Breaking New Ground: Farmer Perspectives on Organic Transition, a joint report released by Oregon Tilth and Oregon State University’s Center for Small Farms & Community Food Systems, highlights key recommendations for organizations and agencies that can provide support in crop research, infrastructure and market development as well as shaping public policies for transition to organic production.
BREAKING
NEW GROUND :
farmer perspectives on organic transition
Breaking New Ground:
FARMER PERSPECTIVES
ON ORGANIC TRANSITION
Garry Stephenson
Professor and Director
Lauren Gwin
Assistant Professor and
Associate Director
Center for Small Farms &
Community Food Systems
Oregon State University
Chris Schreiner
Executive Director
Sarah Brown
Education Director
Oregon Tilth, Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
1
Introduction
3
Methods
4
Results
6
Characteristics of the Full Group
6
Motivations, Barriers, Resources and Support:
Results of the Full Group
8
Profiles of Specific Farmer Categories
14
Discussion
40
Recommendations
47
Conclusion 52
Acknowledgment
52
References Cited
53
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Garry Stephenson
Professor and Director
Lauren Gwin
Assistant Professor and Associate Director
Center for Small Farms &
Community Food Systems
Oregon State University
Chris Schreiner
Executive Director
Sarah Brown
Education Director
Oregon Tilth, Inc.
farmers about their experiences with
organic transition. We asked farmers
about their motivations to transition,
the obstacles they face in doing so, and
the resources and support that are most
helpful during the transition process.
WHO SHOULD READ THIS REPORT?
What we learned should be of interest to
a wide range of stakeholders and service
providers, including organic sector
businesses, organic certifiers, academic
and agency researchers, Cooperative
Extension, organic advocates, and
policymakers.
WHAT DID WE LEARN?
WHAT IS THE ISSUE?
The farms and farmers represented in
Organic transition is a hot topic: despite
increasing consumer demand for organic
food and farm products and double-digit
annual sales growth, U.S. organic production
is currently flat and unable to meet
demand. Organic food manufacturers
and other buyers have reported difficulty
sourcing enough certified organic food
ingredients domestically.
In response, the organic industry, nonprofit
organizations, universities, and public
agencies are working on multiple levels
to support farmers choosing to access the
expanding organic market.
In this report, we offer one piece of the
puzzle: findings from a national survey of
OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY & OREGON TILTH | 1
this study cover a wide range of farm
sizes, crop types, farming experience,
age, and approach to organic farming.
The structure of our survey allowed
us to identify and compare results for
four categories of farmers that together
improve our understanding of the
transition process:
• Farmers who have successfully been
through the process of transition and
are 100% certified organic.
• Farmers who are currently in the
midst of transitioning to
organic certification.
• Farmers with split certified organic
and non-organic operations.
• Farmers who have decided not to
pursue organic farming.
We found useful differences among
these categories regarding motivations,
resources, and support. However, our
most compelling findings arose regarding
obstacles – including those within a farm’s
sphere of influence and those beyond
the farmer’s control – and whether these
groups of farmers view them as major,
minor, or not an obstacle at all.
Farmers in our study echo long-standing
concerns about costs, recordkeeping,
on-farm production challenges,
infrastructure, and access to profitable
markets. Our results make it clear that there
is plenty of work to do by a wide variety of
organizations and agencies that specialize in
crop research, infrastructure development,
market development, and policy
development related to the organic sector.
Guided by compelling survey findings, this
report recommends strategies to support
the success of farmers who chose organic.
HOW WAS THE STUDY DONE?
The survey was a collaboration between
Oregon State University’s Center for Small
Farms & Community Food Systems and
Oregon Tilth, Inc. We surveyed more than
1800 farmers who participated in the
U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural
Resources Conservation Services (NRCS)
Environmental Quality Incentives Program
(EQIP) Organic Initiative between 2010
and 2015, with a focus on transition. The
survey’s response rate was more than 34%
and represents more than 600 producers.
We suggest that those interested and
invested in organic transition look closely
at the information in this report and
identify what they can do to provide
support, overcome obstacles, or promote
policy to support transition and retain
certified organic farmers.
BREAKING NEW GROUND: FARMER PERSPECTIVES ON ORGANIC TRANSITION | 2
INTRODUCTION
What will encourage the
transition of more farms
and acres to organic farming
systems and certification?
1
2
Answering that question has long been
of interest to farmers,1 consumers, and
others who value the environmental,
economic, and health outcomes related to
organic production systems.
