Abstract
Amid the highly industrialized, export-focused food system of the Canadian prairies, some farmers and consumers are turning to localized agriculture as an alternative—they are “going local”. Despite farmers’ obvious importance to the food system, surprisingly little research has examined their motivations and reasons for localization. To date, most local food scholarship in North America has focused on either consumers’ motivations to buy local or the systemic aspects of local food, such as regulations, infrastructure, and marketing arrangements. Existing research suggests that local food systems are supported by consumers’ rejection of the industrial paradigm and desire to (re)connect with their food and its source. But what drives farmers to localize, particularly when export-focused production is firmly entrenched as the status quo? Based on interviews and focus groups with 60 farmers, processors, policy experts, and retailers in the Canadian prairie province of Saskatchewan, this paper examines local food systems from the producer perspective in a rural context of high industrialization and geographical dispersion. We examine what motivates farmers to produce for local markets, and what forces they must resist to do so. The findings indicate that farmers’ main motivations for localization are political and social in nature, and stem from a critique of the dominant neoliberal agri-food system. We map farmers’ agential responses to this dominant system on a spectrum that ranges from acceptance of a neoliberal “feed the world” ideology to promotion of food sovereignty. Drawing on farmers’ perspectives, our findings question the straightforward equation of local food with environmental sustainability and also challenge neoliberal economic assumptions of “scaling up”.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Although all farmers in this study are “local” in the sense of farming in the province of Saskatchewan, in this article we use the term “local” to describe farmers who engage primarily in production for local markets rather than for export, and often engage in local marketing arrangements like CSAs or supplying nearby restaurants.
“Conventional” is a term often used for non-organic production that uses agricultural chemicals such as synthetic fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides. Although we use this term throughout the paper, we recognize the problematic and normalizing nature of using “conventional” to describe technological agricultural practices that are—in the long-term picture of agricultural history—relatively recent. Nonetheless, “conventional” practices have become status quo in Canadian prairie agriculture.
Although Saskatchewan’s average farm size is currently 1784 acres according to Statistics Canada, this average is not necessarily the most effective way to understand farm size in the province. The Statistics Canada average is affected by small “hobby” farms and other very small-scale arrangements. Most conventional farms providing a livelihood (i.e., not “hobby” operations) are larger than average. In a past study conducted by one of the authors (Fletcher 2013), farmers self-defined a “large” farm as more than 5000 to 6000 acres. Therefore, for this study a “large” farm was considered to be over 6,000 acres or, in the case of livestock operations, above the 2017 average herd size of 169 head of cattle (334 for dairy operations). A “medium” operation was 2500 to 5999 acres, and a “small” operation was less than 2500. Participants with less conventional operations for the Saskatchewan context (e.g., vegetable producers) were classified according to the participants’ own description whenever possible.
Abbreviations
- CFSSC:
-
Community Food Systems Steering Committee
- CSA:
-
Community supported agriculture
- GDP:
-
Gross domestic product
- GMOs:
-
Genetically modified organisms
References
Aggestam, V., E. Fleiß, and A. Posch. 2017. Scaling-up short food supply chains? A survey study on the drivers behind the intention of food producers. Journal of Rural Studies 51: 64–72.
Albrecht, C., and J. Smithers. 2018. Reconnecting through local food initiatives? Purpose, practice and conceptions of ‘value’. Agriculture and Human Values 35 (1): 67–81.
Altieri, M.A., C.I. Nicholls, A. Henao, and M.A. Lana. 2015. Agroecology and the design of climate change-resilient farming systems. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 35 (3): 869–890.
Atkinson, K. 2009. Shared visions, shared wildernesses: Wilderness conservation in the grasslands of southern Saskatchewan. British Journal of Canadian Studies 22 (1): 87–114.
Ballamingie, P., and S.M.L. Walker. 2013. Field of dreams: Just Food’s proposal to create a community food and sustainable agriculture hub in Ottawa, Ontario. Local Environment 18 (5): 529–542.
Bartzen, B.A., K.W. Dufour, R.G. Clark, and F.D. Caswell. 2010. Trends in agricultural impact and recovery of wetlands in prairie Canada. Ecological Applications 20 (2): 525–538.
Blay-Palmer, A., K. Landman, I. Knezevic, and R. Hayhurst. 2013. Constructing resilient, transformative communities through sustainable ‘food hubs’. Local Environment 18 (5): 521–528.
