Ohioans Views of Agriculture & Ohioans Views of Agriculture & Local FoodsLocal Foods

2828thth Annual OEFFA Conference Annual OEFFA Conference

Jeff S. Sharp, Ohio State UniversityJeff S. Sharp, Ohio State University

March 3, 2007March 3, 2007

Ohio SurveyOhio SurveyCore Project of the SRICore Project of the SRI

Goals of Today’s PresentationGoals of Today’s Presentation

Communicate some general society-Communicate some general society-agriculture issues that may merit considerationagriculture issues that may merit consideration

Explore some “ideal” types of Ohio consumers Explore some “ideal” types of Ohio consumers interested in local and/or organic foodsinterested in local and/or organic foods Also consider in comparison to a known group of Also consider in comparison to a known group of

Alternative Food System (AFS) consumersAlternative Food System (AFS) consumers Identify some opportunities/needs for further Identify some opportunities/needs for further

development of AFSdevelopment of AFS

Outline of PresentationOutline of Presentation

This is a dense presentation, informed by a lot of dataThis is a dense presentation, informed by a lot of data Highlight 5 noteworthy themes from the 2006 Ohio Highlight 5 noteworthy themes from the 2006 Ohio

Survey of Food, Agriculture & Environmental IssuesSurvey of Food, Agriculture & Environmental Issues Discuss characteristics of 5 consumer types, Discuss characteristics of 5 consumer types,

characterized by their interest in organic or localcharacterized by their interest in organic or local Also consider a motivated food consumer group as wellAlso consider a motivated food consumer group as well

Concluding observationsConcluding observations

2006 Survey2006 Survey

Mail survey returned from 1,729 OhioansMail survey returned from 1,729 Ohioans Response rate of 55%Response rate of 55%

Respondents compare favorably to known Respondents compare favorably to known characteristics of Ohio populationcharacteristics of Ohio population

A higher proportion of respondents were homeowners A higher proportion of respondents were homeowners than is true of Ohio’s general populationthan is true of Ohio’s general population

Just over 3 percent of respondents resided on a Just over 3 percent of respondents resided on a farmfarm

Just over 7 percent of respondents were from Just over 7 percent of respondents were from households with a Farm Bureau memberhouseholds with a Farm Bureau member

Goals of Survey ProjectGoals of Survey Project

Study topical and emergent FAE issuesStudy topical and emergent FAE issues Data for planning and evaluationData for planning and evaluation Track changes across timeTrack changes across time

Cohort effects: older versus younger generationsCohort effects: older versus younger generations Intervening events, such as Mad cow; energy, etc.Intervening events, such as Mad cow; energy, etc. Changes in knowledge or awareness due to an Changes in knowledge or awareness due to an

educational campaign, or societal trendeducational campaign, or societal trend

Five Insights from the Five Insights from the 2006 Statewide Survey2006 Statewide Survey

#1: Must Prepare for #1: Must Prepare for Generational Transitions:Generational Transitions:

Knowledge, participation & Knowledge, participation & support of ag. consistently support of ag. consistently

higher among older Ohioanshigher among older Ohioans

Self-reported level of knowledge about Self-reported level of knowledge about how or where food is grownhow or where food is grown

20%

65%

15%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Not at allKnowledgeable

SomewhatKnowledgeable

Very Knowledgeable

Percent “Very Knowledgeable” Percent “Very Knowledgeable” by regionby region

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

% 27 18 15 13 12

North

west

South

eastCentral

South

west

North

east

Percent “Not at all knowledgeable” Percent “Not at all knowledgeable” by Ageby Age

35%

18% 18%13%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

35 andyounger

36 to 50 51 to 64 65 and over

#2: Agriculture Continues to #2: Agriculture Continues to Enjoy Widespread Support Enjoy Widespread Support

among Ohioansamong Ohioans

Views of FarmingViews of Farming

Overall, farming positively contributes to the Overall, farming positively contributes to the quality of life in Ohioquality of life in Ohio 2006: 88 percent agree or strongly agree2006: 88 percent agree or strongly agree 2004: 90 percent2004: 90 percent 2002: 92 percent2002: 92 percent

Ag & EconomyAg & Economy

Ohio’s Economy will suffer if the state continues Ohio’s Economy will suffer if the state continues to lose farmersto lose farmers 2006: 84 percent agree or strongly agree2006: 84 percent agree or strongly agree 2004: 85 percent2004: 85 percent 2002: 80 percent2002: 80 percent

Views of FarmersViews of Farmers

I trust Ohio farmers to protect the environmentI trust Ohio farmers to protect the environment 2006: 63 percent agree or strongly agree2006: 63 percent agree or strongly agree 2004: 67 percent2004: 67 percent 2002: 60 percent2002: 60 percent