The report is useful for organizations,
agencies, and businesses working with
farmers and communities, and on policy
development to increase domestic
production of organic products.
In this report, we present the results of
a national survey of farmers regarding
the transition to organic certification,
specifically: what motivates them to
transition, what obstacles they face in
doing so, and what resources and support
are most helpful during the transition
process. The report highlights farmers
who are currently 100% certified organic,
are in the process of transitioning to
organic certification, are split certified
organic/non-organic, or have decided not
to pursue organic farming.
Organic transition is currently a hot topic:
despite increasing consumer demand
for organic food and farm products and
double-digit annual sales growth – 11%
in 2015, according to the Organic Trade
Association (OTA, 2016)2 – domestic
(U.S.) organic production is currently
flat and unable to meet demand (e.g.,
Greene, 2013; McBride and Greene,
2015). Organic food manufacturers and
other buyers have reported difficulty
sourcing enough certified organic food
ingredients domestically.
We use “farms” and “farmers” in this report to represent farms, ranches, and dairies and their operators.
Organic Trade Association (OTA). (2016). U.S. organic sales post new record of $43.3 billion in 2015.
Available at: https://www.ota.com/news/press-releases/19031#sthash.7UCqaHEt.dpuf/ (accessed 11/21/16).
OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY & OREGON TILTH | 3
In response, the organic industry, nonprofit
organizations, universities, and public
agencies are working on multiple levels
to identify and address these challenges.
This includes a specific focus on supporting
farmers who chose to transition farms and
acreage to certified organic (e.g., DiGiacomo
and King, 2015; Stephenson, G. et al., 2012;
Oregon Tilth’s Transition to Organic
Network). For example, USDA’s Natural
Resources Conservation Service (USDANRCS), through its Environmental Quality
Incentives Program (EQIP) Organic Initiative
(OI), provides financial and technical
assistance to certified, transitioning, and
exempt farmers to support conservation on
their land (NRCS, n.d.).
The national survey discussed in this
report was conducted by Oregon State
University’s Center for Small Farms &
Community Food Systems and Oregon
Tilth, Inc., as part of our ongoing research
and education collaboration. The survey
also builds on the six-year partnership
between Oregon Tilth and USDANRCS aimed at supporting organic and
transitioning farmers across the U.S. This
survey is one element of OSU and Oregon
Tilth’s research on organic transition.3
The shared goal of this work is to
provide information and resources to our
partners and farmers that will support
farmers choosing to access the expanding
organic market.
In what follows, we briefly describe
our methods, present and discuss our
survey results, and end with a synthesis
and recommendations.
METHODS
We surveyed a national population of
farmers and ranchers who (a) had an
EQIP-OI contract with USDA-NRCS
between 2010 (when OI began) and 2015,
and (b) self-identified as “transitional”
participants in that program.4 The list
included 1,829 farms or individuals.
USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics
Service (NASS) and the Organic Farming
Research Foundation (OFRF) conduct
regular national surveys of certified
organic farmers to learn the scope of
the sector as well as challenges and
resource needs.5
Other elements include Lloyd (2016) and Murray and Enelow (2016).
OI participants identify as (a) already certified organic, (b) exempt from certification, or (c) transitional; Those “who are transitioning to
organic production shall self-certify that they agree to develop and work toward implementing an Organic System Plan (OSP).”
5
The OFRF uses its survey to set research priorities (Jerkins & Ory, 2016) and therefore focuses on challenges and resource needs;
the 2011 survey also asked about motivations. See FN6 on the USDA-NASS Organic Survey relative to transitioning farmers. It is
worth noting that USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS) has until recently conducted regular surveys to track organic trends
by surveying certifiers instead of farmers. See USDA-NASS, (n.d.), for guidance on comparing these and other related USDA datasets.
3
4
BREAKING NEW GROUND: FARMER PERSPECTIVES ON ORGANIC TRANSITION | 4
The EQIP-OI dataset is unique because
it includes two segments of the organic
farming population not typically included
in the other national organic surveys:
transitioning farmers and farmers who
began the transition process but then
decided not to pursue organic farming.
