Retaining Members of Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) in California for Economic Sustainability: What Characteristics Affect Retention Rates?

Abstract

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.

Promoting farmers market via information nudges and coupons: A randomized control trial

“…There is, however, literature on retention rates among community supported agriculture (CSA) markets (another DTC market). Interestingly, research on CSAs shows that increasing the diversity of crop types increases retention rates (Galt, et al, 2019). A study similar to Galt et al focused on retention rates at farmers markets represents an important area for future research.…”

Community supported agriculture membership: The benefits of spousal involvement

“…However, despite the advantages of participation, the turnover is high; it may reach as much as 40% in its formative year, possibly due to unexpected outcomes and inconveniences (Galt et al, 2019;Goland, 2002;Lang, 2005Lang, , 2010Strohlic & Crispin, 2004).…”

“…(Interview 12, advanced member). Galt et al, 2019;Goland, 2002;Hayden & Buck, 2012;Landis et al, 2010;Lang, 2005;Russell & Zepeda, 2008;Zepeda & Li, 2006), this study has aimed to provide an insight into the role of spousal influence on CSA.…”

“…From a consumption point of view, purchasing from CSA can minimize dysfunctional searching or frustration due to information overload, which can occur when shopping for groceries. First, this risk-sharing partnership takes away the purchase-related stimuli and decreases the pressure of decision making for the primary food shopper, and in addition, because of organic and agro-ecological practices, unknown or uncertain amounts of products can also be considered and handled among participants and family members in practice (Cohen et al, 2012;Galt, Soelen Kim, Munden-Dixon, Christensen, & Bradley, 2019;Landis et al, 2010;Russell & Zepeda, 2008).…”

Community Supported Agriculture as a Driver of Food-Related Well-Being

“…CSAs provide a higher intake of vegetables of local origin whilst also emphasizing the social and environmental aspects of farming [19]. Many CSAs aim to enhance the ecological sustainability of the agri-food system through social inclusion of production and consumption [20]. Not surprisingly, CSAs contribute to a modified production-consumption practice [21].…”