Progress report for SPDP24-029
Project Information
Due to rapid urbanization in the Southeastern United States (US), CUA is an increasingly important agricultural sector in the region. The project team’s peer-reviewed research on CUA farmers and the Cooperative Extension Service personnel (CES) who serve them identified two key needs to support the long-term sustainability of CUA. First, CUA farmers lack professional networks that provide mentorship and information sharing, and previous attempts to create these networks have failed. Second, local regulations and policies are the primary barriers faced by CUA farms, and neither CUA farmers not CES have the knowledge and skills to address these barriers. Our Growing Urban Agriculture Resilience and Development (GUARD): Professional Development Program for Urban Agriculture Educators in the Southeast will address both of these barriers. This train-the-trainer program and its informational tools and resources that will help CUA farmers navigate local policies and regulations. Via listening sessions, this project will also identify best practices for developing CUA farmer information and resource sharing networks and implementing training programs for CUA farmers. The GUARD program will create publicly accessible factsheets, educational training materials, and train-the-trainer resource guides, all of which will be reviewed and revised based on feedback from CES personnel and minority urban farmers. Mitigating these critical barriers faced by CUA farms in Florida will increase quality of life for CUA farmers and increase the sustainability and profitability of their farms. This program can also improve quality of life for community members by increasing the availability of sustainably grown food within urban areas.
Our prior research identified two key needs to support the profitability and sustainability of CUA farms. First, CUA farmers are seeking a network for strategic information sharing, peer-to-peer support, and mentoring. One farmer stated “If I could have heard someone like myself speak 10 years ago, that would have been helpful.... versus trying to invent things myself” (Campbell, et al., 2023). Second, CUA farmers frequently have problems with laws and policies that do not apply to rural farms, such as municipal land-use policies, ordinances, zoning laws, and code enforcement. CES and existing education programs for small farms or emerging enterprises lack the information, tools, and resources to help CUA farmers identify and understand which policies apply to their operations and what they need to do to comply with these policies. Given these key needs, we propose to develop a program which meets the following two objectives:
Objective 1: Identify stakeholder-driven best-practices for communication, coordination, and peer-to-peer learning between CES personnel, CUA mentor-farmers, and existing and aspiring CUA farmers.
CUA farmers and CES who educate them have struggled to establish and maintain the connections required to facilitate education, training, information, and resource sharing. While CUA farmers are seeking professional networks and methods for information sharing, our research found that previous efforts led by both CES and by CUA farmers failed to gain traction and, hence, have lacked long-term sustainability. Previous efforts were unsuccessful because the needs and perspectives of CUA farmers as a group were not taken into account in the attempted planning and development of these professional networks. We will conduct listening sessions of CES and CUA farmers to identify stakeholder-driven best practices for providing education and sharing information and resources among CES and CUA farmers to foster long-term sustainability. This objective will achieve the following outcomes:
- This project will create a set of stakeholder-driven best-practices to be used to develop local networks for CUA farmers that will be disseminated as a part of the training materials in objective 2.
- The project will strengthen the relationship between UF, FAMU, and CUA farmers to increase knowledge exchange and capacity to collaborate on CUA programming by training at least 50 CES and CUA mentor-farmers by June 2026.
- The long-term impact of the GUARD program will be increased dissemination and utilization of evidence-based information among CUA farmers and CES supporting the long-term sustainability and profitability of CUA farms in Florida.
Objective 2: Develop a “train-the-trainer" CUA educational program to increase the knowledge and capacity of CES and mentor farmers to help CUA farmers comply with local policies and regulations.
This training program will provide tools and resources to foster peer-to-peer learning and skill-building among CES personnel, CUA mentor-farmers, and CUA farmers, including those that are minority owned and operated. This objective will achieve the following outcomes:
- 90% of program participants will increase knowledge, attitudes, and skills related to addressing local policies and regulations that govern their CUA operations.
- 80% of program participants will increase knowledge and self-efficacy at how to work with local government to amend regulations to be more supportive for the long-term sustainability of CUA.
- 50% of Extension agents or CUA mentor-farmers will have offered or intend to offer a CUA training or mentorship to existing or aspiring CUA farmers within 6 months of attending a training.
