In the U.S. there has been considerable interest in connecting low-income households to alternative food networks (AFNs) like Community Supported Agriculture (CSA). To learn more about this possibility we conducted a statewide survey of CSA members in California. A total of 1,149 members from 41 CSAs responded. Here we answer the research question: How do CSA members' (1) socioeconomic and demographic backgrounds, (2) household conditions potentially interfering with membership, and (3) CSA membership experiences vary between lower-income households (LIHHs) and higher-income households (HIHHs)? We divided members into LIHHs (making under $50,000 annually) and HIHHs (making over $50,000 annually). We present comparisons of LIHHs' and HIHHs' (1) employment, race/ethnicity, household composition and education, use of food support, and enjoyment of food-related activities; (2) conditions interfering with membership and major life events; and (3) sources of information influencing decision to join, reasons for joining, ratings of importance of and satisfaction with various CSA attributes, gaps between importance of and satisfaction with various CSA attributes, valuing of the share and willingness to pay more, and impacts of membership. We find that LIHHs are committed CSA members, often more so than HIHHs, and that CSA members in California are disproportionately White, but that racial disproportionality decreases as incomes increase. We conclude by considering: (1) the economic risks that LIHHs face in CSA membership, (2) the intersection of economic 2 risks with race/ethnicity and cultural coding in CSA; and (3) the possibilities of increasing participation of LIHH in CSA.

Drawing data from comparative case studies of 10 California food policy councils (FPCs), this paper describes the nature of the relationships between local governments and FPCs and examines how these relationships support policy-related activities and food systems change. We focus our comparisons on distinct organizational structures, resource flows, and policy activities. All but one of the 10 councils is organized as a multisector community collaborative, rather than as an independent nonprofit organization or a government advisory body. Each includes local government personnel as members and most depend on government resources for their operations, including meeting

Former CSA members say the share not meeting their needs is a top reason for leaving. However, CSA share customization has no effect on CSAs' retention rates. Together these findings are the customization paradox, to be investigated further. "CSA people" are those willing and able to subject themselves to CSA's requirements. CSA people can be cultivated, but structural processes are eroding the population.

Community supported agriculture (CSA) is one response to major ecological and social problems in the conventional agrifood system. Here we are concerned with how CSA management can enhance the economic sustainability of CSAs. More specifically, using a survey of 111 CSA farms in California, we analyze how specific variables in five domains—CSA management characteristics, farmer characteristics, farm characteristics, economic characteristics, and region—influence retention rates (the proportion of CSA members continuing from one year to the next). Our analysis involves first conducting bivariate correlations, then building a simple causal model that theorizes the direction of causation, then constructing a series of ordinary least squares (OLS) multiple regression models to hold constant independent variables. Our discussion draws out recommendations from our findings for CSA farmers and organizations that support CSA, including increasing the length of the season, increasing crop type diversity, including fruit in standard shares, bringing farming practices into line with organic standards, working with other CSAs to reduce inter-CSA competition, and changing marketing regions for farms in certain regions that appear to be highly saturated. We conclude by identifying more collective routes that CSAs can take to cultivate “CSA people” for a more sustainable economic dimension of CSAs in the long term.

Policymakers and scholars agree that the aging and declining number of ranchers is a serious problem for the future of ranching and range management. Studies show that recruiting and retaining new ranchers is difficult due to a complex mix of start-up costs, knowledge and skill requirements, and regulatory barriers. While research suggests that first-generation farmers are different demographically and require individualised information, there is limited research on first-generation ranchers (FGRs); at best they are generalised as beginning farmers in research and outreach programs. This is surprising given ranchers’ unique knowledge requirements relating to the production of food and fibre, and the management of vast areas of public and private land. Based on a rangeland decision-making survey of 507 California Cattlemen’s Association members, this paper examines similarities and divergences in socioeconomic factors, management practices, drought adaptation strategies, information needs, and values between FGRs and multigenerational ranchers (MGRs). Survey results indicate FGRs and MGRs are not statistically different demographically and have similar values; however, key differences include FGRs using fewer information sources about ranching, fewer general management practices, and fewer drought adaptation practices. FGRs are also more susceptible to drought, and are underserved by organisations. Their vulnerability is particularly concerning, as many have limited drought experience, are more likely to take risks, and are less likely to find value and/or participate in ranching organisations. The future of rangelands requires that organisations interested in conserving rangelands and supporting ranchers re-evaluate assumptions about why FGRs and MGRs have different information needs beyond simplistic demographic identity, and instead focus on their affinity as FGRs in order to understand the complexity of the processes underlying these differences. We end with suggestions for a research agenda to support the climate resiliency of FGRs and increase the efficacy of support organisations.