Author: Sandra Šūmane
Type of short supply chain addressed
This is an open-air farmers’ market, organized twice per month. The market was initiated by a group of local activists who decided to create a space for local producers and consumers to make them meet directly in the local area. This initiative was intended to change or provide an alternative for the practice that both local producers and consumers go regularly to towns in order to, respectively, sell and buy products [3]. (Photographs are taken from the website:
http://www.straupe-
hanza.lv/index.php?p=4574&pp=6225&lang=82 8&g=2011).
Author: Rudīte Vasile
Area and territory where the initiative takes place
The market is located in Straupe, a rural village (1500 inhabitants) in central Latvia, around 60 kilometers from the capital. The market has an advantageous location: it is situated next to a major road with regular traffic, which makes it easily accessible also for casual, passing customers. Another possibly important landmark is the local dairy’s shop right next to which the market is organized. The dairy is quite well known among Latvian consumers for its quality products, and presumably both the market and the dairy benefit from each other’s customers. Big part of the producers-sellers come from the local territory /region (up to 30 km), but there are also some sellers who come from distant
places more than 100 km away – often those are mobile producers who practice various modes of direct selling.
Number of actors/producers/farmers involved There are around 70 food and non-food producers who regularly take part in the market. There is no estimate of the number of consumers. Type of products delivered
Straupe market regulations [2], developed at local level by the market organizers, state that it is allowed to sell in the market agricultural and other artisanal products which are honestly [godpratigi] produced and processed by farmers themselves and which are closely linked to local food or local traditions. There is a limited space at the market and when choosing the participants the preference is given to products which are of local origin, organic, produced according to Slow Food principles (natural, traditional, environmentally friendly) and which contribute to the diversity of products at the market. Artisanal non-food products have to be related to local food or traditions.
There is a quite broad range of food products sold on the market: milk, bread and pastries, vegetables, fruit, honey, fish, meat, herbal tea, eggs, wine etc. Also seedlings and some smaller livestock (rabbits, sheep…) are available. Non- food products include such traditional articles produced from natural materials as wicker and forging works, wool and woolen articles, wood articles, pottery etc.
Qualification of actors and/or the farmers involved
A range of actors have been involved in various phases of the markets’ development (see time- line below). The key actors who implemented the market have been a group of local activists, farmers and the local municipality, united by the idea that local producers and local food had to be given more value.
Majority of sellers are local and regional small and medium farmers and artisanal producers. There are also local inhabitants who sell overproduction from their household plots or picked wild or natural products (mushrooms, berries, flowers). There are also some local or regional food companies that take part in the market – this could mean that not on all market
67 days there are enough local producers who register for selling.
Consumers are local and regional people, as well as passers-by. No specific consumer profile is identified, but all ages, both genders can be observed among them. Local young families often arrive with children.
Author: Rudīte Vasile Time length of the initiative
The market has been operating since 2008. There can be identified several phases of organizational processes in setting up the market. At the
initiating phase, early 2008: the idea of local food market was generated by local activists, farmers were among them. Building of a partnership
network followed. Firstly, links with the local tourism association was established. The idea was presented to local and regional governments. It was outlined in the project which received public funding from both institutions. A learning
phase followed during which project developers and market participants learned from other farmer market organisations, national Slow food movement members, marketing experts and also from public institutions specifically about food production and distribution regulations and taxation. Putting into action: the first market took place in June 2008.
Other actors directly or indirectly involved A local dairy provides the venue for the market: it is organized on its land.
The market is networking in the Slow Food movement – the farmer market’s idea was supported by a celebrity cook running a restaurant in Riga who considered that the
farmer market movement has to be encouraged together with the ideas of Slow Food. In August 2012 the market received visitors from Italian and French Slow Food organisations.
The organizers have developed a good cooperation with the Food and Veterinary service and State Revenue Service regarding the formal requirements for market organization.
In relation to the Evidence Document Ch 1: Identification of SFSCs.
The SFSC was initiated by local people in reaction to the specific situation of the local food production, distribution and consumption system. The basic idea of the market organizers was to reduce food miles, geographical and also social distance between local producers and consumers. Geographical distance has been literally reduced as far as it concerns local producers and consumers. The market attracts also some direct- selling producers from outside the region. In these cases, food miles may be not reduced, but present social exchanges between producers and consumers those distant geographical places are directly connected, have lost their anonymity and have been brought brought virtually closer. The direct link between producers and consumers on the market days facilitates their social proximity, they get to know each other better, learn from each other. Social proximity finds expression also as honesty and trust between the two parties, which are presented as basic principles of the market. Trust is sustained by getting to know producers and also by the quality of products to which producers are attentive, of course, in order to keep their clients. (Correspondence to certain quality standard is also guaranteed by all the food production and distribution norms which producers have to fulfill in order to be accepted on the market – so there are also formal rules, not only pure trust relations.)
Another characteristic discovered in this SFSC is related to localness, construction of authentic local identity. Markets are quite popular food purchasing places among Latvian consumers. However, almost all of them are full of imported food stuffs (that happen to be misleadingly presented as local) and industrial food and articles. The organizers of Straupe market wanted to create an authentic space exclusively for local
68 and traditional products that would clearly distinguish it from the existing markets. Local origin is stressed in the market’s regulations. Still, not all products are 100% local (presumably, there are not yet enough local producers who want and can sell on the market), but all the products bear the qualities of traditional Latvian products or are artisanal.