Animal WelfareAnimal Welfare

In general, increased regulation of the In general, increased regulation of the treatment of animals in farming is neededtreatment of animals in farming is needed 2006: 51 percent agree or strongly agree2006: 51 percent agree or strongly agree 2004: 47 percent2004: 47 percent 2002: 48 percent2002: 48 percent

In 2002, 23 percent disagreed or strongly In 2002, 23 percent disagreed or strongly disagreed in 2006 12 percent disagreed or disagreed in 2006 12 percent disagreed or strongly disagreedstrongly disagreed

#3: Farmer-Nonfarmer #3: Farmer-Nonfarmer Relationships Matter:Relationships Matter:

Visiting with a farmer Visiting with a farmer associated with increased associated with increased

support & reduced concernssupport & reduced concerns

(63% of Ohioans report having no conversations (63% of Ohioans report having no conversations with farm household members)with farm household members)

#4: Building Bridges to #4: Building Bridges to Nonfarmers—Participation in Nonfarmers—Participation in Farm & Rural “Recreation” Farm & Rural “Recreation”

Strongly Associated with Strongly Associated with Knowledge & Attitudes:Knowledge & Attitudes:

Must be prepared for the Must be prepared for the consequence, thoughconsequence, though

Participation in Rural/Farm Related ActivitiesParticipation in Rural/Farm Related Activities

ActivityActivity % Occasionally % Occasionally or Frequentlyor Frequently

Recreational drive through the countryRecreational drive through the country 8282

Purchase at farmer’s market or Purchase at farmer’s market or roadside standroadside stand

7777

Buy locally grown foodsBuy locally grown foods 7676

Attend county fair/festivalAttend county fair/festival 5858

Visit pick your own farmVisit pick your own farm 3737

Tour/visit working farmTour/visit working farm 1616

Attend farm organization eventAttend farm organization event 1111

#5: Opportunity or Threat? #5: Opportunity or Threat? Finding Common Ground with the Finding Common Ground with the

Environmental Community:Environmental Community:

Many Ohio “environmentalists” Many Ohio “environmentalists” are actively interested in the food are actively interested in the food

& farming sector& farming sector

Typology Analysis from the Typology Analysis from the 2004 Statewide Survey & 2004 Statewide Survey &

2005 Motivated Consumer 2005 Motivated Consumer StudyStudy

Why Consider TypologiesWhy Consider Typologies

Better understanding of what drives certain Better understanding of what drives certain consumption patternsconsumption patterns

Assist growers and retailers in understanding Assist growers and retailers in understanding and developing their marketand developing their market

May help to increase the consumption or May help to increase the consumption or purchasing of particular foodspurchasing of particular foods

See Hartman Group for ongoing market See Hartman Group for ongoing market research & Consumer Profilesresearch & Consumer Profiles

Ohio Types, based on interest in Ohio Types, based on interest in Local & OrganicLocal & Organic

Disinclined (19.2%)—rate both local and Disinclined (19.2%)—rate both local and organic as not important factors when making organic as not important factors when making food purchasesfood purchases

Moderately inclined (35.7%)—rate organic Moderately inclined (35.7%)—rate organic and local as somewhat important and local as somewhat important considerationsconsiderations

Ohio types (cont.)Ohio types (cont.)

Locally inclined (20.2%)—rate local as Locally inclined (20.2%)—rate local as important, but not organicimportant, but not organic

Organically inclined (5.6%)—rate organic as Organically inclined (5.6%)—rate organic as important, but not localimportant, but not local

Dual inclined (19.3%)—rate organic and local Dual inclined (19.3%)—rate organic and local both as very important factorsboth as very important factors

Frequency of purchasing local and Frequency of purchasing local and organic foods by typeorganic foods by type

(% indicating frequently)(% indicating frequently)

LocalLocal Dis-Dis-inclinedinclined

OrganicOrganic Mod. Mod. InclinedInclined

Dual Dual InclinedInclined

Frequently Frequently buy Organicbuy Organic

11 11 1414 66 2121

Frequently Frequently buy localbuy local

4040 1111 2222 2828 5454

Willingness to Pay MoreWillingness to Pay More(% indicating WTP 10% or more)(% indicating WTP 10% or more)

LocalLocal Dis-Dis-inclinedinclined

OrganicOrganic Mod. Mod. InclinedInclined

Dual Dual InclinedInclined

LocalLocal 6868 4646 4848 6161 7070

OrganicOrganic 1919 1919 5656 5050 5454

Disinclined (19 percent)Disinclined (19 percent)

