Journal of Environmental Management (2000) 60, 195214 doi:10.1006/jema.2000.0383, available online at http://www.idealibrary.

com on

To what extent can direct selling of farm produce offer a more environmentally friendly type of farming? Some evidence from France
A. W. Gilg and M. Battershill

The globalised agri-industrial food system has become the dominant force shaping the context in which farming operates. The system has a number of harmful environmental side-effects, which have caused concern both among food producers and consumers, and there is evidence that some producers and consumers would like an alternative to the system. Direct selling by producers offers an alternative in which producers and consumers can form a symbiotic relationship depending on their individual desires. This may include a desire for a more environmentally friendly form of farming. This paper explores the potential for direct selling to offer a substantial alternative to the agri-industrial food system and the degree to which direct selling may or may not be more environmentally friendly than the agri-industrial model. The rst part of the paper engages with the existing literature to provide four key questions. These four questions are then partially answered by evidence from a case-study of direct selling in France in the second part of the paper. The paper concludes with a discussion about how contemporary developments, notably, e-commerce may lead to radical changes in how farming environments are managed in the next decade. 2000 Academic Press

Keywords: farm produce, direct selling, environmentally friendly farming, France.

Introduction
This paper examines the extent to which the direct selling of farm produce might offer a more environmentally friendly farming system and thus offer a free-market alternative to state and European Union agricultural policies by exploiting four advantages: (1) all the prots go to the producer; (2) if value-added products are sold greater prots should be made; (3) if value-added products are sold more local employment is created; (4) if the products sell on the basis of an environmentally friendly production system the environment benets. The rst part of the paper explores how the agri-industrial food system has come to dominate farming, how it has had undesirable effects on the environment, and why direct selling may offer a more environmentally friendly alternative, via a
Email of author: a.w.gilg@exeter.ac.uk
03014797/00/110195 C 20 $35.00/0

symbiotic relationship between producers and consumers. This symbiotic relationship may be limited however by a number of obstacles which the paper addresses in the form of four key questions. These questions are partially answered in the second part of the paper from the evidence provided by a casestudy in France. The paper concludes with a discussion of the potential expansion for direct selling with the growth of e-commerce.

The agri-industrial food system, environmentally friendly farming alternatives, direct selling, and agri-environment policies
The agri-industrial food system
The rise of the globalised agri-industrial food system has been conceptualised by

Department of Geography University of Exeter Among Building Rennes Drive EX4 4RJ, UK Received 13 November 1997; accepted 21 August 2000 2000 Academic Press

196

A. W. Gilg and M. Battershill

THE FOOD CHAIN Agricultural inputs e.g. Fertilizers Biotechnology Plant and machinery Agrichemicals Advisory services Energy

Physical environment e.g. Space Biological time Soil Topography Climate

Farm production e.g. Farm size Enterprise type Farmland Farm labour Land tenure

State farm policies e.g. Influencing inputs Influencing product prices Influencing farm structures Fiscal Land inheritance Environment

Product processing e.g. Washing and grading Freezing and packing Transforming Slaughtering and jointing International food trade (exports and imports) e.g. Competitive products Non-competitive products Export subsidies Food aid

Credit/Financial markets e.g. Farm size Enterprise type Farmland Farm labour Land tenure

Food distribution e.g. Wholesalers Retailers Catering trade

Food comsumption e.g. Population size and growth Dietary preferences Purchasing power Household structure Employment

Dominant finance and material flows Dominant power relations Key features in the system

Figure 1.

The food supply system (after Bowler, 1992).

Bowler (1992) as shown in Figure 1 and well documented by Marsden and Little (1990), Goodman and Redclift (1991), Le Heron (1993), McMichael (1994), Tansey and Worsley (1995), Burch et al. (1996) and Goodman and Watts (1997). It is part of a world-wide trend to global retail expansion in which there are three main trends (Rushe, 1999). First, a premier league of global retailers is emerging. Second, these retailers are expanding their formulae across the world. Third, the big growth leaders are general merchandisers that also sell food.

As Figure 1 shows farm production has become one element of a complex system. It is generally acknowledged (Wallace, 1992) that this system is driven by a diminishing number of multi-national companies, notably, food producers and chemical companies rather than by consumers. However, Marsden and Arce (1995) caution that the globalisation process cannot be seen as all embracing and all explanatory. Le Heron and Roche (1995) also argue that the longstanding food regime, based on durable food and grain-fed livestock may be recomposing into a fresh food regime, and Watts and

Direct sales of farm produce and the farm environment

197

Goodman (1997) note that the trade in highvalue foods equals the trade in oil. Watts and Goodman (1997) also note that few food manufacturing companies or retailers conform to the industrial model of transnationalisation; that is, centralised, global intra-rm divisions of labour. Nonetheless, globalisation has had a major impact on agriculture notably the industrialisation of agriculture which according to Bowler (1992) has intensied production and concentrated production into fewer farms and regions. These processes have led to a number of unwelcome environmental impacts: (1) type of farming: over specialisation into one or two products which reduces the possibility of horizontal integration both within the farm and between farms and thus reduces ecological diversity and increases fear of a monocultural system failure. (2) Direct destruction of habitats: both to increase the farmed area and its productivity, and to reduce undesirable pests therefore reducing habitat diversity. (3) Reliance on scientic inputs: in a vicious circle, science is perpetually creating
Persistence

new varieties, pesticides and insecticides to keep ahead of natures ability to combat each new scientic advance. In the meantime much wildlife has been eliminated. (4) Energy use: a high reliance on energy use on the farm and externally much use of energy to bring in purchased inputs and to deliver products to distant markets. Concerns over these impacts have focussed attention on more environmentally friendly forms of agriculture.

Environmentally friendly farming alternatives

Until the 1960s farming was seen as the natural custodian of the countryside because it was horizontally integrated (Gilg, 1996). In the agrarian transition to productionism (Figure 2) farming has become vertically integrated with the unwelcome environmental effects listed above. There are two alternatives to the development of the agri-industrial food system. As Figure 2 shows the rst is to maintain those high pluriactivity areas that have kept
Productionism
Agro-food externalisation and subsumption

Agrarian integration

Agriculkural socio-economic structures

Production concentration Production intensity Farm concentration Primacy of agricultural incomes

Technological treadmill Mobility of assets Policy clientelism A polyvalent rural structure

High pluriactivity

Low pluriactivity

Increasing pluriactivity and especially pluri-income

Space and time dimensions and combinations

e.g. Agueda, Portugal Sevilla, Spain Western Ireland e.g. East Ireland Plain viticole de l'Hrault, France Picardie e.g. Maas en Waal, Netherlands Buckinghamshire, England Euskirchen, Germany

Figure 2.

The Agrarian transition in Europe (after Marsden, 1995).

198

A. W. Gilg and M. Battershill

horizontally integrated systems because they are marginal agricultural areas. The second alternative is to seek increased pluriactivity in those areas where the agrarian transition has already taken place, and to reduce the scale of vertical integration. In either case the aim is to create a more environmentally friendly farming system with the following attributes. Type of farming: mixed farming with a mixture of crops and livestock both within farms and within regions, therefore allowing more horizontal integration and greater ecological diversity. In addition, more selfsufcient local food markets; little destruction of habitats: natural habitats are seen as a resource or as a habitat for natural predators in a self-balancing ecosystem;

little reliance on scientic inputs: creation of a virtuous circle in which tried and tested systems use nature instead of working against it and in which the scientic study of natural systems is used to harness wildlife instead of destroying it; and energy use: continued reliance on energy use on the farm but much less use of energy in bringing in purchased inputs or on transporting goods to distant markets.

