(adapted from a November 27th Terra Madre 2006 presentation on “the power of co-producers�)

We took a long time getting ourselves into this food mess, and it’s going to take a long time getting out. Transformational change just ain’t gonna happen, no matter how many Terra Madres we put on, so it’s up to incremental change—long, slow, hard slogging—to make things right. Don’t get me wrong, though, without Terra Madre, and the other banner-raising, relationship-making, soul-inspiring events like it, the incremental change wouldn’t have a rallying cry to keep it going forward.

So what does this have to do with farmers’ markets and wikis? Oh, everything, I’d say.

A lot of research that has been done, both academic and marketing, on farmers’ markets and market consumers. Many of the papers published look at specific regions or specific markets, and, mostly, specific attitudes and behaviors of the consumers in those places. From the research I and two of my colleagues from the University of Gastronomic Sciences have been doing over the last three monts, we’ve evolved some more generalist perspectives on farmers’ market consumers, who they are, and the role they play in these food systems. The base research is now online in the form of a wiki (the aptly names Farmers’ Market Research Project Wiki). What needs to happen next is for the rest of the world to start building on what we’ve done, so that the wiki can become a more content-rich site: a more useful and representative collaboration on farmers’ markets worldwide.

(A quick word on our definition of “farmers’ markets.� Generally speaking, these are markets in which the producers sell their own products, although as we learned, there is a wide range of regulation around that rule, and sometimes it is a producer representative, rather than the producer him/herself. Often the product is prepared or transformed food, or not food at all, which was the case in some of the Canadian markets I saw. So this just to say: there is a great deal of variation from market to market; there are no absolutes. For the moment, assume that “farmers’ markets� are mostly food markets with mostly the producers selling their own products. Mostly.)

Our research area included North America, Ireland, Italy, and the U.K. In each location we talked with market administrators, producers, consumers, and other customers of the market (more on that in a minute). I personally traveled to east and west coast Canada, Ireland, England, and Wales, so those are the areas I base my current perspectives on.

So. Who are farmers’ market consumers, how should we think about them? Since within Slow Food and Terra Madre, we’ve been talking about the idea of the “co-producer,� I’m going to use that as a way to start.

“Co-producer� is a concept I personally like very much and an expression I find useful in terms of introducing the idea that consumers have a role and responsibility in making change within a food chain. Nonetheless, it is not a universally loved or accepted phrase. There is a sense that it is putting rhetoric before the current reality, attempting to drive change with the word rather than some sort of process. There is also a sensitivity among some of the producers I met that the consumer doesn’t have the right to be called a “co-producer.� They’re the producers, after all, and they work—as we know—extremely hard for the title. Long hours, difficult physical work, socially isolated sometimes. All the consumers do is come along with their wallets, plunk down their cash, and buy the stuff. So, say they: “Co-producer? I don’t think so.� At the same time, it is also true that producers are extremely aware of the value of consumers who do provide feedback on products and actively engage in the food chain. One producer told me that these consumers are the best test market in the world for his products. He knows within a few weeks what’s going to sell and what won’t. Producers are not opposed to the concept of consumers being co-producers, only to labeling them with the word.

Then there is the reality that some consumers, however thoughtful, however educated and dedicated to farmers’ markets, just aren’t co-producers, and aren’t ever going to be. They want swing freely at one end of the chain, rather than be a link within it. They don’t want to give feedback; they want to buy a commodity and go away. I think we food people sometimes need to realize that for many eaters, thinking about where their food comes from is simply too complicated, too irrelevant, or sometimes dtoo painful to think about.

That doesn’t, however, mean those consumers—and all consumers—can’t change a bit. Or even a lot.

Which brings me to the first concept I’d like to introduce: that of a “consumer spectrum.� In some of the discourse I have heard about “co-producer� there seems to be the attitude that it is a matter of turning a switch: simply taking “consumers� and turning them into “co-producers�; an A-to-B shift, from black to white. And, also, that farmers’ markets are where this switch-turning will take place. In reality, however, farmers’ market consumers are just like any consumers. And as the big corporations know, they are highly varied, falling into many groups with many combinations of behaviors and needs. But if we were to line up these groups—these segments of consume—on some kind of axis, we might end up with this “consumer spectrum� that I’m talking about. And then the effort of farmers’ markets, or of Slow Food, or of any of us as food-concerned individuals, is to move people along that spectrum, a few steps at a time, toward more responsibility and more consciousness about food choices. Maybe not from A to Z, but from F to H or M to N. A given consumer may only move a few steps, a few increments, over his or her lifetime, but added up with all the other consumers in the world, these increments become very valuable. It’s like voting. It’s not one vote that makes a difference, it’s all the votes together. It’s not about a hundred people changing from thoughtless consumer to informed co-producer, it’s about a million people changing a little bit—becoming a little bit more responsible. When you add it up, that can be even more valuable than those hundred switcheroos. And most importantly, a lot of people changing a little bit is much more likely to happen than a few people changing a lot.