Food safety:Food safety: Lowest level of concern about food safetyLowest level of concern about food safety

HealthHealth Little agreement that organic foods are healthier than Little agreement that organic foods are healthier than

conventionalconventional DemographicsDemographics

Slightly younger than state average, slightly higher income Slightly younger than state average, slightly higher income than state averagethan state average

Slightly higher proportion in Central and Southeast OhioSlightly higher proportion in Central and Southeast Ohio Large proportion of suburbanitesLarge proportion of suburbanites

Moderately Inclined (36 percent)Moderately Inclined (36 percent)

Food safety:Food safety: Modest level of concern about food safetyModest level of concern about food safety

HealthHealth Modest agreement that organic foods are healthier Modest agreement that organic foods are healthier

than conventionalthan conventional Attitudes about Farming/FarmersAttitudes about Farming/Farmers

Modest to low social linkages to farmersModest to low social linkages to farmers

Organically Inclined (6 percent)Organically Inclined (6 percent)

Food safety:Food safety: High concern about food safetyHigh concern about food safety

HealthHealth Strong belief that organic foods are healthier than Strong belief that organic foods are healthier than

conventionalconventional DemographicsDemographics

Youngest, highest income, most educatedYoungest, highest income, most educated Largest proportion w/ children under 5 in the homeLargest proportion w/ children under 5 in the home

Organically Inclined (cont.)Organically Inclined (cont.) Attitudes about Farming/FarmersAttitudes about Farming/Farmers

Low level of trust of farmers to protect the Low level of trust of farmers to protect the environmentenvironment

Relatively low rating of grown in Ohio attribute Relatively low rating of grown in Ohio attribute and modest rating of keeping a farmer in businessand modest rating of keeping a farmer in business

Fewest social ties to farmersFewest social ties to farmers

Locally Inclined (20 percent)Locally Inclined (20 percent)

Food safety:Food safety: Modest concern about food safetyModest concern about food safety

HealthHealth Little agreement that organic foods are healthier Little agreement that organic foods are healthier

than conventionalthan conventional

Locally Inclined (cont.)Locally Inclined (cont.) Attitudes about Farming/FarmersAttitudes about Farming/Farmers

Strongest social linkages to farmersStrongest social linkages to farmers High level of trust of farmers to protect the High level of trust of farmers to protect the

environmentenvironment Modest concern about the treatment of animals in Modest concern about the treatment of animals in

farmingfarming High rating of grown in Ohio attribute and keep a High rating of grown in Ohio attribute and keep a

farmer in businessfarmer in business

Locally Inclined (cont.)Locally Inclined (cont.)

Shopping BehaviorsShopping Behaviors 24% frequently shop at Farmer’s Market24% frequently shop at Farmer’s Market Low frequency--member of food co-op or Low frequency--member of food co-op or

purchasing from a natural food grocerpurchasing from a natural food grocer DemographicsDemographics

Slightly younger than state average, slightly higher Slightly younger than state average, slightly higher income than state averageincome than state average

Slightly higher proportion of Northwest OhioansSlightly higher proportion of Northwest Ohioans

Dual Inclined (19 percent)Dual Inclined (19 percent)

Food safety:Food safety: Highest level of concern about food safetyHighest level of concern about food safety

HealthHealth Strong agreement that organic foods are healthier Strong agreement that organic foods are healthier

than conventionalthan conventional 82 percent indicate being health conscious82 percent indicate being health conscious

Dual Inclined (cont.)Dual Inclined (cont.)

Attitudes about Farming/FarmersAttitudes about Farming/Farmers Highest level of trust of farmers to protect the Highest level of trust of farmers to protect the

environmentenvironment Highest concern about the treatment of animals in Highest concern about the treatment of animals in

farmingfarming Very high rating of grown in Ohio attribute and of Very high rating of grown in Ohio attribute and of

keeping a farmer in businesskeeping a farmer in business

Dual Inclined (cont.)Dual Inclined (cont.) Shopping BehaviorsShopping Behaviors

34% frequently shop at Farmer’s Market34% frequently shop at Farmer’s Market Relatively high frequency--member of food co-op Relatively high frequency--member of food co-op

or purchasing from a natural food groceror purchasing from a natural food grocer DemographicsDemographics

Much older on average, less educated, lower Much older on average, less educated, lower incomeincome

More common city or small town resident; also More common city or small town resident; also relatively higher frequency in southeastrelatively higher frequency in southeast

Much more likely to be womenMuch more likely to be women

Data from a Known Group Data from a Known Group of Alternative Food System of Alternative Food System