Direct selling and why it might be more environmentally friendly

As Figure 1 shows the food system has marginalised the role of the farmer since the 1980s (Marsden et al., 1986). This provides one reason why farmers might wish to sell their produce directly. Figure 3 demonstrates

Supermarkets

Non-supermarket buyers Greengrocers Restuarants/Cafes/ Institutions

Food processors

Merchant/Agent

Co-operative producer group

Traditional market place

Direct contact

Farmers

True direct selling On the farm Farmers market Market hall Home deliveries Trade fairs Collectives with consumers

Arms length direct selling Restaurants Speciality food shops Supermarkets (delicatessen) Tourism outlets

Figure 3. A schematic diagram of the food marketing system (after Gilg and Battershill, 1998, and Parsons, 1996).

Direct sales of farm produce and the farm environment

199

the choices open to a farmer. The top half of the gure shows the conventional marketing system. In the past two decades there has been a signicant shift from right to left as traditional market places have suffered a decline in business and as either Merchant/Agents or Direct Contracts have taken their place. Increasingly, fresh foods are being grown to contract, and the farmer is told what to grow and how to grow it (Fulton and Clark, 1996). Much farm produce is, however, sold to food processors, but once again food processors are increasingly ordering produce to a contract so that farmers have essentially become just another point along the Fordist production line (Lyons, 1996; Boyd and Watts, 1997). In accordance, farmers who want independence in decision-making must either depend on the declining traditional market place or seek to sell their produce to the public directly. As Figure 3 shows they have two options. First they can engage in True Direct Selling via the six routes shown in Figure 3. Second, they can sell to outlets which can benet from the fact that the product is a farm fresh or farm processed product. Bessiere (1998) has listed the following outlets related to tourism: street markets; mail order; on the farm; through middlemen (supermarkets, restaurants, cooperatives); farmstead inns (Fermes Auberges); family inns (Logis); stay on the farm (fermes de sejour); snacks at the farm (gouters a la ferme); and fairs. In case of both direct options farmers need some reason to persuade consumers to choose their product either by offering one that is not available in the conventional market or producing it in a different way. The mode of production and environmental benets are probably the most compelling reason for persuading consumers to purchase food direct. The prime example is provided by organic food, where there has been a dramatic increase in the sales of organic food in the UK from 100 million in 1993 to 260 million in 1997 (Long, 1999). Another marketing device is to assert quality and as Ilbery and Kneafsey (2000b) have argued, quality can be related to a number of factors, but notably a traditional mode of production based on regional environments, for example, Wensleydale cheese in the UK, as identied by Ritson and Kuznesof (1996).

A third direct marketing device is the use of regional labelling schemes, as exemplied by the French appellation system. According to Moran (1993) this is a way in which the economic rent of the region can be captured by adding value to a product, not just by claiming local uniqueness and premium quality/prices, but also by excluding competition. Champagne is the prime example but Bessiere (1998) has also outlined several French schemes used to certify quality based on unique terroirs and food symbolisms with which people can identify. Ray (1998) argues that a culture economy could be developed around local attributes with food playing a central part in constructing regional identities/neotribalisms as an antidote to modernity and standardisation. Consumer demand may thus lead to a clear link between direct selling and environmentally friendly farming, because consumers have a direct connection with the producers who they have chosen, because they offer a more environmentally friendly form of farming. The increase in the demand for organic food is a case where consumer demand has not been matched by the food supply system. For example, in the UK around 80% of organic food is imported. Therefore, the UKs Organic Aid Conversion Scheme (Riley, 1999) was oversubscribed in its rst year, 19981999 (Burns, 1999). However, Tovey (1997) argues that the enthusiastic uptake of organic farming in Ireland is due to the money available, rather than a genuine desire to farm organically. Marsden (1998a) cautions however that the quality food market might not remain the domain of niche producers. However, Coombes and Campbell (1998) using evidence from New Zealand argue that organic farmers can retain their independence. Nonetheless, they see conventional farmers converting to organic farmers under contracts to satisfy global markets, while small-scale organic farmers continue to satisfy local markets. This is a nding replicated by Buck et al. (1997) in California where most organic production is carried out within the agriindustrial system. In contrast, direct marketing is seen by Buck et al. (1997) as a default choice for growers with few resources. Indeed, Buck et al. emphasise the problems with direct marketing, notably seasonal gluts and labour intensity. Accordingly, many direct

200

A. W. Gilg and M. Battershill

marketeers have used annual subscription schemes like weekly box delivery schemes.

Agri-environment policies and why direct selling may be able to supplement or even replace them
Current agri-environment policies use a variety of mechanisms. For example, public subsidies can be used to maintain marginal agricultures, notably by subsidising extensive livestock production as in the prime a lherbe scheme in France (Colson et al., 1998). In productionist areas controls may be imposed to curb pollution by chemicals but so far few curbs have been introduced, except for Nitrate Sensitive Areas. Voluntary compensation methods based on management agreements or the novel French approach of Plans de Development Durable (PDD), are the main methods used in productivist areas (Charvet et al., 1998). Doubt used to be cast on the efcacy of these methods which only halted rather than reversed damage (Bouzille et al., 1998) and tended to appeal to those already interested in conservation (Morris and Potter, 1995). In addition, Vaudois and Meme (1998) have shown that this change is restricted to poorer farmland, and that farmers in good agricultural areas are not interested in agri-environment schemes because they restrict their freedom. However, recent evidence from Denmark (Bager and Proost, 1997) and France (Charvet et al., 1998) has shown that attitudes among farmers are becoming more environmentally friendly. As an alternative to public policies consumer demand for more environmentally friendly farming can be harnessed by those farmers wishing to get off the technological treadmill by satisfying the growing demand for say organic foods or for livestock reared outside on natural grassland. If consumer demand of this sort continues to grow: three types of area are forecast by Berlan-Darque and Kalaroa (1992). First, the dominant demand by consumers for cheap industrialised food will continue, and will continue to be met by industrial farming regions like the Paris Basin and East Anglia. Second, around the major cities of Europe the trend towards direct selling of food for the luxury market will probably continue to grow. Third, in the marginal areas, farmers could

exploit the richer natural environment of these areas, by selling food directly, via mail, telephone and internet ordering systems to distant urban markets, or to tourist outlets (Ilbery and Holloway, 1997). Direct selling in the urban fringe and marginal areas outlined above by making the environment a key element in their marketing could therefore not only supplement but could eventually replace current agrienvironment policies in these areas. However, Ilbery et al. (1999) have demonstrated that organic farming is not developing in such areas but instead in central-southern England, in areas which can be considered as average farmland. This could be disadvantageous for marginal or urban-fringe areas that are seeking to add and retain value by selling quality farm products directly.

Conceptualising key issues in direct selling

If farmers wish to be successful at direct selling they clearly have to convince themselves of the benets, and also offer reasons for consumers to transfer some of their custom from the agri-industrial food system. Three questions need to be answered: Why should farmers want to sell direct? Why should consumers want to buy direct? What is the relationship between farmers and customers? Three types of factor suggest themselves: economic, social and environmental. The three questions and three factors are now considered in turn.