Born, B., and M. Purcell. 2006. Avoiding the local trap: Scale and food systems in planning research. Journal of Planning Education and Research 26 (2): 195–207.
Campbell, A.M., and R. MacRae. 2013. Local food plus: The connective tissue in local/sustainable supply chain development. Local Environment 18 (5): 557–566.
Charatsari, C., F. Kitsios, A. Stafyla, D. Aidonis, and E.S. Lioutas. 2018. Antecedents of farmers’ willingness to participate in short food supply chains. British Food Journal 120 (10): 2317–2333.
Cleveland, D.A., A. Carruth, and D.N. Mazaroli. 2015. Operationalizing local food: Goals, actions, and indicators for alternative food systems. Agriculture and Human Values 32 (2): 281–297.
Connell, D.J., J. Smithers, and A. Joseph. 2008. Farmers’ markets and the ‘good food’ value chain: A preliminary study. Local Environment 13 (3): 169–185.
Connelly, S., S. Markey, and M. Roseland. 2011. Bridging sustainability and the social economy: Achieving community transformation through local food initiatives. Critical Social Policy 31 (2): 308–324.
Cortus, B.G., S.R. Jeffrey, J.R. Unterschultz, and P.C. Boxall. 2011. The economics of wetland drainage and retention in Saskatchewan. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d’agroeconomie 59 (1): 109–126.
Costanigro, M., S. Kroll, D. Thilmany, and M. Bunning. 2014. Is it love for local/organic or hate for conventional? Asymmetric effects of information and taste on label preferences in an experimental auction. Food Quality and Preference 31: 94–105.
Day-Farnsworth, L., B. McCown, M. Miller, and A. Pfeiffer. 2009. Scaling up: Meeting the demand for local food. Madison: Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems: University of Wisconsin.
DeLind, L.B. 2011. Are local food and the local food movement taking us where we want to go? Or are we hitching our wagons to the wrong stars? Agriculture and Human Values 28 (2): 273–283.
Demartini, E., A. Gaviglio, and A. Pirani. 2017. Farmers’ motivation and perceived effects of participating in short food supply chains: Evidence from a North Italian survey. Agricultural Economics 63 (5): 204–216.
Denny, R.C.H., M.R. Worosz, and N.L.W. Wilson. 2016. The importance of governance levels in alternative food networks: The case of red meat inspection rules. Rural Sociology 81 (4): 601–634.
Dibden, J., D. Gibbs, and C. Cocklin. 2013. Framing GM crops as a food security solution. Journal of Rural Studies 29: 59–70.
Dukeshire, S., R. Garbes, C. Kennedy, A. Boudreau, and T. Osborne. 2010. Beliefs, attitudes, and propensity to buy locally produced food. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development 1 (3): 19–29.
Feagan, R., D. Morris, and K. Krug. 2004. Niagara region farmers’ markets: Local food systems and sustainability considerations. Local Environment 9 (3): 235–254.
Feldmann, C., and U. Hamm. 2015. Consumers’ perceptions and preferences for local food: A review. Food Quality and Preference 40: 152–164.
Fletcher, A.J. 2013. From ‘free’ trade to farm women: Gender and the neoliberal environment. In Research, action and policy: Addressing the gendered impacts of climate change, ed. M. Alston and K. Whittenbury, 109–122. Dordrecht: Springer.
Forssell, S., and L. Lankoski. 2015. The sustainability promise of alternative food networks: An examination through ‘alternative’ characteristics. Agriculture and Human Values 32 (1): 63–75.
Friedmann, H. 2007. Scaling up: Bringing public institutions and food service corporations into the project for a local, sustainable food system in Ontario. Agriculture and Human Values 24 (3): 389–398.
Gertler, M., J. Jaffe, and M.A. Beckie. 2018. Duelling discourses of sustainability: Neo-conventional and organic farming on the Canadian Prairies. In Contested sustainability discourses in the agrifood system, ed. D.H. Constance, J.T. Konefal, and M. Hatanaka. London: Routledge.
Gewertz, D., and F. Errington. 2017. From intensive agriculture to prairie heritage: A paradox of land repurposing in Eastern South Dakota, USA. The Journal of Peasant Studies 44 (5): 1043–1065.
Gibson-Graham, J.K. 2006. A postcapitalist politics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Gilgun, J. 2011. Coding in deductive qualitative analysis. Current Issues in Qualitative Research: An Occasional Publication for Field Researchers from a Variety of Disciplines 2 (1): 1–4.
