Agriculture and Human Values

, Volume 27, Issue 3, pp 335–350 | Cite as

Farm to school programs: exploring the role of regionally-based food distributors in alternative agrifood networks

  • Betty T. IzumiEmail author
  • D. Wynne Wright
  • Michael W. Hamm


Farm to school programs are at the vanguard of efforts to create an alternative agrifood system in the United States. Regionally-based, mid-tier food distributors may play an important role in harnessing the potential of farm to school programs to create viable market opportunities for small- and mid-size family farmers, while bringing more locally grown fresh food to school cafeterias. This paper focuses on the perspectives of food distributors. Our findings suggest that the food distributors profiled have the potential to help institutionalize farm to school programs. Notably, their relationships with farmers may be a critical element in expanding the scale and scope of local school food procurement. Their ability to catalyze local school food procurement however, is limited by the structural context in which farm to school programs operate. Specifically, the oppositional school year and agriculture production cycle, and tight food service budget constraints disembed and limit the potential of farm to school programs to decrease the “marketness” of school food procurement and to shift it from a process based largely on price to one that is more territorially embedded. As farm to school programs continue to gain support, regionally-based food distributors that have the meaningful relationships necessary to re-embed the school food service market back into the larger society may be critical to enabling advocates to achieve their goals.


Alternative agrifood networks Embeddedness Farm to school Food distributors Local food School food programs 



Alternative agrifood networks


Community Alliance with Family Farmers


US Department of Defense Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program


US National School Lunch Program


Systems and Services Company


United States Department of Agriculture



This study was supported by the C. S. Mott Group Professor of Sustainable Food Systems at Michigan State University, North Central Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program, and Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station. The data for this manuscript is from the dissertation of Betty T. Izumi. The authors would like to thank Gail Feenstra, Daniel Jaffee, Steve Stevenson, Harvey James, and two anonymous reviewers for their invaluable input on this manuscript and the school food service professionals, farmers, and food distributors whose time and energy made this study possible.