ConsumersConsumers

Motivated ConsumersMotivated Consumers

Mail survey of household of a relatively long-Mail survey of household of a relatively long-lived neighborhood food co-op located in lived neighborhood food co-op located in Central OhioCentral Ohio Sample was all household co-op members Sample was all household co-op members

allowing address to be used for mailing purposesallowing address to be used for mailing purposes 304 responses (74% response rate)304 responses (74% response rate)

Conducted Winter/Spring 2005Conducted Winter/Spring 2005

Motivated ConsumersMotivated Consumers

Food safety:Food safety: High level of concern about food safety (~Dual)High level of concern about food safety (~Dual)

HealthHealth Near unanimous agreement that organic foods are Near unanimous agreement that organic foods are

healthier than conventionalhealthier than conventional Nearly all indicate being health consciousNearly all indicate being health conscious

Motivated Consumers (cont.)Motivated Consumers (cont.)

Attitudes about Farming/FarmersAttitudes about Farming/Farmers Very, very low level of trust of farmers to protect Very, very low level of trust of farmers to protect

the environmentthe environment Modest rating of grown in Ohio attribute and of Modest rating of grown in Ohio attribute and of

keeping a farmer in businesskeeping a farmer in business

Motivated Consumers (cont.)Motivated Consumers (cont.) Shopping BehaviorsShopping Behaviors

33% frequently shop at Farmer’s Market (~Dual)33% frequently shop at Farmer’s Market (~Dual) All members of food co-opAll members of food co-op

DemographicsDemographics Much younger, relative to average statewide Much younger, relative to average statewide

respondentrespondent Very highly educated (81% BA or more), Average Very highly educated (81% BA or more), Average

income levelsincome levels Very liberal (all others types moderates)Very liberal (all others types moderates) 70% women70% women

Availability and Price FactorsAvailability and Price Factors(% indicating very important factor)(% indicating very important factor)

DisDis M.Inc.M.Inc. Org.Org. LocLoc Dual. Dual. Inc.Inc.

M.C.M.C.

Available Available where shopwhere shop

6363 6464 6363 7070 8484 5454

PricePrice 6363 5959 6060 6767 7777 3030

Observations about the Observations about the typology findings?typology findings?

Some Takeaway ObservationsSome Takeaway Observations

A local oriented group is discernable A local oriented group is discernable Strong ties to farming/skeptical of organics Strong ties to farming/skeptical of organics An interesting group, possibly not well integrated An interesting group, possibly not well integrated

into the alternative food system movementinto the alternative food system movement Moderately inclinedModerately inclined

Potential target audience to introduce to alternative Potential target audience to introduce to alternative food systemsfood systems

Observations (cont.)Observations (cont.)

Dual Inclined versus MotivatedDual Inclined versus Motivated Interesting differences between the two setsInteresting differences between the two sets Data suggest there is a motivated, but unorganized Data suggest there is a motivated, but unorganized

constituency for local and/or organic that may not constituency for local and/or organic that may not be in the AFS networkbe in the AFS network

Price conscious (although “high” price may be relative) Price conscious (although “high” price may be relative) Interested in availability where they normally shopInterested in availability where they normally shop How do local alternative farmers/retails tap this market How do local alternative farmers/retails tap this market

segment, especially in face of mass market competition?segment, especially in face of mass market competition?

Future StepsFuture Steps

2006 Focus group analysis, NCSARE funded2006 Focus group analysis, NCSARE funded Animal Welfare focus in 2007Animal Welfare focus in 2007 Develop themes for 2008 statewide surveyDevelop themes for 2008 statewide survey Consider a new project that digs even deeper: Consider a new project that digs even deeper:

need to better partner/collaborate with end-need to better partner/collaborate with end-usersusers

OpportunitiesOpportunities

Fellowship opportunityFellowship opportunity Training in Sustainable Sciences Through an Training in Sustainable Sciences Through an

Interdisciplinary Graduate Program in Rural Interdisciplinary Graduate Program in Rural SociologySociology

4 Fellowships for Master’s level students starting 4 Fellowships for Master’s level students starting in either 2007 or 2008 will be awardedin either 2007 or 2008 will be awarded

Spring Local Food SeriesSpring Local Food Series Phil Howard, March 27Phil Howard, March 27thth: Be Careful What you : Be Careful What you

Wish For: The Mainstreaming of Organic FoodWish For: The Mainstreaming of Organic Food

Questions?Questions?

Contact Information:Contact Information:Jeff S. SharpJeff S. Sharp

sharp.123@osu.edusharp.123@osu.edu614-292-9410614-292-9410

http//.ohiosurvey.osu.eduhttp//.ohiosurvey.osu.edu