Why should farmers want to sell direct?

Economic factors include the need to diversify as agricultural prots have declined and the gains to be made by cutting out the middlemen involved in conventional marketing. In particular, Ritson (1997) stresses the fact that most farmers sell raw materials rather than food products with added value. The potential for increasing prots this way is graphically shown in Figure 4 (Marks, 1992), which shows that nal expenditure by consumers on food in the UK is ve times that sold by farmers, the same ratio as in Germany (Pretty, 1998). Marsden (1997) has

Direct sales of farm produce and the farm environment

Imports 8.6 bn

201

value added 4.1 bn

Caterers value added 9.9 bn

Wholesalers Food from farms 9.2 bn Manufacturers value added 14.4 bn Retailers value added 9.5 bn Consumers food expenditure 52.9 bn

Exports 2.8 bn

Figure 4.

Main channels of UK food distribution 1988 ( billion) (after Marks, 1992).

conrmed that adding value is the rst key trend in contemporary agri-food networks. Given these trends it is to be expected that farmers should want to reclaim some of the benets from adding value. Social factors can include the need to increase family employment, to keep offspring on the farm, or to provide work for a partner. Farmers for a long time have also been identied as a behaviourally distinct group of entrepreneurs, for whom lifestyle is as important as protability (Gasson, 1973). Taken together social and economic factors may encourage spouses to advocate a direct selling enterprise so that they do not have to nd work off the farm. However, given the increased economic and social freedom of women on farms in recent years (Jervell, 1999) the presence of a female spouse may be a limiting factor, where it was once thought to be a crucial positive factor in diversication. Environmental factors can include the need to maximise prots in marginal farming areas. Ironically the high quality of the environment often found in such areas, due to the low intensity of production methods, can help farmers market their produce directly. First, they can attach an environmentally friendly appellation to their produce, and second, they have a market in tourists visiting the area for its high environmental quality. Finally, contrary to popular mythology, many farmers care deeply about the environment and are very keen to seek out an alternative to industrial farming (Tracy, 1999). Whatever, the reason surveys in Britain have shown that farm shop sales are increasing at more than

20% a year (Rogers, 1998) and a 1994 survey (Ilbery et al., 1997) revealed that about 7% of farmers had a retail business.

Why should consumers want to buy direct?

According to Bell and Valentine (1997) consumers are increasingly concerned to know where food comes from and how it is produced. The best way to answer these questions is to buy direct from the producer, but other factors may be at work. Economic factors can include the points that food bought directly should be cheaper or better value for money in terms of being of a perceived higher quality. For example, wine may be purchased in bulk from the vineyard at a substantially cheaper price than elsewhere. Social factors can include the social cache engendered by having ones own supplier. Bessiere (1998) has also outlined how food purchases may be used by consumers to make symbolic statements about themselves or their regional identity. Socially, the supplier may become a friendly acquaintance who is contacted regularly in a set of social circuits. This is a factor exploited by many direct sellers who circulate regular newsletters about their lives in a bid to create loyalty (Tomalin, 1998). Consumers are thus subliminally buying into an environmental lifestyle. Consumers can buy convenience by either buying in bulk, for example, purchasing a whole lamb for the freezer or by purchasing a set of pre-prepared meals. Collectively, local

202

A. W. Gilg and M. Battershill

food cultures and the belief that local food is best can explain the apparently irrational behaviour of Japanese and Norwegian consumers purchasing expensive local food in preference to cheaper imported food (Nygard and Storstad, 1998). Environmental factors can include a growing concern to avoid the methods used by the agri-industrial food system and to purchase food grown in a less intensive if not wholly organic way, as in the Caf e Direct scheme (Whatmore and Thorne, 1997). Concerns over animal welfare and human health issues about the possible health hazards related to modern methods of food production (Boyd and Watts, 1997) can also be cited as environmental factors. However, surveys have so far shown that concerns over environmental issues are not fully replicated in purchases, for example, Mainieri et al. (1997) recorded a score of 518 (from a maximum seven) for environmental concern, but only 453 for their environmental buying behaviour. Other consumers may react against the growing standardisation of shops under what Ritzer (1997) has coined the McDonaldization thesis. Indeed, Ilbery and Kneafsy (2000b) found that regional food producers put texture, avour and taste top of the list as to why customers should buy their products.

What is the relationship between farmers and customers?

In many ways this is the key conceptual question since if direct selling is to have any environmental benet it must involve enough farmers and customers who wish to have food produced in more environmentally friendly ways. Marsden (1998b:265) has argued that consumers and farmers are being reconnected as consumers become more conscious of the types of food they eat and also its status of origin and transfer. Watts and Goodman (1997) also point out that the food system is distinctive, in that it depends on organic properties at both ends of the chain. Therefore, it makes sense to reconnect them more directly. Economically, the key question is whether the market is consumer or producer-led? Given the fact that even the food industry has not been totally able to shape customer demand, it is unlikely that individual farmers

can inuence customers in any signicant way. Economically therefore, customers must want something from direct selling that the supermarkets cannot provide, if direct selling is to increase its market share. Quality and value for money are the most likely customer demands. Socially, loyalty and friendship may be key factors in cementing a relationship once it has begun, because people are interacting directly rather than impersonally as in a supermarket. Indeed Ilbery and Kneafsey (2000b) have stressed the symbiotic relationship between food producer and consumer in the quality food market, which they conceptualise as a trusting relationship. Concern for production methods is probably the key factor in starting a relationship between farmers and consumers. Nonetheless, there are a number of farmers and consumers who participate in direct selling with no or only some environmentally friendly factors being relevant, as in the case of wine, where the quality of the terroir may be important but the production method may be very intensive. Direct selling is therefore a very complex process. However, one key thread is a desire by some people to return to a food production and marketing system based on local environments and natural methods. If this desire were widespread it could lead to a more sustainable farming system than the current agri-industrial food system. Before, direct selling can be promoted as a realistic alternative however four key questions have to be addressed: (1) to what extent is direct selling benecial to the environment? (2) to what extent is consumer demand driven by environmental concern? (3) to what extent is direct selling restricted to certain environments and related farm products? (4) to what extent can direct selling be a realistic alternative to the agri-industrial food system and to agri-environment policies? There are few studies which have thrown any direct light on these questions, although there have been a number of theoretical discussions. In this paper, we use a casestudy of direct selling in France to provide answers to the four questions posed above.

