Consumers appear increasingly interested in how to engage in consumptive practices that lead to a more sustainable food and agricultural system. In this paper, we examine two possible consumptive pathways for achieving sustainability: the purchase of organic foods and/or the purchase of local foods. While there is some debate regarding the integrity and sustainability of organic versus locally produced foods, there is limited information examining the similarities or differences among consumers variably interested in one or the other attribute. Using data from a statewide survey of Ohio, USA, respondents and members of a food cooperative and an environmental and social responsibility organization, a typology is proposed and comparisons are made among different types of local and organic food consumers regarding their attitudes about food, agriculture and the environment. While a large proportion of the survey respondents expressed little or only modest interest in either local or organic foods, distinct groups of respondents interested in primarily the local attribute, primarily the organic attribute, and both attributes are identified. The results reveal similarities and differences across types with the profiles of each type of consumer contributing to a more nuanced view of supporters of these foods that can assist in production decisions, as well as purchasing and marketing decisions among retailers.

Recognizing the inherent pressures on farm families and farmland, USDA has been developing policies and programs that simultaneously attempt to retain existing farm families on the landscape, recruit new farmers, and create lasting economic opportunities rooted in agriculture. In this article we argue that to date there has been an overemphasis on economic and structural approaches and a systematic discounting of the way individual farmer and farm household motivations can differ as they relate to the farm household life cycle, enterprise growth, adaptation, and reproduction. We use a sociological lens to qualitatively and quantitatively examine the social differences between multigeneration and first-generation farmers at the rural-urban interface by exploring how economic and noneconomic values influence succession plans and enterprise structure. We find that the answers to these questions are complex, layered, and not static, as farm households cycle through the life course. We describe how the differences between young and old multigeneration and first-generation farmers can influence the structure of agriculture at the rural-urban interface, and conclude with some practical policy recommendations.

Recent attention to communities ''localizing'' food systems has increased the need to understand the perspectives of people working to foster collaboration and the eventual transformation of the food system. University Cooperative Extension Educators (EEs) increasingly play a critical role in communities' food systems across the United States, providing various resources to address local needs. A better understanding of EEs' perspectives on food systems is therefore important. Inspired by the work of Stevenson, Ruhf, Lezberg, and Clancy on the social food movement, we conducted national virtual focus groups to examine EEs' attitudes about how food system change should happen, for what reasons, and who has the resources, power, and influence to effect change. The institutions within which EEs are embedded shape their perceptions of available resources in the community, including authority and power (and who holds them). These resources, in turn, structure EEs' goals and strategies for food system change. We find that EEs envision working within the current food system: building market-centric alternatives that address inequity for vulnerable consumers and producers. EEs bring many resources to the table but do not believe they can influence those who have the authority to change policy. While these findings could suggest EEs' limited ability to be transformative change agents, EEs can potentially connect their efforts with new partners that share perceptions of food system problems and solutions. As EEs increasingly engage in food system work and with increasingly diverse stakeholders, they can access alternative, transformational frames within which to set goals and organize their work.

No abstract