This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Producer Response to State-Sponsored Marketing Programs: The Case of Jersey Fresh

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Govindasamy, Ramu
Pingali, Aruna
Italia, John
Thatch, Daymon
Abstract

New Jersey agricultural growers were surveyed to understand their willingness to patronize the Jersey Fresh promotional and quality grading program. Growers’ perceptions of the premium logo and their opinions of the quality grading aspect of the Jersey Fresh Program were collected. Possible causes for the fluctuating participation of farmers in the quality-grading program were also explored. The results of this study should provide valuable information that can be applied not only to expand the Jersey Fresh Program, but also in other states which have similar promotional programs. Specific objectives of this analysis were to examine the general attitudes of participating farmers towards the effectiveness of the Jersey Fresh Logos and to identify the characteristics of farmers participating or interested in participating in the Jersey Fresh Promotional and Quality Grading Programs. Of the farmers who responded, 93.1% indicated that they were aware of the Jersey Fresh Program and 51.4% indicated that they did use the Jersey Fresh Logos. Over three-quarters of the farmers (76.4%) were of the opinion that the logos had a medium to high awareness among consumers. The majority of farmers indicated that the most important reason for using the Jersey Fresh Logos was to add locally grown value (46.9%) and freshness value to their produce (26.6%). Farmers who believed that consumer awareness of the Jersey Fresh Logos was high and who used logos other than Jersey Fresh were found to be more likely to have used the Jersey Fresh Logos and also more likely to use them in the future. Farmers with high gross sales of produce and with higher levels of education were found more likely to have used the Jersey Fresh Logos and also more likely to use the logos in the future. The number of acres being farmed and the age of the farmers, however, were found to have a negative effect on both the current usage and willingness to use the logos in the future. v Growers with farms located in the southern New Jersey were found more likely to be Jersey Fresh participants and also more willing to use Jersey Fresh Logos in the future, compared to farmers in the central or northern regions of the state. Farmers who believed that consumers were highly aware of the program and those who used other logos to identify their quality fresh produce were more likely to be registered in the Jersey Fresh Quality Grading Program. Growers with farms in southern New Jersey and who had more than a four year college education were also found to be more likely to be registered in the Quality Grading Program. Among the most cited reasons for not participating in the program were not wanting their produce to be inspected, not knowing about the program, and not finding the grading logo to be effective in obtaining a premium price.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/36731
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Rutgers University, Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics in its series P Series with number 36731.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 1998
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:rutdps:36731

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Cook Office Building, 55 Dudley Road, New Brunswick, N.J. 08901
Phone: (732) 932-9155
Fax: (732) 932-1100
Web page: http://www.dafre.rutgers.edu/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (AgEcon Search).

Related research
Keywords: Agribusiness; Marketing;

Other versions of this item:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Lopez, Rigoberto A. & Pagoulatos, Emilio & Polopolus, Leo C., 1989. "Constraints And Opportunities In Vegetable Trade," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 20(2), September. [Downloadable!]
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? The RePEc project started in 1997. Its precursor, NetEc, dates back to 1993.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-26.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.