In the last few decades, the emergence of mid-scale, intermediated marketing channels that fall between commodity and direct markets has attracted growing interest from scholars for their potential to preserve small and mid-sized farms while scaling up alternative agrifood sourcing. When such mid-scale supply chains are formed among multiple business partners with shared ethics or values related to the qualities of the food and the business relationships along the supply chain, they may be termed “values-based supply chains (VBSCs).” Most of the research on VBSCs to date has relied primarily on a case study approach that investigates the performance of VBSCs from the perspective of VBSC founders or leaders. In contrast, this research seeks out the perspectives of farmers who participate in VBSCs. A nationwide farmer survey conducted in 2017 offers original insights on farmer motivations for participating in VBSCs and how they are being used by farmers relative to other marketing channels. We find that VBSCs serve farms of all sizes. Overall, smaller farms were more likely to market a higher percentage of overall sales through their VBSC and more likely to rank their VBSC as one of the top three marketing channels in their portfolio. But it was the larger farms that were more likely to perceive VBSC-specific benefits. Our findings confirm that while there is a limited volume of product that such regional supply chains can currently handle, farmers view VBSCs as a valuable marketing option that aligns with their own values and preserves their product’s identity.

The sustainability of the food system is at the forefront of academic and policy discussions as we face the challenge of providing food security to a growing population amidst environmental uncertainty and depletion, social disruptions, and structural economic shocks and stresses. Crafting a sustainable and resilient food system requires us to go beyond disciplinary boundaries and broaden critical and creative thinking skills. Recent literature calls for examples of pedagogical transformations from food systems courses to identify successful practices and potential challenges. We offer a recipe for what to teach by framing systems thinking concepts, then discuss how to teach it with five learning activities: deductive case studies, experiential learning, reflective narrative learning, system dynamics simulations and scenarios, and inductive/open-ended case studies, implemented with collaborative group learning, inter/trans-disciplinarity, and instructor-modeled co-learning. Each learning activity is animated with concrete examples from our courses at Oregon State University, University of Minnesota, and University of Vermont, USA. We discuss opportunities and challenges implementing these strategies in light of student, instructor, and institutional expectations and constraints. But the challenge is worth the effort, because food system transformation requires active learners and systemic thinkers as engaged citizens, food system advocates, entrepreneurs, and policy makers.

Visible disruptions of appropriate food distribution for end consumers during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic prompted calls for an urgent, renewed look at how the U.S. agri-food system is impacted by and responds to pandemics, natural disasters, and human-made crises. Previous studies suggest the COVID-19 pandemic yielded uneven impacts across agri-food supply chain segments and regions. For a rigorously comparable assessment of the impact of COVID-19 on agri-food businesses, a survey was administered from February to April 2021 to five segments of the agri-food supply chain in three study regions (California, Florida, and the two-state region of Minnesota-Wisconsin). Results (N = 870) measuring the self-reported changes in quarterly business revenue in 2020 compared to businesses’ typical experience pre-COVID-19 suggest significant differences across supply chain segments and regions. In the Minnesota-Wisconsin region, restaurants took the largest hit and the upstream supply chains were relatively unaffected. In California, however, the negative impacts were felt throughout the supply chain. Two factors likely contributed to regional differences: (1) regional disparities in pandemic evolution and governance and (2) structural differences in regional agri-food systems. Regionalized and localized planning and the development of best-practices will be necessary for the U.S. agri-food system to enhance preparedness for and resilience to future pandemics, natural disasters, and human-made crises.

American households discard a significant amount of food that represent a sizable portion of their food expenditures. This study adds to our understanding of product attributes associated with food waste, with a focus on cosmetic deterioration during home storage. Specifically, we profile a sample of U.S. individuals by patterns of common food-related behaviors and determine the effects of product attributes on food waste tendencies at the point of consumption by distinct behavioral profiles. An interactive survey at the Minnesota State Fair (N = 333) was used to obtain measurements on food-related behavior and sociodemographic factors. The survey included a conjoint task to elicit food discard tendencies to construct the food waste proxy. The study considered cosmetic deterioration, date labels, implied shelf life, package size, and prices paid, in fresh, packaged spinach and ground beef products. Factor analysis and latent class modeling categorized the sample into two classes, revealing distinct food-related behavioral patterns. Planners, who constituted a slight majority in our sample, were likely to have established pre-shopping and in-store behavior and food management and cooking skills. Extemporaneous Consumers had inferior food handling routines and were less knowledgeable and skilled in the kitchen. Regression analysis using a random-effects tobit model showed Extemporaneous Consumers were prone to waste a greater portion of the spinach product than Planners. Otherwise, both classes showed similar increases in likelihood to discard the products, as their appearance deteriorated. Their tendency to waste increased with shorter remaining shelf life for spinach but not for ground beef, and was not affected by the date label type. Results suggest an intervention that targets a general audience designed to enhance people's skills to discern edibility of food in home storage by manipulating sensory expectations from cosmetic deterioration could be impactful in efforts to curtail food waste.

Organic food products, which have been sold traditionally at natural food stores, have become increasingly available through mass marketing channels. This study estimated an almost ideal demand system (AIDS) model using 2008-2010 retail scanner data to examine consumer demand for organic fluid milk products sold at conventional and natural marketing channels. Asymmetric cross-price elasticities were found suggesting relative stickiness in demand to switch from organic milk to conventional milk and from natural stores to food, drug, and mass merchandiser stores. More generally, demands shifting toward products with higher expenditure elasticities in a differentiated market can be explained by relative budget shares and expenditure elasticities.

This article estimates the amounts of food that is discarded, diverted, and landfilled in Minnesota by comparing and applying approaches and statistics from selected national, regional, and local studies. Our preferred estimates suggest 2.1 million tons of food is discarded in Minnesota, of which 60% is diverted through recovery and recycling efforts. The remaining 834 thousand tons are landfilled. This landfilled amount, considered as “food waste,” is smaller than the 1.3 million tons calculated using the ReFED (2016) methods, but its estimated distribution across the food supply chain is similar. Residential losses account for the largest proportion of food waste landfilled (43%). The processing and manufacturing stage discards the largest proportion of food (36%), but generates the smallest amount landfilled because of a high diversion factor. The range of estimates obtained from various methods highlights the complexities in choosing appropriate assumptions, factors, and datasets when calculating food waste baseline amounts.