на главную поиск contacts

Small Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Growers in Tennessee: Factors Associated With Their Use of Commercial Outlets

Опубликовано на портале: 04-05-2005
Journal of Food Distribution Research. 2000.  Vol. 31. No. 2. P. 39-47. 
Consolidation and technological change are restricting the marketing alternatives for independent, small-volume produce growers. The following are some of the forces restricting small growers: contracting, bar coding, precut processing, increased globalization, HACCP, and efficient consumer response (Epperson and Estes, 1999; Kaufman et al., 2000 forthcoming; Shaffer, 1999). As a result of these and other forces, small volume produce growers tend to be limited to direct outlets (for example, farm stands, PYO, farmer’s markets). Little attention, however, has been given to the marketing choices made by small-volume growers (an exception is Estes, 1985). The focus of this paper is a study that examines the characteristics of the farmer’s operations and their choices of market outlets. The objective of that study was to generate information about the marketing activities of small-volume growers who had, as one of their options, access to organized farmer’s markets.

текст статьи в формате pdf:
Ключевые слова

См. также:
Д. Н. Емельянов, А. М. Носов, А. В. Дерюгина, В.Г. Растянников, А. А. Барлыбаев, Н. М. Клопыжникова
Александр Владимирович Островский
Общественные науки и современность. 2015.  № 2. С. 96-111. 
Paul Trupo, Luke A. Jr. Colavito, Dixie W. Reaves, Charles W. Coale, George W. Norton
Journal of Food Distribution Research. 1998.  Vol. 29. No. 2. P. 45-58. 
Marianne McGarry, Andrew J. Thulin
Journal of Food Distribution Research. 2004.  Vol. 31. No. 1. P. 193-197. 
Byung-Joon Woo, Chung-Liang Huang, J.E. Epperson, Brenda J. Cude
Journal of Food Distribution Research. 2001.  Vol. 32. No. 1. P. 174-181.