Become a fan on Facebook Follow us on Twitter USDA Blog Feed Watch USDA videos on YouTube Subscribe to receive e-mail updates View USDA Photos on Flickr Subscribe to RSS Feeds

New Report: Local Foods are Working for the Nation

Christy (left) and Lilah Talbott of Richmond, VA came to the Fall Line Farms pick-up point at Bon Air United Methodist Church on Thursday, May 5, 2011. This is one of several pick-up points in the Richmond, VA area. This local food hub offers a wide variety of household food staples and specialty items.  The difference from traditional co-ops is that members can pick their customized orders from an ever changing inventory of fruits, vegetables, meats, soaps, eggs, cheeses, flowers, honey, pastas, sauces, syrups, baked goods, mushrooms, flour and grains. Suppliers post what they have on a Lulus Local Food online listing and customers can make their selection Every Thursday suppliers deliver orders to, one of several pick-up points, designated by the customers in or around the Richmond area. USDA Photos by Lance Cheung.

Christy (left) and Lilah Talbott of Richmond, VA came to the Fall Line Farms pick-up point at Bon Air United Methodist Church on Thursday, May 5, 2011. USDA Photos by Lance Cheung.

The market for local food – food that is produced, processed, distributed and sold within a specific region, say a radius of several hundred miles – is growing. Large, small and midsized farms are all tapping into it. Even better, new data suggest that these producers are employing more workers than they would be if they weren’t selling into local and regional markets.

Those are just a few of the take-home messages from a new report out last week by USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS). Here’s a quick breakdown of some of the good news I took from this report:

1. Local markets are important for a lot of farmers. ERS finds that a whopping 40 percent of all vegetable, fruit and nut farms in the United States sell their products in local and regional markets.  Nearly 110,000 farms across the nation are engaged. Some of these same farms are also selling into national or international markets.

For all of these farms, local markets are key to their bottom line. On average, these farms reported that local food sales accounted for 61 percent of their total sales. Almost two-thirds of the producers, regardless of size, reported that local food sales were at least seventy-five percent of their total sales!

2. The market for local foods goes well beyond direct-to-consumer sales. We already knew that direct sales from farms to consumers was growing – it rose by 215 percent between 1992 and 2007. But for the first time, the new ERS report also looks at what are called “intermediated marketing channels,” or sales from a farmer to a regional distributor, grocer, or restaurant, and then on to a consumer.

Combined, intermediated and direct local food sales totaled nearly $5 billion in 2008. Intermediated sales were three times larger than direct-to-consumer sales – so in other words, farm sales to regional distributors, grocers and restaurants are a big piece of the local food picture.

3. Local doesn’t necessarily mean small. Farms selling locally run the gamut from small to large – those with gross sales under $50,000 to those grossing over $250,000. Large farms are more likely to sell to restaurants, distributors and retailers than are small farms, and direct-to-consumer sales are evenly split between small, midsized and large farms.

4. Local means jobs. One out of every twelve jobs in the U.S. is associated with agriculture, and local food plays a role in that. The ERS report finds that fruit and vegetable farms selling into local and regional markets employ 13 fulltime workers per $1 million in revenue earned, for a total of 61,000 jobs in 2008. In comparison, fruit and vegetable farms not engaged in local food sales employed 3 fulltime workers per $1 million in revenue.

Why is on-farm job creation for producers selling locally so much higher? It will take more analysis to understand these differences, but the take-home message is clear: helping farmers and small businesses develop the infrastructure to produce, store, process, distribute and sell food to consumers in their region is an important component of the work that USDA does to keep and grow jobs in agriculture overall.

3 Responses to “New Report: Local Foods are Working for the Nation”

  1. Peter Sherinian says:

    This is all good news, and the way things should be. We in this country have become to relient on food grown thousands of miles away instead of locally or near locally. So hear is the most important question to ask. What is the USDA doing to help foster this continuing progress to local production to local markets. Perhaps of it has not been done already a review of rules for the number of acres allowed to grow food for food banks on city or church lands, before they have to declare that land to be a farm. I believe it is an acre and a half. How about the USDA promoting the production of ”non” monocrops like corn and soybeans. Iowa in 1920 42 different major crops, and considering the state of Iowa imports 8 billion dollars in food from other states instead of setting a million acres out of the 30 million for growing corn and soybeans for anilals and fuel we could use that freed up i million acres and grow most the food here instead of importing it from other states. Grow local sell local-USDA.

  2. Cathy says:

    This is great news and I am glad the USDA is reporting on it in a positive light. I can only hope that the USDA will also follow thru with adjusting their laws and regulations to accomidate smaller farmer operations, instead of maintaining regulations that favor larger, non-local based operations. I am speaking specifically regarding poultry and meat processing laws currently on the books. Most local CSA’s that I know are greatly hampered by the USDA, who make it very difficult to stay in business.

  3. sarah says:

    On the jobs component…

    If farmers are selling fresh produce in local outlets (i.e. actual heads of cabbage) vs. produce for processing that is sold non-locally (i.e. cabbage processed as sauerkraut and then sold), then that affects the labor requirement. I know that on my farm and many others, cabbage for processing into sauerkraut can be mechanically harvested because it’s processed within 24 hours of harvest and the battering that it undergoes from the machine doesn’t matter. However we can’t (and wouldn’t want to) sell banged-up cabbage to local grocery stores! So all cabbage in stores is cut by hand, which is much more labor intensive.

    It’s possible that the crop varieties that are sold locally are ones that have been selected for taste/visual appeal (which may be more tender and need more careful labor for handling) instead of varieties selected for ship-ability (which may be tougher and therefore require less handling).

    This isn’t true for all crops, but I can see it being true for enough crops (fresh apples sold locally requiring more labor than ones sold to a national-selling juice maker, maybe?) that it might explain part of the job creation difference.

Leave a Reply