Meeting these objectives within the proposed project timeline will ultimately enhance the capacity of CUA farms in Florida—whether they are established or emerging farms or farms that are minority-owned and operated—to be economically, environmentally, and socially sustainable.
By adopting a train-the-trainer model, in which farmers educate and mentor other farmers, our program will increase the reach, effectiveness, and impact of the program. Training CES and CUA mentor farmers on how to understand and comply with municipal regulatory policies will ensure that CUA farmers have knowledgeable, trusted, and locally accessible mentors. Beyond the immediate impact of increasing the knowledge, skills, and self-efficacy of Extension professionals and mentor-farmers, our train-the-trainer approach will facilitate increased communication, coordination, and peer-to-peer learning between CUA farmers of varying types of operations and levels of experience. We intend for this emerging network of advisors, mentors, and newly established or aspiring urban farmers will be better able to (1) find and interpret the local policies that govern CUA in their areas; (2) comply with existing policies and successfully submit required permits; and (3) when appropriate, work with their local government to amend local regulations to be more supportive for the development and long-term sustainability of CUA in their county or municipality.
Education
Over the course of our proposed two-year train-the-trainer program we will implement 3 primary tasks to achieve our 2 project objectives: (1) To identify stakeholder-driven best-practices for communication, coordination, and peer-to-peer learning between CES personnel, CUA mentor-farmers and existing and aspiring CUA farmers, and (2) increasing the knowledge and capacity of state (UF/IFAS and FAMU) CES and mentor farmers to help existing and aspiring CUA farmers understand and comply with local policies. During the project period, we will:
Task 1: Conduct CUA Farmer listening sessions
We will conduct listening sessions with CUA farmers and CES to identify their needs and preferences for the development and implementation of a CUA network for educational trainings and sharing resources. Because farmers’ time and resources are limited, these listening sessions will be hosted at events CUA farmers will already be attending. Sessions will be conducted at events that will include different types of production systems or crops to ensure we gain perspectives from a board array of CUA stakeholders. Specific events we plan to target include Florida Organic Growers’ 2024 Organic Food & Farming Summit (Tampa, FL), “Starting a Successful Hydroponic Business,” UF/IFAS Extension Commercial Hydroponic Training (NFREC, Live Oak, FL), Agriculture Entrepreneurship Series (Alachua County, FL), and Fruit Crop Diversification field day (PSREU, Citra, FL). We will use these listening sessions to inform our program materials and establish best practices to creating sustainable CUA CES and Farmer networks.
Output 1: Summary list of stakeholder-driven best-practices for communication, coordination, and peer-to-peer learning between CES personnel, CUA mentor-farmers and existing and aspiring CUA farmers.
Task 2: Create GUARD educational tools, materials, and resources.
We will develop at least three educational modules. Based on feedback from stakeholders and minority-farmers, we may alter the specific content of the modules or add additional modules, if needed. Three planned educational modules outputs include:
Module 1: CUA in Florida
Module 1 will serve as the introduction to the current state of CUA in Florida. The module will provide an overview of CUA, key definitions and terminology; the social, environmental, and economic benefits of CUA; and potential risks, barriers, and opportunities for CUA; and examples of successful CUA operations.
Module 2: Business models/Marketing plans
Module 2 will be focused on the “commercial” aspects of CUA. We will provide an overview of CUA sales and market channels and their benefits or considerations (e.g., CSAs, farmers markets, mobile markets, food trucks, wholesale, co-operatives, etc.); marketing and branding strategies for smallholder urban growers; profitability potential from value-added and niche “specialty” products; and guidance on agritourism, such as farm-to-table meal events and educational workshops.
Module 3: Navigating law & policy for CUA
Module 3’s resources will provide information and resources related to CUA urban farm regulations, licenses, and certificates; compliance requirements; cottage food laws; Greenbelt agricultural tax classification, and the Florida Right to Farm Act (and how it applies to CUA). This module will include information about how to interpret land-use policies and zoning classifications so that CUA farms identify, understand, and comply with policies that apply to them. Because CES does not engage in any advocacy activities, this program will not include any advocacy related to changing local policies. However, resources for this module will include model language that farmers could use if they would like to help their county or municipality to add language to support CUA activities in their community.