Government of Canada, Statistics Canada. 2017a. Saskatchewan remains the breadbasket of Canada. May 10. Accessed 16 May 2018.
Government of Canada, Statistics Canada. 2017b. Direct marketing in Canada. June 21. Accessed 18 May 2018.
Harvey, D. 2011. A brief history of neoliberalism. Reprinted. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hendrickson, M.K., and W.D. Heffernan. 2002. Opening spaces through relocalization: Locating potential resistance in the weaknesses of the global food system. Sociologia Ruralis 42 (4): 347–369.
Hinrichs, C. 2000. Embeddedness and local food systems: Notes on two types of direct agricultural market. Journal of Rural Studies 16 (3): 295–303.
Hinrichs, C. 2003. The practice and politics of food system localization. Journal of Rural Studies 19 (1): 33–45.
Izumi, B.T., D.W. Wright, and M.W. Hamm. 2010. Market diversification and social benefits: Motivations of farmers participating in farm to school programs. Journal of Rural Studies 26 (4): 374–382.
Joassart-Marcelli, P., and F. J. Bosco. 2014. Alternative food projects, localization and neoliberal urban development: Farmers’ markets in Southern California. Métropoles 15.
Kneen, B. 1993. From land to mouth: Understanding the food system. Toronto: NC Pr. Ltd.
Knezevic, I., K. Landman, and A. Blay-Palmer. 2013. Local food systems—International perspectives: A review. Guelph: Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.
Marsden, T., and A. Franklin. 2013. Replacing neoliberalism: Theoretical implications of the rise of local food movements. Local Environment 18 (5): 636–641.
Matts, C., D.S. Conner, C. Fisher, S. Tyler, and M.W. Hamm. 2016. Farmer perspectives of Farm to Institution in Michigan: 2012 survey results of vegetable farmers. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 31 (1): 60–71.
Maxey, L. 2006. Can we sustain sustainable agriculture? Learning from small-scale producer-suppliers in Canada and the UK. The Geographical Journal 172 (3): 230–244.
McBride, S. 2011. The new constitutionalism: International and private rule in the new global order. In Relations of global power: Neoliberal order and disorder, ed. S. McBride and G. Teeple, 19–40. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
McCollom, J. 2018. ‘We love you people better than we like ourselves’: Canada, the United States, Australia, the Soviet Union, and the international Wheat Pool movement of the 1920s. Agricultural History 92 (3): 404–428.
McMahon, M. 2014. Local food: Food sovereignty or myth of alternative consumer sovereignty? In Globalization and food sovereignty: Global and local change in the new politics of food, ed. P. Andrée, J. McKelvey Ayres, M.J. Bosia, and M.-J. Mássicotte, 111–138. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Michel-Villarreal, R., M. Hingley, M. Canavari, and I. Bregoli. 2019. Sustainability in alternative food networks: A systematic literature review. Sustainability 11 (3): 859.
Migliore, G., F. Caracciolo, A. Lombardi, G. Schifani, and L. Cembalo. 2014. Farmers’ participation in civic agriculture: The effect of social embeddedness. Culture, Agriculture, Food and Environment 36 (2): 105–117.
Mount, P. 2012. Growing local food: Scale and local food systems governance. Agriculture and Human Values 29 (1): 107–121.
Müller, B. 2008. Still feeding the world? The political ecology of Canadian Prairie farmers. Anthropologica 50 (2): 389–407.
Mundler, P., and L. Rumpus. 2012. The energy efficiency of local food systems: A comparison between different modes of distribution. Food Policy 37 (6): 609–615.
Newman, L., L.J. Powell, and H. Wittman. 2015. Landscapes of food production in agriburbia: Farmland protection and local food movements in British Columbia. Journal of Rural Studies 39: 99–110.
Qualman, D., T. Sanden, A.A. Desmarais, D. Marsden, and Y. Hansen. 2014. Environmental scan: Conventional and Indigenous food systems and gaps in the Regina area, SK. Regina: Saskatchewan.
Roch, L., and J.A. Jaeger. 2014. Monitoring an ecosystem at risk: What is the degree of grassland fragmentation in the Canadian Prairies? Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 186 (4): 2505–2534.
Schneider, M.L., and C.A. Francis. 2005. Marketing locally produced foods: Consumer and farmer opinions in Washington County, Nebraska. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 20 (4): 252–260.
Skogstad, G. 2008. Internationalization and Canadian agriculture: Policy and governing paradigms. Buffalo: University of Toronto Press.