Direct sales of farm produce and the farm environment

203

The French case-study

Previous work by ourselves (Gilg and Battershill, 1997) had shown that there could be a link between the sale of farm produce and environmentally friendly farming, especially when such food was sold direct from the farm. In spite of the success of some of these farms, Britain does not have a tradition of direct farm sales, compared to France, where direct selling is much more common. It therefore seemed appropriate to test the extent to which direct selling of farm produce in France was related to a concern for the environment or to other factors. Accordingly, a 2-year research project was carried out between 1995 and 1997. The research was mainly undertaken in north-west France. The core research method was a farmer questionnaire which contained 60 coded questions. A total of 150 farms were visited of which 123 were used in the data

analysis (the remainder were more informal visits in other areas). The sample was split into vente directe (direct selling) farms and conventional farms (i.e. where produce was sold completely indirectly through merchants, co-operatives, etc.). Five study areas in north-west France, (Figure 5) were chosen to provide a representative mix to upland, lowland and coastal landscapes. Two study areas were strongly affected by tourism (Brittany) and three areas were in the urban fringe of a major city (Nantes). All the areas included examples of environmentally friendly or marginal farming. The research helped distinguish vente directe farms in terms of socio-economic characteristics and production practices, and also analysed the operation and impact of vente directe itself. The overall ndings of the research have been reported elsewhere (Battershill and Gilg, 1998) and some of the detail relating to the role of household factors (Gilg and Battershill, 1999) and the role of food quality

Cherbourg

Brest 1 2 Quimper Rennes

Nantes 4 3
Clisson

La Rochelle

Figure 5.

The ve study areas in North-west France.

204

A. W. Gilg and M. Battershill

(Gilg and Battershill, 1998) have also been published. The present study concentrates on the link between vente directe and environmental factors, and selectively uses the research ndings of the French case-study to answer the four key questions posed above.

To what extent is direct selling benecial to the environment?

The case-study provides both positive and negative evidence. On the positive side, there was an above average use of environmentally friendly practices and low intensity use of the land, but on the negative side a number of the farmers ran unorthodox farm enterprises and many of them were small scale.

Positive factor (Environmentally friendly practices)

The research found that vente directe farms were more likely to undertake environmentally friendly farming practices (as indicated by the four criteria shown in Table 1) than farms which did not undertake vente directe. All but four of the 63 vente directe farms were engaged in at least one practice, while 13 of the 60 conventional farms undertook none at all. More vente directe farms than conventional farms were engaged in each type of practice. However, the trend was far from overwhelming. Indeed, other than for work done by hand, conventional farms had only slightly fewer farms engaged in each type of practice. For example, 27 vente directe farms kept traditional species, but so did 19 conventional farms. The number of practices undertaken was also very similar for both sides of the sample, except for
Table 1. Type of farm practice deemed to be environmentally friendly Type of farm practice Vente directe Conventional No. of % of No. of % of farms farms farms farms Management of boundaries Extensive management Work done by hand Traditional species None 46 36 32 27 4 73 57 51 43 6 36 29 20 19 13 60 48 33 32 22

nine vente directe farms that undertook all four practices compared to only four conventional farms. In the Finist` ere study area there was a more marked divergence into extensive vente directe farms employing several different traditional practices, and intensive conventional farms employing few. However, in the Marais Breton study area typically larger conventional farms undertook more friendly practices than smaller specialised vente directe farms. Table 2 shows in more detail the type of farm practices outlined in Table 1. The most common type of practice in the sample was management of eld boundaries. A group of intensive conventional farmers in the Finist` ere study area had few hedges left to manage, but otherwise most conventional farms were as active with trimming and planting as any vente directe neighbours. There was a similar picture with extensive management and over half of the vente directe farmers indicated some extensive management, while a number of conventional farms also ran extensive areas. Thirteen of the 14 conventional farms in the Marais Breton-Vend een also ran extensive systems on part of the farm. Work done by hand was especially common amongst vente directe vineyards, notably hand picking of grapes. Other vente directe farmers worked by hand to harvest, to weed or to process farm produce. However, some conventional farmers also weeded by hand (or machine), and might also engage in work done by hand in managing the farmyard or landscape. Finally, traditional species were noted in both halves of the sample, including similar numbers of cattle species, the Melon Muscadet grape, feed beetroots, and Bl e Noir or Buckwheat.

Positive factor (Low intensity farming)

The research found that the usage of all agrochemicals (i.e. Nitrogen, herbicides, fungicides and insecticides) on vente directe farms was nearly half of the usage on conventional farms. In particular, a number of low intensity farms could clearly be identied, which used vente directe often consciously to support extensive farming systems. This included a number of vente directe farms that ran

Direct sales of farm produce and the farm environment Table 2. More detailed examples of practices deemed to be environmentally friendly Both Management of boundaries Cut chestnut stakes for vines Planted hedges Cut wood for rewood Maintain banks and hedges Cut hedges by hand Kept hedges during remembrement Kept hedges to shelter fruits Extensive management Areas of the farm extensively run Extensive permanent pasture Have more grassland than maize Indoor pork on straw system Extensive free range poultry Reducing wine output for quality Organic, therefore extensive Run stock on rough grassland Only hay and beets used for forage Extensive vegetables, e.g. fallows Clover not N in intensive grassland Converting grassland to organic Work done by hand Harvest all grapes by hand Harvest some grapes by hand Cutting and planting vines by hand Harvest fruits by hand Use mechanical weeder Harvest fruit and veg by hand Harvest maize by hand Use sheep to weed Weed fruit and veg by hand Weed feed beets by hand Weed some vines by hand Make own buildings from farm timber Make cheese, butter, etc. by hand Weed thistles by hand Cut hedges by hand Distribute straw by hand Distribute maize in hand baskets Traditional species Melon grape for Muscadet Pinoir Breton cattle for beef or milk Normand cattle for beef or milk Noir, or old buckwheat Ble Feed beetroots Vendeen sheep Pork Blano Quest Traditional poultry breed Traditional grass species Traditional apple varieties Traditional vegetable varieties Poitevin rare breed goats p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p Vente directe Conventional

205

organic systems. Of the 63 vente directe farms and vineyards visited, 13 were completely organic, a further 10 used no sprays and only minimal quantities of Nitrogen fertiliser, while 15 farmed with extensive use of sprays and fertiliser. In contrast, only one of the 60 conventional farms was organic, only six

used no sprays, while 17 ran medium intensive or intensive systems, a sector almost totally absent from the vente directe sample. The average stocking rate on the vente directe farms was correspondingly low. Thirty-two of the 39 vente directe farms with stock ran EU-standard extensive rates (<14

206

A. W. Gilg and M. Battershill

livestock units per hectare), compared to only 17 of the 42 conventional stock farms. The Finist` ere sample included the most low intensity farms, consistent with the higher number of traditional practices also noted in the region. Often low intensity farming coincided with the use of environmentally friendly farming practices on hilly or marginal land with an existing conservation value. As a result, a number of vente directe farms had, in terms of landscape features of ecological value, correspondingly high conservation value landscapes. This was especially so in the Finist` ere study area. Overall, however, conventional farms, which were on average larger, tended to include more individual features, so that they had the same average conservation value of vente directe farms, and a number even had higher value landscapes than their vente directe neighbours.

intensity farming, by dynamic people with experience in the non-agricultural world, was clearly not typical of the socio-economic circumstances of genuine traditional low intensity farm households. In a similar way, the farm enterprises adopted by vente directe farms (and thus the type of produce sold directly) were often not typical of traditional farm enterprises in the area. Although dairy and beef farming dominated the conventional farm sample, cattle-based systems featured far less prominently amongst vente directe farms. Instead, more unusual enterprises for the areas were common, in particular poultry, goats, fruit and vegetables, as well as lamb and pork. Crucially, a number of these enterprises did not demand any land in their system, and a number of vente directe farm enterprises were based around production systems that, whilst extensive, offered little or nothing in terms of landscape management.

