s poorest and most vulnerable; schemes which fall under the umbrella of the Farmers Market Nutrition Program (FMNP)..
WIC safety net
This social safety net was first established in 1992 for Women, Infants and Children (WIC). It provided additional coupons to WIC participants that could be used to purchase fresh fruits and vegetables at participating farmers markets, and was adopted by 39 state agencies, including four Indian tribes, one territory, and the District of Columbia. In the fiscal year 2000, federal funding for the programme was US$15m.
Organisers of the programme explained that WIC had two main goals. Firstly, the availability of coupons would provide a reliable supply of fresh, unprocessed, locally grown fruits and vegetables to poor women and children at nutritional risk. Secondly, the USDA hoped that the encouragement to buy fruit and vegetables in this way would serve to expand consumers’ awareness of farmers markets, and boost awareness of eating wholesomely.
Senior programme
Last year, this programme was widened to include senior citizens; and USDA’s Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) formed the Seniors Farmers Market Nutrition Pilot Program (SFMNPP).
The CCC awarded almost US$15m in grants to 31 states and five Indian tribal governments who then provided food coupons to low-income elderly seniors, coupons that are accepted in exchange for eligible foods at farmers markets, roadside stands, and community supported agriculture programs.
Partnerships between the fiscal authorities utilised infrastructure that enabled farmers markets to expand to serve senior consumers, the estimated 370,000 low-income seniors the pilot planned to serve.
Through the US, at least eleven projects offered seniors transportation between the markets and their senior centres, or in some cases local growers arranged to take their produce directly to senior housing.
Admirable but too costly?
It came as something of a shock then, when the Bush administration admitted that the senior programme will be the first to go as the country entered a new period of budgetary deficit. Agriculture Secretary Ann M. Veneman halved the financing this year to US$10m, citing a lack of funds in the USDA’s US$73bn budget. In next year’s budget, the programme for older people does not make an appearance at all.
The under secretary of agriculture for food and nutrition, Eric Bost, told the New York Times: “The program is admirable, but the issue for us and the president is that we are not able to fund everything we wanted.
“We care for the elderly, but we don’t have the money for this.”
For the senior consumers currently benefiting from the scheme, the immediate effects are obvious. The programme was a bid to improve the nutrition of a vulnerable elderly population. Remove the scheme and the intentions must be fulfilled in another way.
Another less debated effect could be the lack of a social exercise. The trip to the farmers market is often a thinly veiled social outing; a chance to talk and walk, while foraging for the best vegetables on the stalls.
What will it do for farmers?
For the farmers themselves, however, an end to the senior subsidies programme could mean a devastating impact on the network of markets countrywide.
The subsidies programmes are a boon for the small producer in the US. For over 15,000 such farmers who sell through them, they have offered a steady stream of ready customers; guaranteed sales to supplement the basic farm income. According to USDA research, a third of the farmers selling produce on the markets use the occasions as their sole marketing outlet.
For the average small producer, the costs involved are often deemed prohibitive if it is necessary to rely on the uneven footfall of urban and richer families for this extra income. For such social groups, while the idea of fresh food face-to-face from farmers is appealing and cheap, it is often secondary to the offer of convenience, and the ability to use credit cards, at the local Wal-Mart superstore.
Lack of government support
Farmers markets then are highly supported by the public, those on the receiving end of state support, and the agriculture sector. They promote nutrition education, wholesome eating habits; they boost the community’s economy; they are welcomed by the current consumer trend towards traceable foods. So why is the government support lacking?
There is still a balance to find amongst the pressures on US agriculture; a middle road between the lopsided subsidies handed out to the few, large agribusiness concerns and the public sentiment towards the family farms, which account for 94% of producers in the country. In her major policy statement last year, Veneman argued the case that a “new farm policy must be tailored to reflect the wide difference in farms today”, but it remains to be seen if the allocation of US$171bn through the farm bill in the next ten years follows this call.
By Clare Harman, just-food.com
