Abstract
In 2011, the Oregon legislature passed the Farm Direct Marketing Law (FDML), which took effect in 2012. The law clarified licensing and food safety requirements for direct-to-consumer sales at farmers markets, farm stands, and similar venues. It also included a “cottage food” provision allowing farms to make and sell certain low-risk, value-added products from farm-grown ingredients, direct to consumer, without a food processor’s license. Advocates predicted enhanced small farm viability through new products and revenue streams, market season extension, reduced processing costs, test marketing opportunities, and other avenues. Detractors warned the deregulation would cause outbreaks of foodborne illness. In 2016, the law’s fifth year, we explored these predictions and early outcomes. We conducted a focus group with stakeholders and semistructured interviews with two key informants, 18 farmers, and 24 farmers market managers around Oregon. We found farmers making and selling a variety of value-added products under the FDML. We found no foodborne illness linked to FDML products. Interviewees described multiple benefits resulting from the law, many corresponding to predicted benefits. They also described unanticipated benefits at the community level. Interviewees identified barriers and recommended changes related to the law and related education. We discuss the feasibility of these recommendations as well as the long-term potential of the cottage food provision. We end by reflecting on the FDML as a whole, as it supports Oregon’s direct market farming sector. See the press release for this article.
Highlights
In this paper, we provide an early-stage look at the impact of Oregon’s Farm Direct Marketing Law (FDML) five years after it went into effect in 2012
Based on guidance we received from the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) and ODA, we examined the Center for Disease Control (CDC) database of foodborne illnesses to learn of any outbreaks attributable to FDML-allowed products since the law’s passage
The main argument against the FDML does not appear to have materialized: we found no evidence of widespread or acute foodborne illness resulting from FDML foods
Summary
We provide an early-stage look at the impact of Oregon’s Farm Direct Marketing Law (FDML) five years after it went into effect in 2012. At the time of its passage, the FDML was considered an important victory for the direct-market farming sector and a recognition that local food and “knowing your farmer” were valued by Oregonians (Brekken, 2012) Those in favor of the law predicted it would ease farmer concerns about regulatory ambiguity and burden, but would generate new enterprises and income streams to support overall farm profitability (Bauer, 2011; Brekken, 2012; Lies, 2011; Terry, 2011; Love, 2011). Those who argued against the law predicted increased risk and prevalence of foodborne illness (Brekken, 2012; Lies, 2011; Terry, 2011)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