Negative factor (Unorthodox farm households and farm enterprises)

The research found that vente directe farm households were almost identical in some aspects, notably, household size, age structure, succession and labour used (Gilg and Battershill, 1999). In other aspects, however, the vente directe sample was not orthodox. For example, nearly one third of the vente directe farmers, almost all low intensity or organic, had worked outside agriculture, including a number who had been brought up outside the orthodox farming community. Partly as a result, the average educational level of vente directe farmers was higher than their conventional neighbours. These same farmers often shared a dynamic, though unorthodox business attitude, that emphasised quality of life above prot maximisation. This included an avoidance of debt or heavy agricultural investment, and a general tolerance of small incomes compared to the majority of conventional farmers. These factors combined to give a group of farmers committed to a low input, low output farming system that could generate enough money to live on albeit only modestly. Vente directe had often been used for many years by such farmers as a means of valorising the chosen low intensity system. This unorthodox attitude to low income, low

Negative factor (Small scale and low percentage of output sold directly)
The small scale of the vente directe sector is another factor that limits the potential of vente directe as a means of supporting environmentally friendly farming. Even in France, few farms participate in vente directe, and of those that do, most remain dependent on the arms lengths selling channels. The 63 holdings visited were virtually the only examples of vente directe farms that could be found (except for the Muscadet vineyards). Vente directe was found to be a marginal activity, suited only to a few farms. In addition, it was difcult for farmers to secure sales, even when the farm was well-placed to capitalise on a large potential market. Threequarters of the producers said that nding clients was difcult or very difcult, perhaps because the holding was poorly located, the market for produce was saturated, or the produce sold was not in strong demand. Only organic producers seemed to be able to sell produce easily. The percentage of produce sold through vente directe was invariably small; 20 of the 63 holdings sold less than 20% of output directly, and over half sold less than 40% directly. Only 10 of the 63 farms or vineyards could sell all of their production

Direct sales of farm produce and the farm environment

207

directly. Those that could were smaller being specialised producers of pork, poultry, goats milk, wine, fruit and lamb, sometimes running land-free systems. While there was nearly always good added value involved with vente directe, ranging from 20100% above conventional prices, the small amounts of produce sold by most farms meant that they remained dependent on conventional marketing, even those close to large markets.

One exception was the organic sector, where consumers were reportedly better informed and more interested.

To what extent is direct selling restricted to certain environments and certain farm products?
The research framework for the French casestudy had hypothesised that direct selling would be more common and more successful in urban fringe and tourist areas and also in areas devoted to products most suited to direct selling, notably vineyards. Accordingly, the research areas were drawn up to test these hypotheses which were broadly found to be true with certain exceptions as outlined next.

Summary
More vente directe farms were actively engaged in environmentally friendly farming practices and a number exhibited characteristics of traditional low intensity farming systems. However, the difference between vente directe farms and conventional farms is not at present big enough to be able to claim that vente directe farmers are signicantly more environmentally friendly. This may be due to the fact that not all vente directe farmers make a virtue out of their production methods. In accordance, attention is now turned to the second key question.

Comparison of tourism and urban fringe areas (excluding special case of Muscadet)
The research found that fresh produce or unprocessed meat was more likely to be sold in the urban fringe than the tourism areas, where processed foods were more likely to be sold either as holiday mementoes or as gifts. In terms of the method of sale, in both areas the most common were sales on the farm, which accounted for just over a fth of sales. The second, local markets, was also common to both areas, at just under a fth of all sales. However, there were big differences elsewhere. In tourism areas sales from markets, via home delivery and from trade fairs were much more frequent than in urbanfringe areas, while in contrast sales to supermarkets were more common in urban-fringe areas. In terms of the percentage of produce sold directly, the tourism areas were much more reliant on direct sales, with around a third of farms selling more than threequarters of their produce directly compared to around a sixth in the urban areas. The research therefore seems to suggest that two moderately different markets exist, reecting the seasonal pattern of tourism. Farmers in tourism areas need to process food during the winter for summer sales, while urban-fringe

To what extent is consumer demand driven by environmental concern?

The research did not include a formal sample of consumers but vente directe farmers were asked about their customers and a sample of restarateurs, hoteliers and shopkeepers were also questioned about their attitudes to buying food direct from farms. The main impression gained is that most vente directe consumers are motivated by the concept of purchasing high quality food (Battershill and Gilg, 1998) but not the environmental attributes of the production system. Farmers and arms length retailers who handle a major percentage of vente directe produce, often said they were hardly ever questioned about the origins of farm produce or the nature of the farming practices employed to produce it. There was a tendency for consumers to be satised by packaging or by product images, by a local source, or by a charming farmer, and few sought to ascertain exactly how a farm is managed.

208

A. W. Gilg and M. Battershill

farmers concentrate on a more continuous sale of fresher, less processed food.

Type of farm products sold

It has already been noted that vente directe produce was rather unorthodox, except for the case of Muscadet wine. In total the most common products sold though vente directe were dairy products. The predominance of dairy produce stemmed from the fact that dairy farms tended to sell more than one product. Poultry products were second most common overall. Other meats were third most common and, in many cases, the meat was processed in order to add value. Fruit and vegetables were also commonly sold, with fruit very often being processed. With the possible exception of cows milk produce, the produce sold through vente directe was often not traditional for the areas.

To what extent can direct selling be a realistic alternative to the agri-industrial food system and to agri-environment policies?
Farmers and viticulteurs were asked whether they believed that vente directe supported environmentally friendly farming via the use of traditional production methods. Twentyve of the sample of 63 believed there was a strong link, 25 that there was some link, and only 13 that there was no link. Responses varied distinctly according to region, with the best link in the Muscadet vineyards (where 13 of the 17 producers reported a strong link). Some links were noted in the Finist` ere and the Bocage Vend een study areas, while the weakest links were observed in the Marais Breton-Vend een study area. Reasons for there being a strong link included the fact that consumers are interested increasingly in traditional and natural practices, and willing to pay extra to support them. A good demand and higher prices could thus help producers avoid the excesses of modern intensive systems, and to remain extensive through adding value to a smaller output. Some felt there to be

a strong link between quality and tradition, especially, it seemed, in the choice to harvest wine, fruit or vegetables by hand. However, a common observation in the vineyards, made by producers and their advisors, was that genuine traditional practices have evolved to the extent that there is no such thing as traditional Muscadet production. The traditional activities of viticulteurs were essentially more extensive and careful forms of production, using modern equipment and less toxic chemicals. In cases where some link was noted between the type of farming and customer demand most vente directe farmers reasoned that consumers sought tradition as a form of quality, and were prepared to pay extra for more natural, smaller-scale and extensive forms of production. Some felt that because they were engaged in vente directe they had neither a need nor an opportunity to adopt more intensive systems. Often the responses of farmers seemed more realistic than from those who believed in a strong link, inasmuch as they pinpointed which particular traditional practices the demand for quality helped to support. One could not say that the whole farming system was genuinely traditional, only that it retained aspects of traditional low intensity farming systems. Thirteen of the 63 producers felt there was no link between vente directe and traditional low intensity practices. On occasion, and especially in the Muscadet vineyards and more intensive areas of the Bocage Vend een, this was because it was felt there were no traditional practices to support. For others it was because their own vente directe system was not traditional, for example a battery egg system or foie gras production in the Marais Breton. Another poultry producer in the marais also said that consumers did not buy traditional breeds of poultry because there was not enough meat on the carcass. For others the two were felt to be unrelated, i.e. that the choice to buy vente directe (including organic produce) was not inuenced by an interest in traditional practices, or that if traditional practices were undertaken it was solely through the farmers own volition. Another intensive farmer said that he was under no pressure to move towards more traditional practices as a result of vente directe of squashes and pumpkins, because his point of sale was nowhere near

Direct sales of farm produce and the farm environment

209

his farm. Finally, one farmer had opened a successful farm restaurant (ferme aubege), which had become so time consuming that he had abandoned the traditional part of his system, namely the running of cattle in an unimproved area of wet grassland.