Surveying these farmers provides a
valuable and unique glimpse into the
transition experience and, for the
latter, the obstacles that may prevent
completion of that process.6
We constructed our survey after
reviewing existing, survey-based
research during the last decade on farmer
motivations, barriers, and other aspects
of organic farming [Strochlic and Sierra,
2007 (CA); Stofferahn, 2009 (ND); Johnston,
2010 (NY); Lau et al., 2010 (TX); Cranfield,
Henson, and Holliday, 2010 (Canada)].7
We designed our questionnaire to be brief
in order to increase the response rate. As
a consequence, data on some aspects of
the population were not collected (e.g.,
state or region).
The survey was administered by Oregon
Tilth using an online platform (Qualtrics)
and paper questionnaires. Survey methods
followed the protocols of Dillman and
Smyth (2014) and guidance from the
Oregon State University Survey Research
Center (OSU-SRC).
Oregon Tilth, Inc., sent the OI participants
a letter on October 1, 2015, by U.S.
Mail, that provided background on
the purpose of the survey, requested
their participation, and provided
a unique access code to the online
questionnaire to assure anonymity.
Each participant received a follow-up
postcard several days later. One month
later, all non-respondents were mailed a
reminder letter and a paper copy of the
questionnaire with a pre-paid business
reply envelope. One final reminder and
paper questionnaire were mailed to the
remaining non-respondents on January 21,
2016. The OSU-SRC collected and organized
the data. Six hundred and fifteen (615)
farmers completed the questionnaire for an
adjusted response rate 8 of 34.2%.
The OSU Center for Small Farms &
Community Food Systems analyzed
the data using IBM SPSS software, with
consultation from OSU-SRC. Analysis
utilized descriptive statistics including
frequencies and cross tabulations.
Chi-square tests were used to compare
responses among data categories and detect
significant differences in the proportion
of responses. We use an alpha level of
.05 for all statistical tests. As we describe
the findings we use the term “significant”
to indicate statistically significant and
“notable” to indicate important but not
statistically significant.
The one exception is the 2014 USDA-NASS Organic Survey, the only one of NASS’s four organic surveys that includes transitioning farmers, who were
identified through the 2012 Ag Census; transitioning farms are asked only a few basic questions which complement but do not overlap with our survey.
7
See Lloyd (2016) for a more detailed review of existing research.
8
Using the American Association for Public Opinion (AAPOR) response rate calculator.
6
OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY & OREGON TILTH | 5
WHAT WE ASKED
Respondents first answered four
demographic questions: years farming,
number of acres in production, cropping
system, and farming system relative
to organic certification. We then
asked a series of questions to learn what
motivated them to transition to organic
certification, what were the obstacles,
what resources helped them, and what
additional support is needed.9 Farmers
were also given several opportunities to
provide additional comments, primarily
on how to encourage more transition
in general. We offer a selection of their
responses in this report but will provide a
deeper analysis of this qualitative data in
future publications.
RESULTS
This report focuses on key findings. We
first present results for all respondents
as a group. But as is often the case, the
aggregate doesn’t tell the full story. We
then present results for four categories of
farmers to gain insights into the transition
process from their different perspectives.
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FULL
GROUP OF RESPONDENTS
Our respondents and their operations
represent a wide range of farm sizes,
crop types, farming experience, age, and
approach to organic farming (see Table 1).
The sample is dominated by smaller scale
(60.5%), vegetable farms (54.7%) operated by
farmers with less than 10 years’ experience
(55.5%) who are currently transitioning
their farms to organic certification (30.2%).
The dominance of this “typical” respondent
influences many of our results.10
WIDE RANGE OF FARMING
EXPERIENCE.
We heard from newer farmers and more
experienced farmers. More than half
(55.5%) have been farming fewer than
10 years –and are what are currently
considered by the USDA as Beginning
Farmers and Ranchers (BFRs) – but 27%
have more than 20 years of experience.
WIDE RANGE OF AGES.
The farmers are fairly evenly distributed
in age. Most farmers are middle-aged
with nearly 60% between 46 and 65.
More than 25% are under 45 years old.
The questionnaire also included a section specific to respondents’ experience with the NRCS EQIP-OI program. Analysis and reporting of those
results will occur separately.
10
Without similar demographic data for the 1,829 farms, we cannot say whether our sample is more or less representative of that population,
which itself overlaps with but is not the same as the certified organic farmers typically surveyed by USDA-NASS and OFRF.
9
BREAKING NEW GROUND: FARMER PERSPECTIVES ON ORGANIC TRANSITION | 6
SMALLER FARMS BUT
LARGER ALSO…
Although most farms are smaller scale,
we also heard from mid-scale and largescale farmers. The majority (60.5%) farm
fewer than 25 acres, while more than 20%
farm more than 100 acres.11 BUT A
MOSTLY VEGETABLES, BUT A
WIDE ARRAY OF OTHER CROPS.
More than half of the farms (54.7%) primarily
produce vegetables. Another 13.3%
produce fruits or nuts. Nearly one-third
of the farms (32.0%) produce extensive
crops including grains and legumes
(12.6%), livestock (16.0%) and dairy (3.4%).12
TABLE 1. DEMOGRAPHICS : FULL SAMPLE
CATEGORY
PERCENT
EXPERIENCE
0 to 5 years
5 to 10 years
10 to 20 years
20 years or more
24.6
30.9
17.6
26.9
AGE
18 to 35 years
36 to 45 years
46 to 55 years
56 to 65 years
66 to 75 years
76 years or older
11.5
15.4
25.1
33.6
13.3
1.2
0 to 25 acres
26 to 100 acres
101 to 500 acres
501 to 1,000 acres
More than 1,000 acres
60.5
18.4
15.6
3.1
2.4
CROPS 13
Vegetables
Fruits/Nuts
Grain/Legumes
Livestock
Dairy
54.7
13.3
12.6
16.0
3.4
CERTIFICATION
100% Certified Organic
Transitioning
Split (Certified Organic/Non-Organic)
Not Pursuing Organic Farming
Exempt from Certification
26.8
30.2
11.2
16.4
15.3
FARM SIZE
There is a payment limit for EQIP OI financial assistance that is lower than standard EQIP. The effect of this on the sample regarding farm size is not known.
The survey asked which cropping system “best describes” their production. The online version allowed only one answer. The paper version asked
for one answer, but of 614 responses to the question 166 indicated multiple crops; 35 indicated “other.”
13
See footnote #12
11
12
OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY & OREGON TILTH | 7
VARIETY OF APPROACHES
TO ORGANIC FARMING
We asked farmers the status of their
farms relevant to organic certification.
About 30% are in the process of
transitioning to organic certification and
about 27% are currently certified organic,
having completed their certification after
finalizing their EQIP-OI contract. Split
operations – part certified organic, part
non-organic – represent about 11% of
farms. About 15% are considered “exempt”
from certification.14 Of special interest,
about 16% of the farms responded that
they are “not pursuing organic farming,”
offering us the opportunity to examine
why some farmers initially pursue it but
then change their minds. This report does
not include an analysis of “exempt” farms;
we will cover this group in future reports.
MOTIVATIONS, BARRIERS,
RESOURCES, AND SUPPORT:
RESULTS FOR THE FULL SAMPLE
MOTIVATIONS
We asked respondents what initially
motivated them to transition to organic
farming, providing a list of possible
motivations including “market or
profit” motivations and “values-based”
motivations. Table 2 indicates what
percentage of respondents said yes to
those factors.
“Exempt” as defined in the USDA National Organic Program regulations (7 CFR Part 205) means farming organically and marketing as such but
exempt from certification due to having under $5,000 in annual sales.
14
BREAKING NEW GROUND: FARMER PERSPECTIVES ON ORGANIC TRANSITION | 8
TABLE 2. MOTIVATIONS : FULL SAMPLE
MOTIVATION
% YES
VALUES-BASED
Fits my and/or my family’s values
Concerns about environment
Potential enhancement of farm sustainability
Concerns about human health
91.3
86.7
86.5
86.3
MARKET/PROFIT
Access the expanding market for organics
Potential increase in profit
Specific market opportunity or contract from a buyer
61.6
60.8
32.7
Six of the seven motivations were
selected by at least 60% of all respondents.
However, the farmer/farm family’s
values were the most frequently cited
motivation at over 90%, followed closely
by concerns about the environment,
enhancement of farm sustainability, and
concerns about human health. Access
to the expanding market and increased
profit were less cited but still notable, and
having a specific market opportunity or
contract was the least cited. The high
ranking of values-based motivations is
not surprising considering the sample is
made up of farmers who self-selected to
participate in the EQIP OI and therefore
had a potentially higher level of interest
in organic or sustainable farming than
the general farm population.
OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY & OREGON TILTH | 9
What motivates farmers to transition
their farms to organic?
In their own words:
• “For us, it’s about our value
system. We believe we are the
stewards of the land.”
• “We believe in organic
practices because it’s
the right thing to do for
the environment. However,
to get more farmers involved,
there need to be more
economic incentives – price
premiums and/or subsidies.”
• “I think money will be the
motivating factor. I have
personal beliefs motivating
me to farm organically,
but I have seen the
benefits financially.”
OBSTACLES
Respondents were given a list of potential
obstacles to organic transition – related
to costs, production, and marketing – and
were asked whether each was a major
obstacle, a minor obstacle, or not an
obstacle. We categorize each obstacle as
being major, minor, or not an obstacle
based on the highest response percent of
40% or more (although in two instances
we allowed 39.6%). When the response
in all categories is below 40% we identify
the obstacle as having “no clear trend.”
This simple approach does not capture
subtleties of the responses. For instance,
obstacles in the “not an obstacle”
category were still typically identified
as major or minor by some farmers. We
encourage readers to examine the data
for their own assessment.
As shown in Table 3, farmers identified
two obstacles as major: weed
management, and the cost of organic
certification. Among the seven minor
obstacles, the top three are the learning
process, recordkeeping requirements
of organic certification, and the cost
of organic inputs. Four obstacles are
identified as not an obstacle including:
planning crop rotations, reduced yields,
finding buyers for organic products,
and access to technical expertise. This
finding for reduced yields is interesting,
because “yield drag” has long been
thought to be a significant challenge for
organic producers and organic agriculture
broadly,15 yet nearly 17% of our
respondents said it was a major obstacle,
and 83% said it was minor (32%) or not an
obstacle at all (51%).
Five obstacles have no clear trend
as major, minor, or not obstacles. For
instance, although the cost of labor is
considered a major obstacle for over
35% of farmers, nearly as many (33.5%)
consider it not an obstacle and less than
30% consider it a minor obstacle. In these
instances, there is no clear consensus on
the obstacle, but it does not diminish the
obstacle’s importance.
What are the obstacles to organic
transition? In their own words:
• “It’s easier to get a marriage
or driver’s license than to
do the paperwork on
organic certification.”
• “The burden of proof needs
to shift from the organic
farmer having to document
every seed, every drop of
spray … Conventional
agricultural products make
more sense to track as they
have much greater potential
negative side effects… This
shifts the cost burden.”
On the “yield gap” see Reganold and Wachter (2016) and Kniss, Savage, and Jabbour (2016).
15
BREAKING NEW GROUND: FARMER PERSPECTIVES ON ORGANIC TRANSITION | 10
TABLE 3. OBSTACLES : FULL SAMPLE
OBSTACLES
PERCENT
MA JOR
MINOR
NOT AN
OBSTACLE
Weed management
52.9
30.7
16.4
Cost of organic certification
43.2
37.5
19.3
Learning process
16.7
47.1
36.2
Recordkeeping requirements of organic certification
40.0
43.6
16.4
Cost of organic inputs
32.7
42.6
24.7
Managing soil fertility
23.9
42.1
34.0
Availability of organic inputs (seed, fertilizer, etc.)
19.5
40.6
39.9
Obtaining organic price premiums
30.3
39.6
30.1
Obtaining organic price information
22.1
39.6
38.3
Availability of organic processing facilities
38.2
25.4
36.4
Cost of labor
36.6
29.8
33.5
Pest or disease control
35.7
38.9
25.4
Availability of labor
28.7
38.0
33.3
Obtaining adequate prices during transition
26.1
36.2
37.6
8.4
39.4
52.2
Reduced yields
16.7
32.2
51.1
Finding buyers/markets for my organic products
19.7
31.3
48.9
Access to knowledge technical expertise on
organic production
19.6
39.1
41.3
MA JOR OBSTACLE
MINOR OBSTACLE
NO CLEAR TREND
NOT AN OBSTACLE
Planning crop rotations
MAJOR
MINOR
NOT AN OBSTACLE
OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY & OREGON TILTH | 11
NO CLEAR TREND
RESOURCES
Respondents were then given a list of 10
different resources and asked to choose
up to five that would be (or would have
been) most beneficial during transition.
Table 4 ranks these resources in order of
how many respondents selected them
(number 1 is the top rank). Three of the
top five resources are production-oriented
and two of the five are market-oriented.
TABLE 4. RESOURCE RANKING : FULL SAMPLE
RESOURCE
RANK
THE GROUP’S TOP 5
Information on organic pest, disease, and weed management
Information on soil health management for organic farms
Information on organic markets (trends, opportunities, pricing)
Information on effective organic crop rotations for your region
Market development for organic products
1
2
3
4
5
LESS IMPORTANT
Information on organic crop varieties
Financial planning tools for transitioning to organic
Advance contracts from buyers during transition
Certified transition label
Organic and/or transition crop enterprise budget templates
6
7
8
9
10
Farmers also called for consumerfocused resources, for example,
“more public awareness of the
health and environmental benefits
of organic farming and why it
may cost more to bring organic to
the table.”
BREAKING NEW GROUND: FARMER PERSPECTIVES ON ORGANIC TRANSITION | 12
SUPPORT
Once we know what topics are most
important to transitioning farmers, we
also have to learn how they prefer to
receive that information and guidance.
Respondents were asked to choose their
top two of five types of support. As
shown in Table 5, high contact support
was preferred, with mentoring from
experienced organic farmers most valued
and one-on-one technical assistance at
number two.
In person workshops—still high contact—
were ranked number 3, and books and
other printed materials and online
courses and webinars ranked lower.
The ranking of form of support does not
necessarily reject it but simply ranks
farmer preferences without regard to cost
or complexity.
TABLE 5. SUPPORT RANKINGS : FULL SAMPLE
TYPE OF SUPPORT
Mentoring from experienced organic farmers
One-on-one technical assistance during transition
In person workshops or short courses
Books or other printed materials
Online courses or webinars
RANK
1
2
3
4
5
On resources, in their own words:
• “Success speaks volumes.
If [farmers] could only see a
neighbor overcoming common
production problems, growing
grains successfully, milking
cows successfully, whatever
the crop – if they could SEE
success, they would begin to
get curious and start to do
the math!”
• “One on one mentorship with
certified organic growers
would be tremendous.”
OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY & OREGON TILTH | 13
• “[In my region] extension agents
are available for
conventional farmers but none
for organic farmers.”
• “The time required for a small
operation to manage transition
is almost insurmountable…
because of my small scale.
I haven’t made progress at all.
Having a mentor to help me get
started with the paperwork and
recordkeeping would help a lot.”
PROFILES OF SPECIFIC
FARMER CATEGORIES
While the aggregate results are useful,
they cannot tell us the full picture or
suggest how to inform or support specific
groups of farmers transitioning to organic
certification. To do this, we examined
specific categories of respondents to
see (1) how they are different in terms
of their demographics, and (2) whether
and how those differences influence
their responses regarding motivations,
obstacles, resources, and support. This
approach allows “market segmentation”
that meets the needs and attitudes of
specific groups.
Of the categories we examined, those
based on status of organic certification –
100% Certified, Split, Transitioning, and
Not Pursuing Organic Farming – showed
significant and notable differences16 and
provide the most compelling information
on the transition process for farmers.
For each of these, we provide a short
description based on demographics
and then discuss variation related to
motivations and obstacles. We discuss
resource and support rankings together at
the end of this section.
We also examined beginning farmers and ranchers, young farmers, groups by crop type (e.g., vegetables v. fruits/nuts), and exempt certification
status. Summary results for BFRs are offered in the BFR Box. The others will be discussed in future publications.
16
BREAKING NEW GROUND: FARMER PERSPECTIVES ON ORGANIC TRANSITION | 14
BEGINNING FARMERS
AND RANCHERS
The USDA defines a beginning farmer
or rancher (BFRs) as someone who has
“…not operated a farm or ranch, or who
has operated a farm or ranch for not more
than 10 consecutive years.” BFRs are an
important category to consider because
USDA and other public agencies offer an
array of programs designed to support
BFRs; some lenders have dedicated
loan programs for BFRs; and numerous
universities and non-profit organizations
provide educational programming for BFRs.
The “BFR” category includes more than
half of the participants in this study:
55% have less than 10 years’ farming
experience, and nearly 25% have less
than five years.17 Compared with the
experienced farmers in our study, BFRs
tend to operate smaller farms, produce
vegetables, and be in the process of
transition to organic certification.
While BFRs tend to be younger as a
category than experienced farmers,
they are actually bimodal in age, with
the majority over 45 years old and the
largest segment between 46 and 65
years old.18
However, while there are significant
demographic differences between
BFRs and experienced farmers, the
two groups are fairly similar regarding
motivations. BFRs are more motivated
by organic farming values, with
a significantly higher percentage
motivated by their or their family’s
values, concerns about human health,
and concerns about the environment.
