L A ORGANIZACIÓN ESPARTAQUISTA

This study found that RI aquaculturists use different methods of

communication with various types of buyers, some who are direct consumers of their product and others who move the product along various stages of the supply chain. For instance, those aquaculturists who sell at farmers’ markets reported that they have the most direct contact with the end-user (actual person who consumed the product), and those who sell to wholesalers are the most removed from the end user, as many reported that they did not regularly communicate with the end-user. Since many producers who sell to restaurants speak directly to chefs, there is likely only one “middle-man” between the producer and the direct consumer.

One important function eco-labels serve is communicating the environmental and social attributes of a product from producer to consumer. Eco-labels are said to provide a quality assurance role by communicating product information on

environmental impacts (Bratt et al., 2011), allowing consumers to make informed choices and producers to share information about environmental and social impacts of the product with consumers.

Since producers in this study have varying levels of contact and methods of communication with the final consumers of their product, it is possible that producers may have different needs for an eco-label. Since some of the producers who sell at farmers’ markets and to restaurants report that they already communicate with the

90

final consumers of their products by speaking to them directly, they might have a different need for an eco-label than those producers who do not have an opportunity to discuss environmental and social attributes of their products directly with consumers. Those producers who already are able to interact with their consumers might seek eco- labels for reasons other than communication, like ensuring their products meet a high standard of sustainability.

This study did not find that aquaculturists who sell to particular types of buyers were more or less likely to have been asked by a buyer to certify their products with an eco-label. Since only one producer was asked to certify their products by a buyer, I could not make any claims about certain types of buyers being more or less likely to request that an aquaculturist seek certification. Future studies could further investigate this link by asking a greater number of aquaculturists how they communicate with their buyers about environmental and social impacts of their products, and comparing if varying levels of communication affect an aquaculturists’ intent to certify their products with an eco-label.

Since local food systems have been said to facilitate communication between producer and consumer (Johnson and Endres, 2011), it is possible that those producers who sell locally can also more easily communicate directly with their buyers and may not need to use eco-labels to communicate information about their product. Only two of the participants in this study said they sold their products mainly out of state, so most aquaculturists do sell at least a portion of their products in RI. Four respondents said they participate in the “Get Fresh Buy Local” program. In addition to those in the “Get Fresh Buy Local” program, other participants also mentioned that they

emphasize that their product is local to buyers. Many of the producers said that the location where the product is raised is included on the label or brand name they use. It should also be noted that participants were not explicitly asked in survey questions their thoughts or opinions on the local food movement, or whether or not they emphasize that their product is local to consumers or buyers. Participants brought up that they market their product as local in response to questions asking about how they market their product and communicate with their buyers. While the local food

movement was not a topic I intended to explore in this study, it does appear to

influence RI aquaculturists. Since many of the aquaculturists use the location of where their product is raised as part of its name or brand and participate in local food

programs, they are communicating that their product is local to RI consumers. Currently, it appears the local food movement is more important to RI aquaculturists than eco-labeling certification programs, as evidenced by their participation in local food programs and their emphasis of location in product branding and advertising, compared to their lack of participation in eco-labeling programs.

For other products, such as produce, more than half of consumers in the United States report that purchasing local produce is more important to them than purchasing organic produce (Mintel GNPD and Mintel Oxygen Reports, 2012). As the local food movement progresses and eco-labels gain popularity, it will be important to see how they interact and influence each other. For instance, there have been calls for seafood eco-labels to take on a more holistic approach to sustainability by considering impacts that occur after seafood products are harvested or landed, such as processing and

92

transport (Thrane et al., 2009). These are some of the impacts that the local food movement aims to minimize.

As noted in Chapter 2, few eco-labeling programs for shellfish aquaculture have certified producers in America. Therefore, buyers in the United States that wish to purchase or sell eco-labeled aquaculture products would likely seek certified aquaculture products from other countries. For instance, Wegmans, a grocery store chain in the northeastern United States, sells seafood products certified with the Global Aquaculture Alliance from Ecuador and Thailand (Wegmans, 2013). If buyers of shellfish aquaculture products intend to purchase products that have minimal negative environmental impacts, they must weigh the potential benefits of local food production and consumption, such as reduced waste from packaging and reduced greenhouse gas emission from transportation, against the potential benefits of various eco-labeling certification programs.