Cited by 44Organic Food and AgricultureUrban Agriculture and SustainabilityRural Development and Agriculture

Increasing farm income and local food access: A case study of a collaborative aggregation, marketing, and distribution strategy that links farmers to markets

Open access
Schmidt, Michele, Kolodinsky, Jane, DeSisto, Thomas, Conte, Faye·2011·Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development

Abstract

As consumer interest in locally grown food increases, farmers and organizations are working on inventive ways to supply fresh and affordable local food to residents. The Intervale Center, a nonprofit in Burlington, Vermont, partnered with small and midscale farmers to create the Intervale Food Hub, a collaborative of staff and farmers that aggregates, markets, and distributes local products through both a multifarm community supported agriculture (CSA) program and wholesale. Informed by surveys conducted to assess supply and demand in the region, the Food Hub provides businesses, restaurants, retailers, institutions, and individuals with year-round access to a diverse mix of fresh and value-added local food. The Intervale Center serves as a local distributor, purchasing products from up to 30 farmers and coordinating packaging, marketing, distribution, and business operations. Year-round, shared space is available to conduct business operations, including packaging and short-term storage. After three years of operation, the Food Hub has begun exploring ownership structures and geographic expansion. Using a participatory action research approach, this case study reviews the enterprise's development and outcomes. We provide a qualitative assessment of farmer and staff perceptions of successful practices and limitations, and conclude with recommendations for future research.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5304/jafscd.2011.014.017

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • SB farmers lack the necessary resources and expertise to go alone in mounting a real challenge to the conventional food system.

    “similar to previous studies [28,31,33,65], SB farmers lack the necessary resources and expertise to go alone in mounting a real challenge to the conventional food system.”

    From Agroecological Transition: A Territorial Examination of the Simultaneity of Limited Farmer Livelihoods and Food Insecurity (2022) · cites this paper as [31]

    The “Collaborative Marketing and Distribution Strategies” section says small-scale farmers can share resources and expertise and reach larger markets that they cannot supply alone. The discussion of farmer barriers also identifies limits in labor, storage, and management and marketing capacity. The paper supports the need for collaboration to access markets, but does not establish that SB farmers generally cannot mount a challenge to the conventional food system. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Addison County Regional Planning Commission (ACRPC). (2008, May 14). Addison County regional plan. Retrieved from http://www.acrpc.org/pages/ publications/reg_plan.htm#PDF
  2. Bruhn, C., Chapman, E., Vaupel, S., & Vossen, P. (1992). Consumer attitudes towards locally grown produce. California Agriculture, 46 (4), 13-18.
  3. Grasshoppers Distribution. (2011). Making the leap to local foods. Louisville, Kentucky: Author. Retrieved from http://www.grasshoppersdistribution.com Grower's Collaborative. (2010). Grower's Collaborative: A program of Community Alliance with Family Farmers (CAFF). In L. Day-Farnsworth, B. McCown, M. Miller, & A. Pfeiffer (Eds.), Scaling Up: Meeting the Demand for Local Food (pp. 9-10). Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems. Retrieved from http://www.cias.wisc.edu/ wp-content/uploads/2010/01/growers_ collaborative.pdf
  4. Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. 4 th edition. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
  5. Orth, R. H. (2003). Vermont geography, weather and natural history. In J. J. Duffy, S. B. Hand, & R. H. Orth (Eds.), The Vermont Encyclopedia. Lebanon, New Hampshire: University Press of New England.
  6. Schmidt, M. C., Kolodinsky, J., Conte, F., DeSisto, T., & Hyman, J. (2010). The Multi-farm Community Supported Agriculture Model: Assessing the Economic Impact of Combined Storage, Distribution, and Marketing of Local Food Products for Small-and Mid-sized Farms. Paper presented at the annual meeting post-conference workshop of the Northeast Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, Atlantic City, New Jersey, June 15-13, 2010. Retrieved from http://www.narea.org/2010/workshop%20pres/ Schmidt_NAREA2010Workshop.pdf
  7. Timmons, D. (2006, April). Local Food in Vermont: Mixed Messages [blog post]. Vermont Commons. Retrieved from http://www.vtcommons.org/ journal/2006/04/dave-timmons-local-food- vermont-mixed-messages United States Department of Agriculture National Agriculture Statistics Service (USDA NASS). (2007). Census of Agriculture. Market value of agricultural products sold including landlord's share and direct sales, 2007 and 2002: State level [Data file]. Retrieved from http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/ Publications/2007/Full_Report/Volume_1,_ Chapter_1_State_Level/index.asp

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schmidt, M., Kolodinsky, J., DeSisto, T., & Conte, F.
Affiliations
University of Vermont (US)
Venue
Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development
Published
2011-08-25
Pages
157-175
ISSN
  • 2152-0798 (ISSN-L)
  • 2152-0801
OpenAlex
W2318808921
Cited by
44
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • AgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Agriculture
  • University of Vermont
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Organic Food and Agriculture
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Urban Agriculture and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Rural Development and Agriculture
Keywords
food hubs, local food access, farm income, community-supported agriculture, food distribution, food marketing, nonprofit partnerships, farmer perceptions, ownership structure, geographic expansion, Burlington, Vermont

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review