Rich Pirog Marketing & Food Systems Program Leader Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture Iowa State University - Ames

Transcription

1 Consumer Perceptions of Locally Grown Foods and the Environmental & Economic Impacts of Long- Distance Food Transport Rich Pirog Marketing & Food Systems Program Leader Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture Iowa State University - Ames

2 What are food miles? Distance food travels from where it is grown/raised to where it is purchased (consumer or end-user) 1969 DOE study 1,346 miles 1980 estimation (UW) for produce 1,500 miles Food miles in industrial nations have increased significantly in last 50 years

3 340% U.S. total vegetable imports and per capita consumption trends relative to 1970 base year 310% 280% 250% 220% 190% 160% 130% 100% 4.1% vegetables imported in 1970 Vegetable import Vegetable consumption 11.6% vegetables imported in % Year Data from USDA Economic Research Service

4 200% U.S. total fresh fruit imports and per capita consumption trends relative to 1970 base year 190% 180% Fruit import Fruit consumption 38.9% fresh fruit imported in % 160% 150% 140% 130% 120% 110% 100% 20.8% fresh fruit imported in % Year Data from USDA Economic Research Service

5 Weighted average source distances calculated from USDA AMS arrival data Chicago Terminal Market. Estimations do not include distance from terminal market to point of retail sale

6 Weighted Average Source Distances (WASD) for Fresh Produce Chicago Terminal Market Truck WASD continental U.S. (miles) Arrivals by truck overall (% of total) Arrivals by rail overall (% of total) Foreign arrivals (% of total) 1,245 miles 49.6% 50.4% 12.5% 1,424 miles 68.6% 31.4% 16.4% 1,518 miles 86.9% 13.1% 21.5%

7

8

9 Estimated fuel consumption, CO2 emissions, and distance traveled for three truck-based food transport systems. Food transport system Fuel Consumption (gal/year) Co2 Emissions (lbs./year) Distance traveled (miles) National semitrailer 368,000 8,400,000 2,245,000 Regional midsize truck 44, , ,000 Local small truck (institutional) 88,000 1,730,000 1,518,000 From: Food, Fuel, and Freeways Leopold Center, Each system was to transport 10% of per capita consumption of fresh produce to feed Iowa

10 Ecolabel Value Assessment Phase II: Objectives Analyze consumer response to ecolabel options and to freshness dating concept Ascertain perceptions regarding percent of food produced locally Better understand market power and appeal of grown locally compared to other terms Assess skills of ISU Business Analysis Lab to provide market assistance to sustainable growers

11 Ecolabel Value Assessment Phase II Perceptions of ecolabel prototypes (Internet) Geographic perceptions of locally grown Local grown, family farm, organic perceptions Taglines and freshness dating Options to increase profitability IL, IN, IA, KS, MN, MO, NE, WI Iowa willingness to pay study (Internet) Iowa and Omaha and Quad City metros Level of interest and willingness to pay (above conventional price)

12 Consumer Internet Study Phase I December 2003

13 Consumer Internet Study Phase I December 2003

14 Consumer Internet Study Phase I December 2003

15 Consumer Internet Study Phase I December 2003

16 Consumer Internet Study Phase II: Ecolabels with two taglines

17 Consumer Internet Study Phase II: Ecolabels with two taglines

18 Consumer Internet Study Phase II: Ecolabels with single tagline - local

19 Consumer Internet Study Phase II: Ecolabels without taglines - USA

20 Phase II Ecolabels Perceptions of local foods Ecolabel and No Ecolabel Respondents

21 What is the first thing that comes to mind when you look at these labels? % responses No response Road or cars Homegrown Freshness Negative feelings Positive feelings Strawberries Other labels w ith tw o tag lines From: Ecolabel Value Assessment Phase II Leopold Center and ISU Business Analysis Lab May 2004 Leopold Center

22 What is the first thing that comes to mind when you look at these labels? % response No response Origin Strawberries Grown locally Freshness Not appealing Other labels with single tag lines From: Ecolabel Value Assessment Phase II Leopold Center and ISU Business Analysis Lab May 2004 Leopold Center

23 Percent of respondents who thought the following tag lines were very influential with ecolabels without ecolabels % respondents 0 There's no taste like home...grown The road to freshness is a short one. Give back to the community and treat yourse.. Vine ripened down the road, or box ripened... Freshness- dated so you know when it left... Tag lines From: Ecolabel Value Assessment Phase II Leopold Center and ISU Business Analysis Lab May 2004 Leopold Center

24 Which of the following are important to you when you purchase local foods? Percent choosing most important % responses Price Environmental concerns Healthier foods Quality Food security Helps local economy Supports local farmers Taste Freshness Other with ecolabels without ecolabels attributes From: Ecolabel Value Assessment Phase II Leopold Center and ISU Business Analysis Lab May 2004 Leopold Center

25 What do you consider "local" when making a food choice? % response No response Grown 25 miles or less from purchase point Grown 100 miles or less from purchase point Grown in your state Grown in the Midwest Other with ecolabels without ecolabels From: Ecolabel Value Assessment Phase II Leopold Center and ISU Business Analysis Lab May 2004 Leopold Center

26 Ecolabel Value Assessment Phase I What do you consider "local" when making a food purchase or carrying a food product through your store or business? % responses no response Grow n 25 miles or less from purchase Grow n 100 miles or less from purchase Grow n in my state Grow n in the Midw est Other Business - No Ecolabel Consumer -No ecolabel