Internet-ready/Public Availability of Program Materials
All educational tools and resources will be made available online, ensuring 24/7 access. We will create virtual, asynchronous training modules that will be available via University of Florida’s Extension Online Learning platform, which allows the dissemination of recorded videos, materials, as well as online evaluations, to ensure fidelity to program delivery.
Output 2.1: Each module will have a peer-reviewed Extension publication, a brief factsheet or infographic, a PowerPoint presentation, and a presentation script.
Output 2.2: Instructor’s guide for use by Extension educators and mentor-farmers which includes best practices for implementing the program, utilizing the tools and resources that will be included in Output 2.1, and evaluation tools to use when the GUARD training is conducted.
Task 3: Facilitate GUARD Educational Trainings
Task 3 is the implementation and delivery of in-person and virtual in-service trainings for Extension educators, CUA mentor-farmers, and minority farmers to increase knowledge, capacity, and collaboration among Extension, CUA mentor-farmers and minority farmers. We will conduct two live, synchronous GUARD educational trainings to provide opportunities for feedback and information-sharing among attendees to allow the project team to make additions or revisions to program materials before they are finalized and posted online. One of these trainings will be a physical (i.e., in-person) in-service training for CES personnel that will provide background information on the status of CUA farming in Florida, needs and barriers of CUA farms prior to presenting the rest of the GUARD program training. The second training will be a live, virtual training for both CES and CUA mentor-farmers to train them on how to use GUARD program materials and implement the training in their counties and within their professional networks.
Output 3: Two GUARD program trainings will be conducted during the project period training at least 50 CES and CUA mentor farmers. One will be an in-service training focused specifically on educating CES. The second will target CUA mentor farmers, particularly minority, CUA mentor farmers, and will include CES to build connections between CUA mentor-farmers and CES.
Public Health Emergency Contingency Plan:
In the case of an on-going public health emergency that would prevent in-person activities, we would move tasks 1 and 3 to be fully virtual. Specifically, live, in-person in-service training in Task 3, would still be live and synchronous, but it will be hosted via Zoom rather than in person. Similarly, we would organize Zoom listening sessions with small groups of CES and CUA farmers to establish best practices.
Education & Outreach Initiatives
To identify commercial urban farmers' educational needs, preferences for formats education, networking, and sharing resources.
We hosted two commercial urban agriculture (CUA) farmer listening sessions. The purpose of these listening sessions was for the project team to learn about CUA farmers' challenges and their needs and preferences for educational resources, farmer networking, and resource sharing.
Key Findings from Listening Sessions and Survey
The project team analyzed listening session data and compiled a list of key themes and topics to be addressed in the development of the GUARD educational program.
Urban Agriculture Challenges and Educational Needs
Listening session participants noted that the problems faced by urban farmers are similar to those faced by all small farms but also noted the unique challenges of farming in urban spaces, including farming on land they do not own and farming on land that is not zoned for agriculture. A recurring theme in the listening sessions were issues related to zoning and code enforcement. Other identified issues were rooted in the impact of the lack of understanding about agriculture in urban areas, which have the effect of creating conflicts within county governments, causing local governments to adopt policies and regulations that harm urban farming, and creating conflicts related to allowing urban farms receive the greenbelt agricultural tax exemption.
Some regulatory challenges are rooted in there being so much variation in urban agriculture and a lack of a standard definition. For example, some urban farming operations are unique, such as mushroom farming, so there is not a standard understanding of how to regulate them. In other cases, the lack of definition gives the perception that urban agriculture is not "real" agriculture because it often is taking to include community gardening.
Thus, listening session participants stated that it would be useful to have informational tools and resources that deal specifically with issues they face. Educational topics that were discussed in the listening sessions included legal and regulatory issues as well as general topics of interest to farmers that they indicated they would be interested in learning about or sharing what they know in a farmer networking group. We included these topics in the survey, and the quantitative data are in tables 1 and 2 below.