Statistics Canada. 2017. Census of agriculture 2016. Ottawa, ON: Government of Canada.
Telfer, D.J. 2000. Tastes of Niagara: Building strategic alliances between tourism and agriculture. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration 1 (1): 71–88.
Tregear, A. 2011. Progressing knowledge in alternative and local food networks: Critical reflections and a research agenda. Journal of Rural Studies 27 (4): 419–430.
von Germeten, J.-P., and M. Hartmann. 2017. Balancing profitability with social consciousness: Determinants of suppliers’ intensity of participation in the EU school fruit scheme. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 32 (2): 131–144.
Visser, J., J. Trienekens, and P. van Beek. 2013. Opportunities for local food production: A case in the Dutch fruit and vegetables. International Journal on Food System Dynamics 4 (1): 73–87.
Wakefield, S., K.R. Fredrickson, and T. Brown. 2015. Food security and health in Canada: Imaginaries, exclusions and possibilities. The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe canadien 59 (1): 82–92.
Weis, T. 2010. The accelerating biophysical contradictions of industrial capitalist agriculture. Journal of Agrarian Change 10 (3): 315–341.
Wiebe, N., and K. Wipf. 2011. Nurturing food sovereignty in Canada. In Food sovereignty in Canada: Creating just and sustainable food systems, ed. H. Wittman, A.A. Desmarais, and N. Wiebe, 1–19. Halifax: Fernwood Pub.
Wittman, H., M. Beckie, and C. Hergesheimer. 2012. Linking local food systems and the social economy? Future roles for farmers’ markets in Alberta and British Columbia. Rural Sociology 77 (1): 36–61.
Wittman, H., A.A. Desmarais, and N. Wiebe (eds.). 2011. Food sovereignty in Canada: Creating just and sustainable food systems. Halifax: Fernwood Pub.
Acknowledgements
This research was made possible by funding from the Community Research & Action Fund and University of Regina Partnership Grant. The authors are grateful for contributions from the project Advisory Committee; research assistants Joanne Ditson and Jamie Wallace; Tracy Sanden and Kaylee Michnik from Regina Qu’Appelle Health Region (now Saskatchewan Health Authority); and Donovan Howden from the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan. We would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their comments that helped strengthen this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in the study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix 1: Characteristics of farmer interview participants, with summary of their views
Appendix 1: Characteristics of farmer interview participants, with summary of their views
ID | Commodities produced | Farm size | Marketing arrangements | Organic or conventional | Negative aspects of current agri-food system | Motivations for local/alternative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Farmers | ||||||
F1 | Dairy | Small | Local | Natural | Chemical use; growth of “mega farms”; small farm viability challenges | Farm lifestyle; safe food for people |
F2 | Mixed livestock and vegetables | Small | Local | Organic | Dominance of technology and chemical companies; trade agreements push small farmers out; corporate and large-scale farming; small farm viability challenges | Small farms for food security; connection to consumers |
F3 | Mixed grain and livestock | Medium | Export | Partially organic/transitioning | GMOs; concern about pesticides; corporate and large-scale farming; productivism and profit orientation, not food for people; small farm viability challenges | |
F4 | Grains and/or oilseeds | Small | Export | Organic | Risk of seed saving becoming illegal | |
F5 | Mixed livestock, grain, vegetables | Small | Local/export mix | Organic | Lack of consumer connection to food; large-scale farming; small farm viability | Farm lifestyle; educating people; opportunity for local |
F6 | Grains and/or oilseeds | Small | Export | Conventional non-organic | Current agri-food system is generally good, however: transportation - lack of competition in rail sector; lack of processing facilities; need for more vegetable production in SK; overuse of fertilizer; large farming causes depopulation | |
F7 | Mixed livestock and vegetables | Small | Local | Organic | Corporate capitalism; profit orientation; lack of consumer connection to food; cheap food; chemical use; fossil fuel use; labour exploitation globally | Ecological benefits; ensure food quality; connection to consumers; reduce scale of production; small farms for food security |
F8 | Dairy | Small | Supply managed | Conventional non-organic | Current agri-food system is safe, however: domestic hunger amidst export system; profit-taking by non-farm actors in food chain | Consumer demand for local; moral/value motivations; quality food for people |
F9 | Grains and/or oilseeds | Large | Export | Conventional non-organic | Current agri-food system is good; technology is good; however: transportation—rail sector challenges | |
