In the light of growing concerns about the separation of producers and consumers in our food system and the power of big supermarkets, new research funded by Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) provides valuable insights into the motivations and practices of consumers and producers involved in ‘alternative food’ networks, which include schemes as varied as organic vegetable boxes, community gardens and farm animal adoption.
Through participation, consumers tended to increase their consumption of fruit and vegetables, and improve their cooking skills and knowledge about food. The research also found some evidence of a ‘graduation effect’, whereby involvement in an alternative food scheme encouraged consumers to change their consumption behaviours in relation to other goods, such as household products and clothes.
Although the majority of consumers use alternative food sources alongside supermarkets, they often did not trust them and felt that the quality of supermarket food was inferior. Many reported that they only shopped there out of necessity. Alternative food projects also challenge supermarket-led notions of food choice. Although they may provide less choice in terms of types of product, consumers in our research associated these projects with a greater variety of foods, many of which are unavailable on supermarket shelves.
People take part in alternative food networks for a range of economic, ethical and personal reasons and these vary over time and in relation to life events such as moving house or the birth of a baby. For many, a key motivation was a desire to care for people and places, both close and distant. This involved reducing food miles, sourcing Fairtrade whenever possible, or looking for products with reduced environmental impacts and high animal welfare standards.
Dr. Moya Kneafsey from Coventry University, who led the research, commented, “Consumers enjoyed being able to ask the producers about their products and felt reassured about the quality and safety of the food. Alternative food schemes enable consumers to make a direct connection with food producers, and can result in relationships of trust and loyalty.”
The researchers also identified challenges for alternative food networks. There were concerns amongst producers as to how to maintain their connection with consumers in the face of possible future growth. Many alternative food projects do not necessarily want to get bigger, as they might lose the sense of ‘connection’ which has been established between producers and consumers.
On the other hand, small schemes are under threat from two directions. First, large retailers are trying to create a sense of ‘connection’ with producers through the use of marketing strategies – such as providing names and pictures of growers and farmers on packaging. Second, rapidly expanding semi-national box delivery schemes such as Abel & Cole and Riverford Organics are also tapping into the interest in sourcing organic foods.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dr. Moya Kneafsey at Coventry University on 02476888254 or firstname.lastname@example.org
ESRC PRESS OFFICE:
Alexandra Saxon on Tel: 01793 413032 / 07971027335 or e-mail: email@example.com
Danielle Moore on Tel: 01793 413122 or e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Phillippa Coates on 01793 413119 or e-mail email@example.com
NOTES FOR EDITORS:
1. This project was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council. The full report is entitled "Re-connecting consumers, food and producers: exploring ‘alternative’ networks." The study was carried out by Dr. Moya Kneafsey, Dr. Lewis Holloway, Dr. Rosie Cox and Dr. Elizabeth Dowler, working at the universities of Coventry, Hull, Birkbeck (University of London) and Warwick.
2. Methodology. The study focused on six case studies of an illustrative sample of different alternative food networks. These covered all of the main food groups across contrasting geographic regions. The managers of the schemes were interviewed twice over a year long period and two rounds of consumer workshops were undertaken. 89 consumers took part in the two rounds of workshops and 44 consumers took part in detailed interviews. A year later, telephone interviews were conducted with 32 of the 44 consumers and six households agreed to detailed qualitative research on their consumption experiences. Other consumers were recruited using an online questionnaire.
3. The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) is the UK's largest funding agency for research and postgraduate training relating to social and economic issues. It supports independent, high quality research relevant to business, the public sector and voluntary organisations. The ESRC’s planned total expenditure in 2007/08 is £181 million. At any one time the ESRC supports over 4,000 researchers and postgraduate students in academic institutions and research policy institutes. More at http://www.esrcsocietytoday.ac.uk
4. ESRC Society Today offers free access to a broad range of social science research and presents it in a way that makes it easy to navigate and saves users valuable time. As well as bringing together all ESRC-funded research (formerly accessible via the Regard website) and key online resources such as the Social Science Information Gateway and the UK Data Archive, non-ESRC resources are included, for example the Office for National Statistics. The portal provides access to early findings and research summaries, as well as full texts and original datasets through integrated search facilities. More at http://www.esrcsocietytoday.ac.uk
5. The ESRC confirms the quality of its funded research by evaluating research projects through a process of peer review. This research has been graded as 'good'.
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.