Discussion and conclusions

Most commentators (Marsden, 1998b) see two major changes for the agricultural sector. The rst change will be a reduction in overall state support in which good farming areas will survive using even more scientic forms of production, but other areas will need to continue to be supported while they diversify. The second change will thus be focussed on the less good farming areas and will be based on a heterogeneity of non-food production activities and alternative food supply systems. In these areas, production will be based on quality not quantity, and be consumer rather than producer-led. The rest of this paper considers these two changes and in particular the possibility of alternative food production and delivery systems. The case-study has shown that vente directe as a sector has some potential to provide environmentally friendly farming. This is because: (1) some farmers want to farm in an environmentally friendly way and vente directe allows them to do so; and (2) some consumers want food quality and this can be linked to environmentally friendly farming practises, notably in the case of organic farming. The 1990s witnessed growth trends in the market which links farm production methods with consumers. First, there are now about 450 box schemes in the UK (Tracy, 1999) mainly based on organic farms. Second, there has been a rapid growth in the numbers of farmers markets in the UK from none in 1997 to 75 in 1999, and 200 predicted by 2001 (National Farmers Union, 1999), following their long-term success in the USA (Festing, 1998). Third, there has been a rapid increase in quality assurance schemes in which products are labelled according to the mode of production. For example, no less than 30 cheeses had been certied in Italy by 1996 under European Union Regulation 2081/1992, which allows Speciality Food and Drink Products to be registered (Marsden,

1998b). In Britain however, only 34 products had been registered by 1998 (Ilbery and Kneafsey, 2000a). Moreover, these were mainly existing products and it is doubtful if the scheme will attract many new entrants. Morris and Young (1998) in a review of freemarket schemes claim that they should be seen as complementary rather than alternatives to existing agri-environment schemes. In spite of these doubts Ilbery and Kneafsey (1998a) believe that quality products and services have considerable potential as a rural development tool in lagging rural regions. For the future, there are three questions that need to be addressed: how many farmers might wish to sell direct? How many consumers might wish to buy direct? To what extent can concern for the environment provide a common link between them?

How many farmers might wish to sell direct?

In recent years most sectors of the farming industry have been in crisis as protability has generally declined. However this crisis has been uneven. Large, well-capitalised and innovative farms have continued to succeed, as have most arable farms. By contrast, small farm businesses and livestock farms, which are often found in marginal and/or upland areas, have suffered. For these, the need to nd increased sources of income has thus been most pressing, and it can be suggested that farmers in these areas may have to consider direct selling to survive. Elsewhere, organic cereal farms make better than average prots. Even so UK supermarkets have to source 80% of their organic produce from outside the UK. There are thus plenty of market opportunities for farmers to free themselves from the global food system which they often perceive to be exploiting them. And yet, many farmers are averse to risk (Oglethorpe, 1995) and are reluctant to change. Furthermore, farmers believe themselves to be farmers and not food processors or grocers. According to a report for the Countryside Commission (1998) on the sale of farm products that benet the environment there are three further constraining factors to growth in this area: rst, lack of awareness among customers; second, competition from

210

A. W. Gilg and M. Battershill Table 3. The difculties faced by farmers wishing to sell farm products that benet the environment and suggestions for overcoming these difculties Difculties Consistency, quality and quantity of supply from producers Small business expansion-crisis point at which size of business outgrows the expertise and ability of owners and the systems they have in place (e.g. quality management) Higher prices for products that benet the countryside preventing purchase by bulk of consumers Consumer confusion regarding true products that benet the countryside exacerbated by false products and misleading claims Suggestions Increased provision/use of centralised marketing and/or distribution organisations Provision of business advice

Either: (1) Encourage price parity policies; or (2) Provide better information to justify higher prices through consumer awareness campaigns or accreditation Education of consumers on what to look for and support Improvement of manufacturing and retailing labelling standards Development of a workable accreditation scheme

Source: Countryside Commission (1998).

cheap imports; and third, the power and inexibility of the supermarkets. However, research for the Countryside Commission (1998) has shown that the difculties faced by farmers wishing to sell products that benet the countryside can be overcome by a variety of methods as shown in Table 3.

global food companies. About the only information we have comes from estimates of the percentage of consumers thought to be green, which varies widely from 3656% (Countryside Commission, 1998). In realistic terms, only a small percentage can be expected to purchase food directly, given current technologies so attention is now drawn to new technologies.

How many consumers might wish to buy direct?

There is no tradition of direct purchasing of food by UK consumers compared to other European countries. However, in recent years there has been a growing interest in such purchases due to a variety of changes. First, people are more mobile and can travel to special farm outlets, and second, a growing number of people are concerned about the quality of supermarket food, for example, its mode of production; its blandness; and a lack of real choice. Little work has, however, been done on how big this market might be, except for the organic sector which is expected to grow. Most market research is based not on asking what people might want from food but in researching new forms of processed food that can be marketed via the mass media. There is, therefore, a paucity of information about consumer demand for directly sold farm products, largely because of the lack of any organisation to undertake research compared to the research and marketing departments of the

Why and how might consumers buy food more directly, and could this change be linked to concern for the environment?
The main reason for most consumers to buy directly would be the convenience of shopping from home via the telephone or computer screen. Environmental factors, like reduced petrol consumption and the desire to buy environmentally friendly produced food cannot be said as yet to be major reasons for direct purchasing of food. Nonetheless, Pretty (1998) has outlined three ways in which a more sustainable agriculture could recapture markets from the supermarkets: by more direct selling, notably via farmers markets; by increasing collaboration via partnerships and cooperatives; and by enhancing labelling and traceability schemes. The most powerful potential for change, however, is the recent introduction of e-commerce (etailing), and especially the