  1. Allen, P., and J. Guthman. 2006. From “old school” to “farm-to-school”: Neoliberalization from the ground up. Agriculture and Human Values 23: 401–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Azuma, A.M., and A. Fisher. 2001. Healthy farms, healthy kids: Evaluating the barriers and opportunities for farm-to-school programs. Venice, CA: Community Food Security Coalition.Google Scholar
  3. Berkenkamp, J. 2006. Minnesota-grown fruits and vegetables in K-12 schools: A feasibility study of the opportunities and barriers to great use of locally-grown produce. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
  4. Block, F. 1990. Postindustrial possibilities: A critique of economic discourse. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  5. Block, F. 2001. Introduction. In The great transformation: The political, economic origins of our time, ed. K. Polanyi, xviii–xxxviii. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  6. California Department of Education. n.d. California Fresh Start Pilot Program. Accessed 16 April 2008.
  7. Carstensen, P. 2008. The prospects and limits of antitrust and competitive-market strategies. In Food and the mid-level farm: Renewing an agriculture of the middle, ed. T.A. Lyson, G.W. Stevenson, and R. Welsh, 227–252. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  8. General Assembly of the State of Colorado. 2006. Fresh Fruits and Vegetables Pilot Program. Accessed 9 May 2008.
  9. Goodman, D. 2004. Rural Europe redux? Reflections on alternative agro-food networks and paradigm change. Sociologia Ruralis 44 (1): 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gordon Food Service. n.d. Accessed 13 Feb 2009.
  11. Gregoire, M.B., and C. Strohbehn. 2002. Benefits and obstacles to purchasing food from local growers and producers. The Journal of Child Nutrition and Management 26 (1): 1–7.Google Scholar
  12. Growers Collaborative. n.d. Accessed 24 Mar 2008.
  13. Guthman, J. 2004. Agrarian dreams: The paradox of organic farming in California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  14. Higgins, V., J. Dibden, and C. Cocklin. 2008. Building alternative agri-food networks: Certification, embeddedness and agri-environmental governance. Journal of Rural Studies 24: 15–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hinrichs, C.C. 2000. Embeddedness and local food systems: Notes on two types of direct agricultural markets. Journal of Rural Studies 16: 295–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ilbery, B., and D. Maye. 2005. Alternative (shorter) food supply chains and specialist livestock products in the Scottish-English borders. Environment and Planning A 37: 823–844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Izumi, B.T. 2008. Farm to school programs in public K-12 schools in the United States: Perspectives of farmers, food service professionals, and food distributors. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University.Google Scholar
  18. Izumi, B.T., K. Alaimo, and M.W. Hamm. In press. Farm to school programs: Perspectives of school food service professionals. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior.Google Scholar
  19. Izumi, B.T., O. Rostant, M. Moss, and M.W. Hamm. 2006. Results from the 2004 Michigan Farm-to-School Survey. Journal of School Health 76 (5): 169–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jaffee, D. 2007. Brewing justice: Fair trade coffee, sustainability, and survival. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  21. Kennedy, D.S. 2007. Moving boxes closer to home: The role of SYSCO Corporation in food system localization. Missoula, MO: The University of Montana.Google Scholar
  22. Kirschenmann, F., G.W. Stevenson, F. Buttel, T.A. Lyson, and M. Duffy. 2008. Why worry about agriculture of the middle? In Food and the mid-level farm: Renewing an agriculture of the middle, ed. T.A. Lyson, G.W. Stevenson, and R. Welsh, 3–22. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  23. Kirwan, J. 2004. Alternative strategies in the UK agro-food system: Interrogating the alterity of farmers’ markets. Sociologia Ruralis 44 (4): 395–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kloppenburg, J., and N. Hassanein. 2006. From old school to reform school? Agriculture and Human Values 23 (4): 417–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kloppenburg, J., J. Hendrickson, and G.W. Stevenson. 1996. Coming in to the foodshed. Agriculture and Human Values 13 (3): 33–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lewi, J., and S. Coppess. 2007. School nutrition operations report: The state of school nutrition 2007. Alexandria, VA: School Nutrition Association.Google Scholar
  27. Li, Y., and S. Saraswat. 2008. Global 500: Our annual ranking of the world’s largest corporations. Fortune Magazine. Accessed 1 July 2007.
  28. Maye, D., and B. Ilbery. 2006. Regional economies of local food production: Tracing food chain links between ‘specialist’ producers and intermediaries in the Scottish-English borders. European Urban and Regional Studies 13 (4): 337–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Morgan, K., and R. Sonnino. 2008. The school food revolution: Public food and the challenge of sustainable development. London, UK: Earthscan Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
  30. Morris, C., and H. Buller. 2003. The local food sector: A preliminary assessment of its form and impact in Gloucestershire. British Food Journal 105 (8): 559–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Murdoch, J., T. Marsden, and J. Banks. 2000. Quality, nature, and embeddedness: Some theoretical considerations in the context of the food sector. Economic Geography 76 (2): 107–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. National Farm to School Network. n.d. Accessed 17 Sept 2007.
  33. North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. 2008. Farm to School Program. Accessed 29 Jan 2008.
  34. O’Connor, J. R. [1973] 2002. The fiscal crisis of the state. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  35. Ohmart, J., and K. Markley. 2007. Product source integrity for farm to cafeteria projects. Farms to Cafeterias to Capitol Hill: Growing Healthy Kids, Farms, and Communities Conference, Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
  36. Patton, M.Q. 2002. Qualitative evaluation and research methods, 3rd ed. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  37. Pirog, R., T. Van Pelt, K. Enshayan, and E. Cook. 2001. Food, fuel, and freeways: An Iowa perspective on how far food travels, fuel usage, and greenhouse gas emissions. Ames, IA: Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture.Google Scholar
  38. Polanyi, K. [1944] 2001. The great transformation: The political and economic origins of our time . Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  39. Sage, C. 2003. Social embeddedness and relations of regard: Alternative ‘good food’ networks in south-west Ireland. Journal of Rural Studies 19: 47–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. School Nutrition Association. n.d. Accessed 6 Jan 2009.
  41. Schnieders, R. 2003. SYSCO Corporation: Distributing food throughout North America. Shareowner 17 (1): 32–35.Google Scholar
  42. Schnieders, R.J., and K.F. Spitler. 2007. SYSCO Corporation annual report. Houston, TX: SYSCO Corp.Google Scholar
  43. Snyder, P., L. Lytle, T. Pellegrino, M. Anderson, and J. Selk. 1995. Commentary on school meals from school food service personnel and researchers. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 61 (1): 246S.Google Scholar
  44. Sonnino, R. 2007. Embeddedness in action: Saffron and the making of the local in southern Tuscany. Agriculture and Human Values 24 (1): 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sonnino, R., and T. Marsden. 2006. Beyond the divide: Rethinking relations between alternative and conventional food networks in Europe. Journal of Economic Geography 6: 181–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stevenson, G.W., and R. Pirog. 2008. Values-based supply chains: Strategies for agrifood enterprises-of-the-middle. In Food and the mid-level farm: Renewing an agriculture of the middle, ed. T.A. Lyson, G.W. Stevenson, and R. Welsh, 119–143. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  47. Story, M., K.M. Kaphingst, and S. French. 2006. The role of schools in obesity prevention. The Future of Children 16 (1): 109–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Strohbehn, C., and M.B. Gregoire. 2001. Innovations in school food purchasing: Connecting to local food. The Journal of Child Nutrition and Management 25 (2): 62–65.Google Scholar
  49. USDA Food and Nutrition Service. 2004. Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act. Accessed 16 April 2008.
  50. USDA Food and Nutrition Service. 2007a. Food Distribution Program: Value of donated foods from July 1, 2007 through June 30, 2008 72 (142): 40826–40827.Google Scholar
  51. USDA Food and Nutrition Service. 2007b. National School Lunch, Special Milk, and School Breakfast Programs, national average payments/maximum reimbursement rates. Federal Register 72: 37508.Google Scholar
  52. USDA Food and Nutrition Service. 2008. National School Lunch Program Fact Sheet. Accessed 13 Nov 2008.
  53. USDA Food and Nutrition Service. n.d. Menu Planning in the National School Lunch Program. Accessed 20 Mar 2009.
  54. USDA Food Distribution Programs. n.d. Department of Defense Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program. Accessed 16 Nov 2007.
  55. Vallianatos, M., R. Gottlieb, and M.A. Haase. 2004. Farm-to-school: Strategies for urban health, combating sprawl, and establishing a community food systems approach. Journal of Planning Education and Research 23: 414–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Watts, D.C.H., B. Ilbery, and D. Maye. 2005. Making reconnections in agro-food geography: Alternative systems of food provision. Progress in Human Geography 29 (1): 22–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Betty T. Izumi
    • 1
    Email author
  • D. Wynne Wright
    • 2
  • Michael W. Hamm
    • 2
  1. 1.Kellogg Health Scholars ProgramUniversity of Michigan School of Public HealthAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.Department of Community, Agriculture, Recreation and Resource StudiesMichigan State UniversityAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations