The COVID-19 pandemic has changed consumer grocery shopping choices and patterns. As consumers have looked for products that might boost their immune system, OJ has been seen as a convenient option to achieve this. By exploring both Nielsen grocery scanner data and a monthly consumer survey from April 2020 to March 2021, we provide a visual description of the dynamic changes in OJ consumers within the year of the pandemic.
Introduction In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. government implemented multiple assistance and stimulus packages to aid consumers and businesses, including agricultural producers. Agricultural operations qualified for assistance from three relief programs in 2020: The Coronavirus Food Assistance Programs (CFAP 1 and CFAP 2) are targeted exclusively at agricultural producers and include direct payments to eligible operations. With some exceptions, producers of agricultural commodities (crop, livestock, dairy, or aquaculture) for which prices declined by 5% or more were eligible for a CFAP payment (Johansson et al., 2020). Some commodities (such as hemp, alfalfa mustard, etc.), for which price data were not available, were also eligible for payments under CFAP (Johansson et al., 2020). A third program for which agricultural producers qualified was the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) administered by the Small Business Administration (SBA). The PPP was designed to help small businesses keep employees on the payroll and offset some of their operating costs. The maximum loan amount, which was forgivable if used during the 24-week period following the first disbursement of the loan on eligible expenses (payroll and allowed overhead expenses), was 2.5 times the monthly average profit plus payroll costs, including eligible overhead costs (employer insurance payments, employer unemployment taxes, etc.) (SBA, 2020). PPP data on each of the loans, including agricultural businesses loans, were released on December 1, 2020. This article examines the PPP participation rate, the average amount received, and PPP distributions relative to labor cost at the state level for the agriculture sector.
Social distancing mandates and the subsequent economic disruptions resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic caused unprecedented changes in where, how, and what food U.S. consumers purchased and acquired in 2020. To better understand these changes, a team of researchers—focused on the implications for local and regional food systems—conducted a national survey of over 5,000 households from mid-October to mid-November 2020. The survey was conducted using a Qualtrics panel. We set quotas to ensure a demographically balanced sample, with the exception of gender (as we asked the primary food shopper in the household to respond and women were more likely to play that role). A variety of demographic and COVID-related questions were asked to capture food behavior trends, including: 1) purchases of food through a variety of market channels, 2) use of online platforms, and 3) food security status. Questions gaged consumer behavior over three time periods: September 2019 (the before times), April 2020 (the pandemic begins), and September 2020 (the new normal). Food Purchasing Practices During the COVID-19 Pandemic, Online Food Shopping Trends During the COVID-19 Pandemic, and The Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Food Insecurity are infographics designed to provide valuable but brief explanations of our research findings.
Determining the optimum mature cow weight or cow size is a complex problem faced by producers. While larger cows wean larger calves than smaller cows, the smaller cow weans a larger percentage of her body weight (Dhuyvetter, 2009). In addition, while the smaller cow has a reduced feed efficiency, the larger cow requires more nutrients for maintenance (Hersom, 2009). Further, smaller cull cows bring less money per head on sale day than larger cows. Given a set of fixed resources, a greater number of smaller cows can be maintained relative to a smaller number of larger cows (Mathis and Sawyer, 2000).
The rural Latinx population is growing but some small towns are fading. Can Latinx immigrants revitalize small town business? More supportive policies could help. Studies based on restricted Federal data show Latinx are under-represented in manufacturing ownership and could benefit from culturally appropriate business development programs geared toward business survival.
The articles in this Choices Theme issue evaluate the main short-term impacts of the COVID-19 epidemic for key food and agricultural markets and discuss potential longer-term implications. Topics examined include farm income, federal pandemic payments to producers, fruit and vegetables, dairy, livestock, consumer expenditures, and trade.
The year 2020 will be remembered for several striking events. Perhaps most notably, the COVID-19 pandemic has produced a severe shock to the economy. The famous influenza outbreak of 1918–1919 killed an estimated 675,000 Americans and led to a 1.5% drop in GDP. In comparison, the 2020 pandemic has already resulted in more than 500,000 deaths and a 3.5% drop in GDP—the largest one-year plunge since recordkeeping began after World War II.
Beginning in the 1940s, quinoa gained attention due to its high nutritional value. Organizations such as the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) identified quinoa as a crop that could help achieve food security and campaigned to increase its consumption in the three Andean countries. An increase in the consumption of quinoa, however, did not happen until the 1980s, when consumers in high-income countries became interested in the crop, which ultimately helped upgrade quinoa from “indigenous food” to “superfood” status. As a result, quinoa consumption is no longer limited to the rural areas of the Andes, and quinoa has become a highly sought-after product in the urban areas of the Andes and in high-income countries among consumers interested in healthy, nutritious, gluten-free, and organic foods (CBI, 2020).
This theme issue of Choices, commissioned by the Council on Food, Agriculture and Resource Economics (C-FARE), in collaboration with the Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development on behalf of the Regional Rural Development Centers (RRDCs), includes eight papers that examine impacts of the pandemic and effects of selected federal policies designed to mitigate adverse impacts. Topics include: employment and job loss trends, impacts on agriculture, and impacts on other sectors of the economy, including tourism, childcare, banking, broadband, and healthcare facilities.
Use of trails in rural communities across the country has surged since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper explores implications of increased trail use during COVID-19 for rural communities including trail and environmental management, health and economic implications, equity and access.
The concept of asset fixity—which Galbraith and Black (1938) defined as the “lumpiness” of salient production factors due to high fixed costs, making their temporary reduction or reorganization very expensive and unprofitable in the short run—in agriculture has interesting implications for perennial crops such as tree fruits. Johnson (1950) introduced the concept of asset fixity in agriculture, explaining that most farm machinery and land have low opportunity costs because they have few alternative uses outside of agriculture. Johnson (1958) later stated that the existence in agriculture of fixed resources with low opportunity costs leads to persistently low rate of returns. Further, Johnson and Quance (1972) later argued that fixed asset theory has implications for an overproduction trap, or the tendency in agriculture to maintain high aggregate production levels even when real prices are declining. However, Johnson and Pasour (1981) questioned the implications of the asset fixity theory, stating that it contrasts the concepts of choice-influencing cost and the rule of resource allocative efficiency, while admitting that asset fixity theory helps explain why the supply function is irreversible. Chambers and Vasavada (1983) applied statistical tests to prove the existence of asset fixity in U.S. agriculture and found no fixities involving agricultural capital, labor, or materials at the aggregate level, concluding that asset fixity should not be used uncritically as the basis for explaining supply irreversibilities. However, they recognized that data aggregation was a potential caveat to their study. Edwards (1985) disputed their findings, suggesting that the work by Chambers and Vasavada did not support the rejection of asset fixity applications to a single farm when comparing opportunity costs of capital with alternatives for acquisition and salvage. Nonetheless, Chambers and Vasavada (1985) replied that their 1983 findings were only applicable to the context discussed in their paper.
This study examines the history, nutrition, uses, and perceived health benefits of acai, chia seeds, and maca root. We investigate drivers of global demand, the role of producer nations, and the dynamics of international markets. These superfoods now have their own market potentials because of increased popularity in developed nations.
This paper assesses the COVID-19–related disruptions to meat and livestock markets in the United States. We provide a data-based description of the COVID-19 impact, including the shutdown of the food service sector, costs associated with packing plants’ efforts to move product across supply chains, and meat-packing plant closings.
Native potato production is an important livelihood strategy for most rural Andean families. An inclusive value chain development approach triggered innovation processes in Peru's potato sector, benefiting small-scale producers and value chain actors and improving their livelihoods, although the magnitude of the effects on poverty reduction remains to be determined.
Using a nationwide survey, we characterize the ways in which U.S. households spent their economic impact payments (EIPs) and investigate changes in household food purchasing in response to COVID-19. Most consumers allocated a significant fraction of their EIPs to food, with an increase in spending on canned food, dry goods, and snacks.
To identify hard-to-count places, the U.S. Census Bureau has computed low response scores using 25 sociodemographic variables. However, rurality of survey areas was not considered. We find that non-metro counties have lower response rates and that the influence of sociodemographic factors on census responses differs between metro and non-metro counties.
Introduction Many U.S. states employ a use-value formula to assess agricultural lands for property tax purposes (Anderson and England, 2014). This formula is based on an income capitalization approach to appraisal, which assesses the value of agricultural land by dividing the estimated annual net income from agricultural production (or cash rent) by a capitalization rate. South Dakota has used a use-value formula to assess all agriculture property since 2010. To qualify as agriculture property in South Dakota, the principal use of the property must be the raising and harvesting of crops, timber, or fruit trees; the rearing, feeding, and management of farm livestock, poultry, fish, or nursery stock; the production of bees and apiary products; or horticulture for an intended agriculture gross income that is at least 10% of the assessed value or where the parcel exceeds a specified size.