Finally, local ownership and governance of the food chain is another aspect of shortness: the specific rules of the market were developed by its organizers (according to national laws and regulations though) and they take the relevant decisions.
Author: Rudīte Vasile
Ch 2: Sustainability and health aspects of SFSCs Health: the market diversifies food choice and in particular improves access to fresh, seasonal and also organic products, which might lead to a more diverse and balanced diet, but this is not verified in this case in practice. (Regarding organic products, there are contradictory conclusions about their nutritional superiority. However, one thing is apparently clear that there are fewer pesticide residues in these products.) Local traditional food cannot be regarded as obligatory healthier though (f.i., pastry, high-fat cheeses and meat products are not highly recommended daily products).
Environmental: food miles have been reduced at some extent. Possibility to sell on the market allows some small local producers to avoid searching for more distant outlets [4]. However, it is questionable that the market can fully absorb all produce of all producers (especially of more commercial ones), as it is organized only twice
per month and the number of customers, albeit considerable, is comparatively moderate. This indicates also that some SFSCs have a limited capacity and producers have to develop mixed marketing strategies (this point is relevant for characteristics of SFSC).
Economic: improves market access for small and artisanal producers. Moreover, the market also provides a space for finding other clients (restaurants, guest houses etc. [7]). Some of the producers witness that their income has increased [4]. The market format and direct exchanges with consumers and other producers encourage economic diversification and creativity: several farmers have started processing on their farms, many invent new products. The market has revived the local economy – both agriculture and also tourism as the market has become an object of tourists’ interest [4].
Social: similarly as in the other Latvian case of CSA, also in the farmer market case there are witnesses that stress that direct interactions with customers contribute to the valorization and recognition of farmers’ work and local products [3]. Presumably, this adds to / increases farmers’ socio-psychological comfort to keep going on with farming.
At community level the market has facilitated some revitalization of the local community. The market has become a crucial social event in the community, it animates local social life, has become a place of meeting for local people. Ch 3: Organizational patterns for SFSCs
The market initiative presents a partnership in which a wide range of actors have cooperated in order to implement it. Cooperation has been necessary in order to provide the initiative with all the needed particular resources (initiative, knowledge, funding, venue…).
Ch 4 : SFSCs and policy
The case evokes the question of suitability and flexibility of existing regulation to new FSC forms. Straupe market was the second established regular farmer market in the country and as a pioneer it had to face some constraining shortcomings of the regulations at the time. It has adapted itself to some rules and incited changes in other. A problem the market faced soon after the opening was that the regulation of
69 that moment allowed to organize only eight market days per year for this type of markets. The organizers took the initiative and together with the cook of Slow Food movement mentioned above and a coordinator of another farmer market approached the Ministry of Agriculture with propositions to change the existing regulations. The minister of agriculture agreed that the existing regulations were out of date and farmer markets should be supported. Although the law was not changed immediately, an agreement was reached that the market can continue operating, exceeding the eight legal days.
Another problem was that there were no specific regulations for production and distribution of artisanal food products, which excluded them from the legal market. This question had been raised already by other producers (specifically organic) and as a result of increasing demand for legalizing artisanal food production the relevant legislation has been put in place after some time. Finally, in order to expose and sell even the smallest animals in the market there was needed an additional demarche: a livestock stand had to be registered at the venue’s address.
Besides, there is a local regulation on markets (regarding what type of products are accepted, organization and order in the market etc. ), but the majority of the document refers to the many national / EU regulative norms that the producers must meet in order to be able to sell on the market [2]. Some participants acknowledge that there is overbureaucracy, but they agree that some standards and regulation must be in place [6]. In order to comply with all the regulations during the preparation phase of the market participants followed specific courses.
Key questions emerging from the case study analyzed
Not questions, but some concluding themes emerging from the case:
• It demonstrates a collective, bottom-up, endogeneous process of initiating and implementing change in food system;
• Involves (social) learning and innovation (organisation, marketing, production);
• Improves local control over production, marketing and distribution;
• Synergy with local development: animation of social life and traditions (farmers market and cultural), contribution to local economy, tourism.
Internet and media materials:
1. http://www.straupe-
hanza.lv/index.php?p=4574&pp=10383&lang=82 8
2. http://www.laukutikls.lv/vietejas_iniciativas/laba _prakse/31-straupes_lauku_labumu_tirdzins 3. Grinvalde- Iruka, A. (2009) Ciemošanos Straupe
pielago
tirgumhttp://www.diena.lv/sabiedriba/novados/ ciemosanos-straupe-pielago-tirgum-679177 4. Majore – Line, M. (2011) Popularize vietejos
sezonasproduktus
http://www.edruva.lv/zinas/sabiedriba/zina/342 25
5. Feldmane, S. (2008) Isti lauku labumi
Straupe.http://www.edruva.lv/zinas/zinas_no_ve cas_e_druvas/zina/4866
6. Radzina, Z. (2008) Gadatirgiem IR
nakotnehttp://www.saimnieks.lv/Konkursi/5110 7. Straupes Avize. Straupes pagasta padomes
informativais izdevums Nr. 161 2008. gada augusts.
8. http://www.laukutikls.lv/citi_pasakumi/pieredze s_apmaina_latvija/563-
biedribas_lauku_partneriba_upe_8_dalibnieku_p ieredzes_apmainas_brauciens_uz_cesu_rajonu 9. Observations on the market during 2011.
70