The two groups are essentially the same
regarding obstacles with no significant
differences. They agree on 3 of their 5
top resources: information on organic
pest, disease, and weed management, soil
health management for organic farms, and
organic markets. They also agree on their
top 2 forms of support: mentoring from
experienced organic farmers, and one on
one technical support.
Categories for years of experience were “0 to less than 5” and “5 to less than 10” and do not align perfectly with USDA’s definition of “not more
than 10” but are a close approximation.
18
This older set of BFRs reflects an identified category of farms “retiring to farming” from another career. See Kirkpatrick 2013.
17
OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY & OREGON TILTH | 15
PROFILE 1 :
100% certified organic
Farms that are 100% Certified
Organic represent nearly 27% of
the full sample and account for
165 of the 615 farms in this study.
We profile this group because
these farmers have successfully
transitioned in recent years and
are now fully committed to this
farming system. Consequently,
they provide a good baseline for
comparison to the other farm
categories profiled (transitioning
to organic, split operations, and
farms not pursuing organic).
MADER RANCH – HALFWAY, OR
Photograph by Deanna Lloyd
BREAKING NEW GROUND: FARMER PERSPECTIVES ON ORGANIC TRANSITION | 16
DEMOGRAPHICS
Farmers in the 100% Certified Organic
category have a fairly even distribution
of experience from less than five years
to more than 20 years. Like the whole
sample, more than half have less than ten
years of experience, but nearly 25% have
20 or more years’ experience.19
TABLE 6. DEMOGRAPHICS : 100% CERTIFIED ORGANIC
CATEGORY
PERCENT
EXPERIENCE
0 to 5 years
5 to 10 years
10 to 20 years
20 years or more
21.8
33.3
20.0
24.8
AGE
18 to 35 years
36 to 45 years
46 to 55 years
56 to 65 years
66 to 75 + years
15.3
19.0
26.4
28.2
11.0
FARM SIZE
0 to 25 acres
26 to 100 acres
101 to 500 acres
501 to 1,000 acres
54.5
20.0
23.0
2.4
CROPS 20
Vegetables
Fruits/Nuts
Grain/Legumes
Livestock
Dairy
57.1
7.6
18.5
8.4
8.4
Nationally, 28% of certified organic farms have less than 10 years’ experience (compared with 21% of all farms) and 47% have more than 20
years’. (USDA-NASS, 2014, Table 51; USDA-NASS, 2012).
20
Of 164 responses to this question, 38 farms indicated more than one crop; 7 farms indicated “other.”
19
OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY & OREGON TILTH | 17
The 100% Certified Organic category is
slightly younger than the full sample
with about 34% of them 45 years or
younger compared to about 27% for the
full sample. Nearly 40% of 100% Certified
organic farmers are over 55 compared to
slightly over 48% for the full sample.
The majority of 100% Certified Organic
farmers in this study are farming 25 or
fewer acres. However, mid-scale farms
are well represented with more than 25%
of farms over 100 acres.
Well over 50% of the 100% Certified
Organic farms produce vegetables. In fact,
nearly two-thirds of these farms produce
intensive crops (vegetables, fruits/nuts).
However, there is still a diversity of crops
with over 35% of the farms operating
more extensive cropping systems
(grains/legumes, livestock, dairy). In fact,
regarding crop type, the 100% Certified
Organic category includes nearly 80% of
the dairy farms in our study and nearly
half of the grain/legume farms.
MOTIVATIONS TO TRANSITION
TO ORGANIC
The 100% Certified Organic farmers
reveal a high level of commitment to
some of the values-based foundations
of the organic farming movement (Table
7). These farmers rated values-based
motivations higher than the full sample.
100% Certified Organic farmers are
pragmatic too, rating “potential
All Regions
PDF
4023, 4023, OT_OSU_TransitionReport_03212017.pdf, OT_OSU_TransitionReport_03212017.pdf, 19987313, https://cms.organictransition.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/OT_OSU_TransitionReport_03212017.pdf, https://cms.organictransition.org/resource/breaking-new-ground-farmer-perspective-on-organic-transition/ot_osu_transitionreport_03212017-pdf/, , 1, , , ot_osu_transitionreport_03212017-pdf, inherit, 4022, 2024-01-08 08:10:26, 2024-01-08 08:10:26, 0, application/pdf, application, pdf, https://cms.organictransition.org/wp-includes/images/media/document.png