Table 1: Most Important Topics on Legal and Regulatory Issues for CUA Farmers
|
|
N |
Mean |
Standard Deviation |
|
Regulatory issues with zoning, land-use, permits, licensing |
22 |
3.77 |
1.27 |
|
Farm business structures (e.g., sole proprietorship, S-Corp, LLC, non-profit) |
22 |
3.73 |
1.486 |
|
Farmland lease agreements (as lessor or lessee) |
22 |
3.32 |
1.585 |
|
Insurance and liability |
22 |
3.23 |
1.412 |
|
Employment law |
22 |
2.68 |
1.287 |
Table 2: Most Important Educational Topics for Information and Resource Sharing among CUA Farmers
|
|
N |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
|
Marketing and sales |
22 |
4.05 |
1.327 |
|
Value-adding and revenue diversification strategies |
22 |
4.05 |
1.253 |
|
New technology and production methods |
22 |
4.00 |
1.195 |
|
Farm finances and business management (pricing, calculating cash flow, record-keeping, etc.) |
22 |
3.91 |
1.411 |
|
New crops and products |
22 |
3.86 |
1.207 |
|
Supporting sustainability and environmental goals |
21 |
3.86 |
1.424 |
|
Crop production |
22 |
3.73 |
1.453 |
|
Pest management |
22 |
3.73 |
1.202 |
|
Developing a business plan |
21 |
3.71 |
1.309 |
|
Soil health (amendments, remediation, etc.) |
22 |
3.68 |
1.427 |
|
Food safety certification |
21 |
3.57 |
1.502 |
|
Crop planning/planting decisions |
22 |
3.45 |
1.471 |
|
Fostering social and health benefits |
21 |
3.43 |
1.690 |
|
Farm site selection |
22 |
2.77 |
1.541 |
Urban Agriculture Advocacy & Education for Policymakers
An emergent theme in the listening sessions was the need to educate local governments about urban farming and how regulations could support it. While listening session participants did indicate that it would be beneficial to be educated on regulatory issues, they emphasized that their preference would be policy change at the state and local level to be more supportive of urban farming. So, they indicated that rather than them learning how to comply with regulations and policies, they preferred instead for policy makers to be educated in order to change the regulations and policies to be more supportive. Participants noted that they had no experience with policies that supported or fostered their urban farming efforts—only policies that limited and hindered their efforts.
Listening session participants suggested public pressure and political considerations often take precedence over scientific evidence in decision making, so finding new ways to educate policy makers and advocate for urban agriculture were essential. The county's legal guidelines and hesitance to help these farmers were also highlighted as issues. Listening session participants also suggested that policy makers should be encouraged to consider the impact of policies on both farmers and urban neighbors. Correspondingly, participants also noted the need for a champion at the local and state level to advocate for urban farming. Participants in one of the listening sessions suggested that highlighting the beneficial impact of urban agriculture on local food production could be a beneficial strategy. Participants suggested that infographics and resources specifically tailored to local government officials would be useful.
Farmers' Networking Preferences
Listening session participants noted the need for different outreach efforts to appeal to urban farmers to appeal to a wider audience beyond traditional farmers. While urban farmers want to network and engage in mentorship programs, they often are struggling with getting their businesses started and managing operations, so they do not feel like they have time to participate in these programs. However, in the listening sessions and in the survey, farmers expressed a preference for in-person networking and learning opportunities. They did suggest that online resource-sharing platforms could be useful. While the survey data shows farmers rate online education and networking lower, in the listening sessions participants discussed that they would like a mix of opportunities—they noted that they liked the conferences and field days, but that logistics did make online education beneficial.
Most Desired Formats for Networking and Sharing Information and Resources
|
|
N |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
|
In-person workshops or trainings |
22 |
4.05 |
1.046 |
|
Field days/on-farm demonstrations |
22 |
4.05 |
0.999 |
|
Farmer-to-farmer consultations |
22 |
4.00 |
0.976 |
|
Conferences |
22 |
3.91 |
1.151 |
|
Mentorship programs |
21 |
3.48 |
1.436 |
|
Webinars or online trainings |
22 |
3.36 |
1.136 |
|
Online discussion groups/forums |
22 |
3.18 |
1.368 |
|
Online meetings |
22 |
3.14 |
1.356 |