27 What percentage of the fresh produce, meat, and poultry for sale in your community do you perceive was grown/raised within your state? % responses with ecolabels w ithout ecolabels 0 No response Less than 5% 5-25% 26-50% 51-75% more than 75% Percentage Grown/Raised in State From: Ecolabel Value Assessment Phase II Leopold Center and ISU Business Analysis Lab May 2004 Leopold Center

28 If price and visual appearance for m eat or produce w ere the sam e and the package label provided only the follow ing information about the product, how w ould you prioritize your selections from 1st choice through last choice? (rank 1 to 5) % responses No response Grow n locally Grow n locally- Certif ied organic Grow n locally- Pes tic ide free Grow n in (your state) - Certified organic Certif ied organic with ecolabels First Choice without ecolabels From: Ecolabel Value Assessment Phase II Leopold Center and ISU Business Analysis Lab May 2004 Leopold Center

29 If price and visual appearance for meat or produce were the same and you knew the following information to be true about the product, prioritize your selections from 1st choice through last choice. % responses No response Grown locallysome pesticides used Grown locally- Certified organic Grown locally- Pesticide free Grown in (your state)-certified organic Origin unknown- Cerif ied organic with ecolabels First Choice without ecolabels From: Ecolabel Value Assessment Phase II Leopold Center and ISU Business Analysis Lab May 2004 Leopold Center

30 Please rank the following terms on how closely related they are to the term family farm. % responses No response Grow n locally Pesticidefree Organic Grow n in your state Product of USA Huma nelyraised with ecolabels without ecolabels Most Closely Related From: Ecolabel Value Assessment Phase II Leopold Center and ISU Business Analysis Lab May 2004 Leopold Center

31 Percent responding "High Potential" to options to financially assist farmers in state of residence % responses Local a nd regiona l markets Organic pro duction Agri-tourism In-state processing options Farming m ore acres Marketing coope rative/farm er m arket w ith ecolabels w ithout ecolabels Options From: Ecolabel Value Assessment Phase II Leopold Center and ISU Business Analysis Lab May 2004 Leopold Center

32 Increasing Locally Grown Purchases What would influence you to buy more locally grown or produced food? Available/More available in area Prices reasonable/competitive Available at the grocery store Advertise/Advertise more Food was fresher Food tasted good/better Support farmers/local farmers Available all year round Knew someone who grew it Better labeling (locally grown indicated) Farmer's Market was convenient More/Larger variety Available at Farmer's Market Base: Those who have purchased local (n=494) 34.8% 15.0% 12.2% 9.1% 8.1% 6.3% 6.8% 5.2% 5.4% 6.0% 4.2% 3.6% First Mention 62.6% Second Mention Univ. of Nebraska

33 From: Ecolabel Value Assessment Phase II Leopold Center and ISU Business Analysis Lab May 2004

34 Interest in local foods and willingness to pay Iowa and Omaha/Council Bluffs and Quad Cities metros

35 How often have you thought about how and where your food was produced? 50 % responses None of the time Rarely Some of the time Frequently All of the time From: Ecolabel Value Assessment Phase II Leopold Center and ISU Business Analysis Lab May 2004 Leopold Center

36 How would you rate your level of interest in purchasing foods that are: % responses Raised locally? Raised socially responsible? Raised environmentally responsible? High Very High From: Ecolabel Value Assessment Phase II Leopold Center and ISU Business Analysis Lab May 2004 Leopold Center

37 Percent of respondents willing to pay 30% or more if foods were produced in a way shown to maintain or improve the environment, community life, and livelihood of local farms, by type of food. % responses Fru its/veget... Breads/Grains Beans/Legumes Milk/Cheese Eggs Pork Beef Chick en/t urk ey Luncheon M... From: Ecolabel Value Assessment Phase II Leopold Center and ISU Business Analysis Lab May 2004 Leopold Center

38 Geographical Indications (GIs) GIs are indications that identify a good as originating in a region or locality where its quality, reputation, or other characteristic is essentially attributable to its geographic origin. All other countries must prevent use that suggests a product originates in a geographical area other than the true origin and misleads the public or creates unfair competition.

39 Three Types of GIs PDO (Protected Designation of Origin) Foodstuffs must be produced, processed, and prepared in a given geographical area using recognized know-how. PGI (Protected Geographical Indication) A geographical link must occur in at least one of the stages of production, processing, or preparation. TSG (Traditional Specialty Guaranteed) Highlights traditional character of a foodstuff, either in composition or means of production

40

41 U.S. Certification Mark Definition: Trademark used to certify regional or other origin, material, mode of manufacture, quality, accuracy, OR other characteristics Can be used to designation geographical origin. Vidalia Onions Certification mark owned by Georgia Department of Agriculture and covers all or part of 20 counties in Georgia Potential for others in the U.S.?

42 Summary Food miles offer a simple metaphor to contrast food systems (local vs. global) Eating locally/regionally may help reduce fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions More consumers are questioning where their food comes from and how it is produced Consumers are inclined to support local and regional foods because of taste, freshness, quality, value Access and availability to local foods are challenges Freshness-dating may appeal to consumers and help local/regional farmers market certain types of foods Consumers understand what local signifies more than they do organic; local/regional foods are linked more to image of family farm and can be be an important part of the food story

43 For more information Web site: (Marketing web page) Phone: (515)