Direct sales of farm produce and the farm environment

211

dramatic growth of the Internet. This provides for the rst time a mechanism to match consumer demand, for say environmentally friendly produced food, with producers. Farmers who wish to offer such food can now easily set up a web-site and assess market demand from the number of hits. If there is sufcient demand they can expand their system or encourage neighbouring farmers to join them. Supermarkets and manufacturers now have very sophisticated supply chains which can be updated fast enough (Bray, 1999) for supply chains to be demand-led (make as much as you can sell) rather than productionled (make it rst, then hope to sell it). There is no reason why farmers could not use this same approach. However, at the same time Pritchard (1999) has shown how the 20 largest US food companies have already had considerable experience at using cyberspace in adapting their marketing message to different cultures. The web may therefore be a doubleedged sword, allowing global companies to compete as if they were a local company, therefore stealing the locality credentials of farmers selling local food products by traditional means. Forecasts about the future of etailing are very diverse varying from only around 10% to as much as 50%. The crucial point though, is that it offers unprecedented opportunities for consumers and producers to match demand and supply more perfectly than current market systems. The need to match demand and supply more closely has also been emphasised by further reforms to the CAP. In particular, the recent Agenda 2000 changes have given extra impetus to the slow process of removing farm subsidies and returning agriculture to the market place. At the same time the new Rural Development Regulation and agrienvironment policies continue aid for farmers in marginal areas. In particular, farmers are being encouraged to create value added farm product enterprises, with the extra bonus that their produce is axiomatically environmentally friendly, because of its location in a marginal and agri-environmentally aided area. In the long term such enterprises could become so successful that the policy aids which helped them start could be withdrawn. However, before this golden scenario is reached, Ilbery and Kneafsey (1998b) caution that three challenges must be faced. First,

the difculty of establishing distinctiveness. Second, the related challenge of developing progressive and dynamic constructions of cultural authenticity. Third, the complexities of marketing a distinctive and culturally authentic product. Another factor in the equation is the impact of new farm technologies notably the introduction of genetically modied (GM) foods, which could herald two different reactions. First, GM foods could lead to a further concentration of protable agriculture into areas which have already been subject to much environmental damage. This would mean that marginal areas would need to provide niche produce more than ever before, to an increased cohort of environmentally consumers delivered by fears about GM foods. Second, GM foods could remove many causes of environmental damage and produce much healthier food than now, so that all consumers would be happy to eat only GM produce. In this case, the global food companies could develop a sealed integrated system, totally dependent on their scientic expertise, which potentially could be very environmentally friendly. Gerber et al. (1998) argue that the drive for GM food production, like the move to precision farming, is productivity led despite claims of environmental benets. GM foods, and precision farming are all based on a productivist ethos and their aim is to establish even closer control over crops and livestock in an attempt to turn the eld into an environment as closely controlled as the research laboratory. This could be benecial if wildlife were included in the equation, but more probably the spectre of elds devoid of wildlife looms ever larger as the technology becomes more sophisticated. In conclusion, the evidence provided by this paper suggests the relationship between direct sales of farm produce and concern over the environment will be restricted in the short term to a small minority of farmers and consumers. It can also be forecast that the market will focus on: certain niche products; concerned consumers; areas that have environmentally benecial attributes for certain food products; and farmers who wish to avoid modern hi-tech farming. In the medium term, based on estimates of those consumers thought to be green, it can be speculated that the maximum market might

212

A. W. Gilg and M. Battershill

be a quarter of all sales by volume and a third of all sales by value, (Countryside Commission, 1998).

Acknowledgement
The Economic and Social Research Council are thanked for providing the research grant which enabled the French case-study to be carried out. Figure 5 is reprinted from Journal of Rural Studies; 14; M. R. J. Battershill and A. W. Gilg. Traditional low intensity farming: evidence of the role of vente directe in supporting such farms in northwest trance, and some implications for conservation policy; 475486. Copyright 1998, with permission from Elsevier Science.

References
Bager, T. and Proost, J. (1997). Voluntary regulation and farmers environmental behaviour. Sociologia Ruralis 37, 8096. Battershill, M. and Gilg, A. (1998). Traditional low intensity farming evidence of the role of Vente Directe in supporting such farms in north-west France and some implications for conservation policy. Journal of Rural Studies 14, 475486. Berlan-Darque, M. and Kalaroa, B. (1992). The ecologisation of French agriculture. Sociologia Ruralis 32, 104114. Bessiere, J. (1998). Local development and heritage: traditional food and cuisine as tourist attractions in rural areas. Sociologia Ruralis 38, 2134. Bouzille, E., Carcaud, N. and Ferjoux, A. (1998). Les mesures agri-environmentales en pays de la loire. In Environnement et Nature dans les Campagnes (N. Croix, ed.), pp. 8391. Rennes: Presses Universitaires Rennes. Bowler, I. (1992). The industrialisation of agriculture. In The Geography of Agriculture in Developed Market Economies (I. Bowler, ed.), pp. 731. Harlow: Longman. Boyd, W. and Watts, M. (1997). Agro-industrial just-in-time: the chicken industry and postwar American capitalism. In Globalising Food: Agrarian Questions and Global Restructuring (D. Goodman and M. Watts, eds), pp. 192225. London: Routledge. Bray, P. (1999). Fast Feedback Boosts Sales. The Sunday Times-E-Commerce Supplement, 28th March, p. 10. Buck, D., Getz, C. and Guthman, J. (1997). From farm to table: the organic vegetable commodity chain of Northern California. Sociologia Ruralis 37, 320. Burch, D., Rickson, R. and Lawrence, G. (eds) (year). Globalisation and Agri-Food Restructuring: Perspectives from the Australasia Region. Aldershot: Avebury.

Burns, J. (1999). Organic scheme coffers empty-as anticipated. Farmers Weekly 6 August, 8. Charvet, J., Poulot-Moreau, M. and Rouyres, T. (1998). Les plans de developpement durable dans les regions de grande culture du bassin parisienen. In Environnement et Nature dans les Campagnes (N. Croix, ed.), pp. 153167. Rennes: Presses Universitaires Rennes. Colson, F., Chatelier, V., Gibault, I. and Berthelot, P. (1998). Les mesures agr-environmentales en France et dans les pays de la Loire. In Environnement et Nature dans les Campagnes (N. Croix, ed.), pp. 3746. Rennes: Presses Universitaires Rennes. Coombes, B. and Campbell, H. (1998). Dependent reproduction of alternative modes of agriculture: organic farming in New Zealand. Sociologia Ruralis 38, 127145. Countryside Commission (1998). Products that Benet the Countryside: Countryside Commission Research Note Twelve. Cheltenham: The Commission. Festing, H. (1998). Farmers Markets: An American Success Story. Place: Ecologic Books. Fulton, A. and Clark, R. (1996). Farmer decision making under contract farming in northern Tasmania. In Globalisation and Agri-Food Restructuring: Perspectives from the Australasia Egion (D. Burch, R. Rickson and G. Lawrence, eds), pp. 219238. Aldershot: Avebury. Gasson, R. (1973). Goals and values of farmers. Journal of Agricultural Economics 24, 521537. Gerber, J., Holloway, L., Seymour, S. and Watkins, C. (1998). New technologies and old knowledges: the impact of precision farming on the management of the English countryside. In Environnement et Nature dans les Campagnes (N. Croix, ed.), pp. 187204. Rennes: Presses Universitaires Rennes. Gilg, A. (1996). Countryside Planning. London: Routledge. Gilg, A. and Battershill, M. (1997). Farmer reaction to agrienvironment schemes: A study of participants in south-west England and the implications for research and development. In Agricultural Restructuring and Sustainability (B. Ilbery, Q. Chiotti and T. Rickard, eds), pp. 253265. Wallingford: CAB International. Gilg, A. and Battershill, M. (1998). Quality farm food in Europe: a possible alternative to the industrialised food market and to current agrienvironmental policies: lessons from France. Food Policy 23, 2540. Gilg, A. and Battershill, M. (1999). The role of household factors in direct selling of farm produce in France. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geograe 90, 312319. Goodman, D. and Redclift, M. (1991). Refashioning Nature: Food, Ecology and Culture. London: Routledge. Goodman, D. and Watts, M. (eds) (1997). Globalising Food: Agrarian Questions and Global Restructuring. London: Routledge. Ilbery, B. and Holloway, L. (1997). Resonses to the challenge of productivist agriculture. Built Environment 23, 184192.

