IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

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

Listed author(s):
  • Govindasamy, Ramu
  • Pingali, Aruna
  • Italia, John
  • Thatch, Daymon W.

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.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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:
Download Restriction: no

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

in new window

Date of creation: 1998
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:

More information through EDIRC

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.:

in new window

  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.
  2. Peter Kennedy, 2003. "A Guide to Econometrics, 5th Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 5, volume 1, number 026261183x, January.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:rutdps:36731. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.