F10 | Vegetables | Small | Local | Natural | Monoculture system affects food security; food miles; farmer incomes low; unhealthy processed food; chemical use | Supportive resources; access to markets; food quality and health |
F11 | Beekeeper | N/A | Local/export mix | Natural | Farm incomes low; individualistic marketing (not collective); food as commodity; profit-taking by non-farm actors in food chain; monocultures; chemical use; processed food | Supportive infrastructure and policy; access to markets |
F12 | Grains and/or oilseeds | Small | Export | Natural | Price manipulation on markets; food miles; GMOs; chemical use; individualistic marketing (not collective); profit-taking by non-farm actors in food chain; lack of processing; corporate power in food chain; large-scale farming | |
F13 | Mixed grain and livestock | Small | Export | Conventional non-organic | Current agri-food system is safe and GMOs, chemicals are okay, however: farmers are price-takers; lack of consumer knowledge that dominant system is safe | |
F14 | Grains and/or oilseeds | Small | Export | Conventional non-organic | Current agri-food system is safe | |
F15 | Seed | Small | Local | Natural | Large-scale farming; land grabbing; fossil fuel use; individualism; distribution inequity; farm incomes low; disconnection from food and environment | Maintain biodiversity; encouraging seed-saving; food sovereignty; connection to consumers |
F16 | Mixed grain and livestock | Medium | Export | Conventional non-organic | Productivism; income prioritized over environment; large-scale farming; short-term thinking; lack of processing facilities | |
F17 | Mixed livestock and vegetables | Small | Local | Natural | Productivism and profit orientation; small farm viability; ecological impact | Humane treatment of animals; producing safe food for family; consumer demand; ecological benefits |
F18 | Dairy | Large | Supply managed (domestic) | Conventional non-organic | Farmers are price-takers; large farming causes depopulation; land grabbing | Consumer demand; supportive infrastructure |
F19 | Vegetables | Large | Other | Conventional non-organic | Productivism; food miles; low farm incomes; farmers are price-takers; food waste; cheap food | High financial returns on local |
F20 | Mixed grain and livestock | Medium | Export | Organic | Chemical use; lack of government support for organic; corporate influence; large-scale farming; farm debt | |
F21 | Grains and/or oilseeds | Large | Export | Conventional non-organic | Current agri-food system is safe, however: high cost of production; government needs to support family farms | |
Farmer and policy | ||||||
FP 1 | Grains and/or oilseeds | Small | Export | Organic | Export-oriented policy; corporate power in food chain; chemical seed treatments; GMOs | |
FP 2 | Vegetables | Small | Local | Natural | Profit-driven, globalized system | Consumer demand; resistance to globalized control; supportive policy |
FP 3 | Livestock | Small | Local | Natural | Lack of consumer connection to food; chemical use | Ensure food quality; ecological integrity for drought-resistance; pride; the right thing to do |
Farmer and processor | ||||||
FPR 1 | Grains and/or oilseeds | Unassigned | Unassigned | Conventional non-organic | Current agri-food system is good; proud to be feeding the world; chemical use is okay | Small-scale processing is safer than large-scale |
FPR 2 | Grains and/or oilseeds | Medium | Local | Organic | Lack of consumer connection to food; corporate power in food chain; cheap food; large-scale farming; productivism and “feed the world” ideology; food waste; soil damage; chemical use | Moral/value motivations; reduce food miles; connection to consumers |
FPR 3 | Berries | Large | Local/Export mix | Conventional non-organic | Lack of consumer connection to food; cheap food; food waste | |
FPR 4 | Mixed grain and livestock | Unassigned | Export | Conventional non-organic | Transportation by rail; lack of processing facilities | |
Farmer and retailer/distributor | ||||||
FR 1 | Grains and/or oilseeds | Unassigned | Local/export mix | Organic | “Cheap food”; unhealthy corn-based products; “feed the world” ideology | Ecological integrity; humane treatment of animals; educate consumers about problems with “cheap food”; consumers feeling ownership of system |
FR 2 | Vegetables | Small | Local | Organic | Corporate power in food chain; chemical use; individualism; labour exploitation globally; GMOs | Consumer connection; collectivity; control over food system; food quality |
FR 3 | Vegetables | Large | Local | Unassigned | Saskatchewan needs a stronger local food system; lack of government support for local food | Connection to consumers; consumer demand; supportive policy; supportive infrastructure |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Beingessner, N., Fletcher, A.J. “Going local”: farmers’ perspectives on local food systems in rural Canada. Agric Hum Values 37, 129–145 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-019-09975-6
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-019-09975-6