In assessing the disparity between local foods producers and consumers, I think it is important to remember that sales support farmers’ livelihoods, and for many of these individuals farming is a business. Yesterday Nicole and I visited the Douglas Loop Farmers’ Market. While there, Stephen Bartlett, of Sustainable Agriculture Louisville (SAL), explained to us that many farmers who previously worked in the Smoketown/Shelby Park Farmers’ Market had moved their operations to Douglas Loop. Shelby Park is located in a low-income area of Louisville, and Bartlett explained that farmers simply were not earning enough revenue to justify holding a market in that location. In this instance demand was not high enough to justify the continued presence of the farmers’ market. In contrast to Shelby Park, Douglas Loop is located in the Highlands, a much more affluent neighborhood. Farmers have unsurprisingly experienced better business since the move.
I am sure many farmers selling local foods are strong proponents of food equity, but at the same time they must remain realistic about the economic viability of their operations. Though I tend to shy away from pure economics as an answer or justification, I do not think anyone would contest the fact that markets in low-income neighborhoods will not perform as well as markets in more prosperous areas. This trend has obvious implications for the availability of local foods and the reality of the “by whom/for whom” distinction noted by Ackerman-Leist. In fact, the distribution of farmers’ markets throughout Louisville confirms this pattern–the West End, another low-income area, has two markets, while the Highlands has four.
One initiative in Louisville I am particularly interested in is the use of the Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) system in farmers’ markets. I believe that allowing welfare benefits to be used at farmers’ markets has the potential to partially reconcile Ackerman-Leist’s “by whom/for whom” division. Some markets in Louisville accept state benefits, such as those provided through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), as payment, which could increase low-income families’ access to local foods sold at farmers’ markets. I am looking forward to exploring whether or not the use of the EBT system at markets has actually increased access among low-income demographics in Louisville.