The idea of a consumer spectrum also makes sense in the context of the prime tenet that have been thinking about with regard to farmers’ markets. And that is that farmers’ markets must reflect the values and culture of the communities that they serve. (These communities being economic and social and geographical, including agricultural.) Given the wide range of markets that the three of us saw, where each varied extensively in vendor mix, in tone, in range of products, in regulations—it makes sense too that there should be a wide and diverse range of consumers shopping there.

So what do consumers need and what can they give to a market? To talk about that, let’s broaden the idea of consumer to include those “other customers of the market� I mentioned earlier.

Beyond the individual who shops at the market once a week for the family’s food, there are a whole set of people who get other things from the market. Tourists, for example, who may buy a nice lemon cake and some local crafts, but also an experience of the place that they are visiting. Restaurateurs, who will buy fresh local food for their menus, but also long-term relationships with producers in their area, and possibly exclusive growing relationships for specific food products. (“Restaurant-supported agriculture� if you will, with a model similar to CSAs.) Regional officials may also be customers of the market, making some kind of commitment of resources in exchange for solutions to local social issues that the market can facilitate. Perhaps immigrant-integration, urban development, or nutrition education. I even saw a charitable organization consuming “consulting services� from a farmers’ market. Vendors from Nanaimo advised a church group on how to run a one-day market in order to raise funds for one of their charities. It may seem that this is pushing the definition of consumers, but in a very real way, these kinds of customer make up a really important part of the consumer base of certain established markets. And it is also how markets become embedded in their communities, become reflective of their communities, and provide far more value to their communities than just places to buy food.

If there is, in fact, such a thing as the “co-producer,� then I’d suggest that it is the alliance of both day-to-day individual consumers shopping for food, along with this broader group of “other customers.� All together, they not only provide co-producer feedback on what kind of beets and apples to grow, but how producers can best serve and be served by their communities. And how markets can do the same.

Here’s another, related idea: I believe that markets that are allowed to evolve go through a series of life cycles, or generations. The first generation is a relatively simple state of affairs—a group of vendors who get together and start selling products in an informal way. Temporary space, little administration, not necessarily every week. (This is probably what a lot of anglo-country markets started as, but have now mostly evolved beyond.) The second generation would be a market that develops a board of directors, hires a manager, has a stronger relationship with its location, and takes place on a regular basis. (This is where I would say the majority of anglo-country markets are right now.) A third-generation market is one that has become part of the established food culture, may be in a covered or owned space, and is probably highly integrated with the municipality and the merchant community. Moss Street in Victoria, Galway in Ireland, the London Farmers’ Markets are examples.

What I believe is the most exciting stage of farmers’ market development is a fourth generation, and some advanced third-generation markets like Halifax in Nova Scotia and Riverside in Cardiff, Wales might be on the cusp of becoming such things: truly embedded in their communities, acting as facilitators of solutions for market stakeholders, negotiating relationships between all members of the “co-producer� community. They are portals, in a way, of opportunity.

The market and the consumer work in symbiosis to evolve each other simultaneously. Better markets breed better consumers; better consumers require more evolutionary markets. Just as a consumer can move along a spectrum in increments, so can a market, until gradually, maybe, they are both taking more quantum steps in their own growth.

It has been said (I can’t possibly remember by WHO, right now…) that consuming food—including at farmers’ markets—is a political act. An agricultural act. A social act. Certainly all these things are true. Let me add that each choice the consumer makes is also an incremental act and, like voting, an act that is invaluable but that requires collectivism in order to be powerful.

So try this image out, and let me know what you think: All of us, consumers and farmers’ markets, inching our way incrementally along the consumer spectrum and the market-generation spectrum. Hundreds of thousands of us—millions of us—taking tiny little steps every day and together, in time, travelling enormous distances.

David Szanto
Master in Food Culture and Communication
UNISG - Colorno
Icebox | Studio
Farmers’ Market Research Project Wiki