Direct sales of farm produce and the farm environment Ilbery, B. and Kneafsey, M. (1998a). Regional images and the promotion of quality products and services in the lagging regions of the European Union. In Environnement et Nature dans les Campagnes (A. Ferjoux, ed.), pp. 6782. Nantes: Universit e de Nantes Presse. Ilbery, B. and Kneafsey, M. (1998b). Product and place: promoting quality products and services in the lagging regions of the European Union. European Urban and Regional Studies 5, 329341. Ilbery, B. and Kneafsey, M. (2000a). Registering regional speciality food and drink products in the United Kingdom: the case of PDOs and PGIs. Area 32, 317325. Ilbery, B. and Kneafsey, M. (2000b). Constructions of quality in regional speciality food production: a case-study from south-west England. Journal of Rural Studies 16, 217230. Ilbery, B., Healey, M. and Higginbottom, J. (1997). On and off-farm business diversication by farm households in England. In Agricultural Restructuring and Sustainability (B. Ilbery, Chiotti and T. Rickard, eds), pp. 135151. Wallingford: CAB International. Ilbery, B., Holloway, L. and Arber, R. (1999). The geography of organic farming in England and Wales in the 1990s. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geograe 90, 285295. Jervell, A. (1999). Changing patterns of family farming and pluriactivity. Socilogia Ruralis 38, 100116. Le Heron, R. (1993). Globalized Agriculture: Political Choice. Place: Pergamon Press. Le Heron, R. and Roche, M. (1995). A fresh place in foods space. Area 27, 2333. Long, E. (1999). Demand offers market chance for UK growers. Farmers Weekly 16 April, 56. Lyons, K. (1996). Agro-industrialisation and social change within the Australian context: a casestudy of the fast food industry. In Globalisation and Agri-Food Restructuring: Perspectives from the Australasia Egion (D. Burch, R. Rickson and G. Lawrence, eds), pp. 239250. Aldershot: Avebury. McMichael, P. (ed.) (1994). The Global Restucturing of Agro-food Systems. Cornell, NY: Cornell University Press. Mainieri, T., Barnett, E., Valdero, T., Unipan, J. and Oskamp, S. (1997). Green buying: the inuence of environmental concern on consumer behaviour. The Journal of Social Pschology 137, 189204. Marks, H. (1992). Food: Its Production Marketing and Consumption. Reading, UK: The Farm Management Unit, University of Reading. Marsden, T. (1995). Regulating agriculture? Regulating the new rural spaces. Journal of Rural Studies 11, 285296. Marsden, T. (1997). Creating spoe for food: the distinctiveness of recent agrarian development. In Globalising Food: Agrarian Questions and Global Restructuring (D. Goodman and M. Watts, eds), pp. 169191. London: Routledge. Marsden, T. (1998a). New rural territories: Regulating the differentiated rural spaces. Journal of Rural Studies 14, 107117. Marsden, T. (1998b). Agriculture beyond the treadmill? Issues for policy, theory and practice. Progress in Human Geography 22, 265275. Marsden, T. and Arce, A. (1995). Constructing quality: emerging food networks in the rural transition. Environment and Planning A 27, 12611279. Marsden, T. and Little, J. (eds) (1990). Political, Social and Economic Perspectives on the International Food System. Aldershot: Avebury. Marsden, T., Whatmore, S., Munton, R. and Little, J. (1986). The restructuring process and economic centrality in capitalist agriculture. Regional Studies 2, 271280. Moran, W. (1993). Rural space as intellectual property. Political Geography 12, 263277. Morris, C. and Potter, C. (1995). Recruiting the new conservationists: farmers adoption of agrienvironmental schemes in the UK. Journal of Rural Studies 11, 5163. Morris, C. and Young, C. (1998). A preliminary analysis of UK farm quality assurance schemes: new deals for the rural environment. In Environment et Nature dans les Campagnes (A. Ferjoux, ed.), pp. 3348. Nantes: Universit e de Nantes Presse. National Farmers Union (1999). Back to the Future-Farmers Markets. London: The Union. Nygard, B. and Storstad, O. (1998). De-globalisation of food markes? Consumer perceptions of safe food: the case of Norway. Sociologia Ruralis 38, 3653. Oglethorpe, D. (1995). Sensitivity in farm plans to risk-averse behaviour a note on environmental implications. Journal of Agricultural Economics 46, 227232. Parsons, H. (1996). Supermarkets and the supply of fresh fruit and vegetables in Australia: Implications for wholesale markets. In Globalisation and Agri-Food Restructuring: Perspectives from the Australasia Region (D. Burch, R. Rickson and G. Lawrence, eds), pp. 251270. Aldershot: Avebury. Pretty, J. (1998). The Living Land. London: Earthscan. Pritchard, W. (1999). Local and global in cyberspace: the geographical narratives of US food companies on the internet. Area 31, 917. Ray, C. (1998). Culture, intellectual property and territorial rural development. Sociologia Ruralis 38, 320. Riley, J. (1999). Organic scheme is second rate says soil association. Farmers Weekly 16 April, 12. Ritson, C. (1997). Marketing, agriculture and economics. Journal of Agricultural Economics 48, 279299. Ritson, C. and Kuznesof, S. (1996). The role of marketing rural food products. In The Rural Economy and the British Countryside (P. Allansan and H. Whitby, eds), pp. 99118. London: Earthscan.

213

214

A. W. Gilg and M. Battershill Ritzer, G. (1997). The McDonaldization Thesis. London: Sage. Rogers, A. (1998). Shop-keeping is a vital part of farm business. Farmers Weekly-Farmlife 23 October, 45. Rushe, D. (1999). Shopping Maul. Sunday Times: Business Focus, 25 April, p. 5. Tansey, G. and Worsley, T. (1996). The Food System. London: Earthscan. Tomalin, C. (1998). Loyalty to leominster. Town and Country Planning 67, 202203. Tovey, H. (1997). Environmentalism and rural sociology: on the organic farming movement in Ireland. Sociologia Ruralis 37, 2137. Tracy, Marchioness of Westminster (1999). Talking point. Farmers Weekly 21 May, 95. Vaudois, J. and le Mene, C. (1998). Entre protection de lenvironnement integree des teritoires ruraux: les mesures agri-environmentales dans les regions Nord-Pas-de-Calais. In Environment et Nature dans les Campagnes (N. Groix, ed.), pp. 109136. Rennes: Presses Universitaires Rennes. Wallace, I. (1992). International restructuring of the agri-food chain. In Contemporary Rural Systems in Transition (I. Bowler, C. Bryant, D. Nellis, eds), pp. 1528. Wallingford: CAB International. Watts, M. and Goodman, D. (1997). Agrarian questions: global appetite, local metabolism, culture and industry in n-de-siecle agro-food systems. In Globalising Food: Agrarian Questions and Global Restructuring (D. Goodman and M. Watts, eds), pp. 132. London: Routledge. Whatmore, S. and Thorne, L. (1997). Nourishing networks: alternative geographies of food. In Globalising Food: Agrarian Questions and Global Restructuring (D. Goodman and M. Watts, eds), pp. 287304. London: Routledge.