Limited Resource Farmers and the Marketing System

Abstract

tifying and finding solutions to the problems they face.' Much of this effort has focused on identifying enterprises that are profitable on a small scale; that is, enterprises which require little land and capital but provide a high return to the producer. These alternative crops include new and improved varieties of traditional cash crops and other nontraditional enterprises, such as fruits and vegetables, herbs and spices, ornamentals and specialty animals (French, Whatley). The success of fruit and vegetable producers in California, Florida, Texas, and Arizona has triggered discussions as to whether other areas in the United States, particularly the southern states, could compete with these major producing states (Capps, Babb and Long). Coupled with this push for diversification is the belief that LRFs may benefit from alternative enterprises because they suffer adversely from price fluctuations and low net returns from production of traditional crops. Colette and Wall allude to the high income potentials of vegetables but argue that these crops tend to be very risky enterprises and that LRFs usually have insufficient cash reserves to carry them over a bad year. Efforts have also been directed toward the marketing problems facing LRFs (Christy, Dagher, McLean-Meyinsse). While much attention has been given to alternative enterprises, a full understanding of the marketing system, including market risks, strategies, and alternative market outlets, requires more attention by producers, policy makers, and our profession. Most farmers allocate more time, energy, and resources to production than to marketing. Limited-resource farmers, in general, have not invested the resources required to identify and use viable marketing plans and strategies that can exploit the full potential gains these markets offer sellers of agricultural products. In some cases, LRFs have identified marketing niches and developed innovative marketing strategies (Wysong and Handwerker). The strategic behavior exhibited by small farmers has profit performance implications, such as (a) providing the consumer with high quality, usually fresh products, and (b) gaining the net margins that accrue from performing specific marketing services or functions.