Spring 1996 (v8n2)
	Prospects for a sustainable agriculture in the Northeast's rural/urban fringe. Pfeffer, Max J. and Mark B. Lapping Research in Rural Sociology and Development, Volume 6:67-93. 1995 This paper critically evaluates the recent developments of sustainable agriculture at the rural/urban fringe in the Northeast U.S. From the authors' perspective, sustainability relates mainly to diversification of production, pursuit of new markets and a greater local and regional self-sufficiency in food production. The authors present specific agricultural trends for the Northeast in the 1980s and then report how farmland preservation planners see these changes playing out in the future. The authors identify some problems that must be dealt with if agriculture is to survive in the Northeast and policies that have already been implemented to address these problems. They conclude with an assessment of the possibilities for sustainable agriculture in the Northeast's rural/urban fringe. Background In response to the farm crisis of the 1980s, many farmers across the nation have begun developing alternative production systems and farm enterprises that are less dependent on the highly specialized, government-supported agricultural system. At one level, these alternative systems are more risky than conventional operations, but a greater diversity of products that take advantage of market niches and that offer premium prices helps compensate for the risks. Such strategies have been particularly successful in rural/urban fringe areas where producers have direct access to urban consumers. As a result of the successful adaptation of farmers to these new markets and the stabilization of the farmland base near some cities, say the authors, agriculture at the rural/urban fringe is becoming a dynamic sector of the economy, and in fact, may represent a "harbinger of some types of activity that will inhabit these areas in the future" (p. 70). According to the authors, the literature on rural/urban fringe agriculture consistently attributes this dynamism to the spread of residential development into agricultural areas that emerged in the 1970s. Although this phenomenon has created well-documented problems, including cropland losses, complaints about farming practices and loss of farm support businesses, residents also value local agriculture as part of the ambiance they seek. Farms that have flourished in rural/urban fringe areas have done so largely because they cater to the preferences of nearby residents. They tend to be more specialized in producing high value crops, sell more products directly to consumers, are smaller and make more efficient use of resources. Policies to support these farms have been adopted throughout the Northeast, including right-to-farm ordinances, preferential assessment of farmland, agricultural zoning and purchase of land or development rights. The authors of this paper have two primary concerns: 1) What type of agriculture do these policies aim to preserve? And 2) Will they be successful at sustaining agriculture in the Northeast urban fringe areas for years to come? Methods To address these questions, the authors used two main data sources. First, changes in northeastern agriculture were observed using county Census of Agriculture data for 1978 and 1987, the most recent information available. Metropolitan counties in 11 states (Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont) were identified using the U.S. Census Bureau designation for 1983. The second data source was a survey of professional planners currently involved in land use planning in the Northeast's rural/urban fringe. A mail survey of 259 planners working in the public sector, in private non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and as consultants to public and private agencies, was conducted in the latter half of 1992. The 210 responses returned represented an 81 percent response rate. In addition to fixed-response questions on local planning issues, respondents were asked two open-ended questions about the future of agriculture in their area. These views, along with salient agricultural changes and local farm preservation policies were then evaluated in terms of four criteria for sustainability: emphasis on production for local markets, crop diversity, maintenance of small communities, and the adoption of farming methods that minimize the disruption of ecosystems. Agricultural Trends in the Northeast's Rural/Urban Fringe Census data showed that farm numbers and farmland acres in the rural/urban fringe remained relatively stable in the 1980s, although small farms increased and middle-sized farms declined. The largest average percentage declines were in poultry and dairy farms. The largest proportional increase was in farms specializing in animal products. Data and interviews suggested horse farms were the main source of this increase. The authors suggest that the rural/urban fringe may be changing from a locus of production to one of leisure pursuits. In contrast, numbers of farms specializing in field crops, horticultural specialties and vegetables remained the same. Planners' Visions Survey results found that planners expressed positive opinions about the prospects for agriculture in their areas. The minority that had negative assessments were mostly from the New England states and felt that urban expansion and farmland conversion would continue and drive up the costs of production, making small-scale production unprofitable. These planners held out some hope for pasture-based animal production on marginal lands. Those expressing the majority opinion emphasized the importance of market opportunities associated with access to urban markets. They felt that local agriculture was competitive with other regions, given a situation where producers are treated equally in terms of various government subsidies. Most still admitted that farms directly on the urban periphery would be converted to other uses, yet they also saw urban development creating new market opportunities for produce and nursery products through local outlets. These views run counter to dominant development trends in the U.S. which have led to increasing regional concentration. Planners do not envision a type of agriculture at the rural/urban fringe that will be oriented toward self-sufficiency in food, but that will exploit diverse, lucrative specialty niche markets in the region. These markets include a variety of nontraditional commodities such as the growing ethnic demand for sheep and goat products and "boutique" farm specialties, as well as farm involvement in services such as tourism, recreation and education. These activities are expected to become an important income source and contribute to the economic development of the region. Planners expect to meet regional food demands in two ways: 1) through the strong rise in direct marketing to consumers (e.g., farm stands, U-pick operations, local farmers' markets and 2) by supplying larger regional markets in nearby large urban centers. On the other hand, planners disagree about the likely future structure of agriculture in the region. About half expect farm consolidation and the other half feel deconcentration will occur. In both cases, according to the authors, we can expect more diversification on farms as well as a more diverse farm sector within local areas. Although planners devoted much attention to the economic aspects of local agriculture, very little concern was directed toward the environment. Few thought problems such as soil erosion, pesticide drift, or water pollution would be problems in the future and that local agriculture, in general, is environmentally friendly and a preferred use of the land. They expected that local agriculture will be more important as dwindling energy supplies make local food sources more attractive to urban populations. Even though the Northeast rural/urban fringe agriculture may be important for meeting future food needs, planners identified several problems that threaten farm survival. It is most threatened by development pressures and farmland conversion to non-farm uses. Related problems include the "parcelization" of farmland as a result of poor zoning regulations, and the decreased opportunities for young people to enter farming because they can't compete with developers for valuable land. There are some policies to preserve agriculture in rural/urban fringe areas and these are strongly supported by planners. Preferential farmland tax assessment is the most common measure found in all states of the region. Purchase of development rights (PDR) programs were also fairly common (in 60 percent of the counties studied) and were enthusiastically endorsed by planners. Under PDR programs, farmers voluntarily sell their development rights and receive payment for development restrictions through public funds. Although popular, PDR programs are expensive and the demand for them often exceeds the funds available. Other policies have also been enacted to preserve farm enterprises, such as zoning for roadside stands, farmers' markets, housing for farm labor, etc. Planners indicate these policies are not as important as farmland preservation. They view farmland preservation as more of "a means to promote an orderly and efficient pattern of growth" vs. "a limit to overall growth." Conclusion From this evidence, the authors conclude that farm enterprises must increasingly orient their production toward alternative markets. Farmers in rural/urban fringe areas are successfully taking advantage of the demand for local, specialty food and farm products. The dominant sentiment from planners is that local agriculture is desirable and should be encouraged through local policies. This type of agriculture is consistent with the bioregional approach articulated by environmentalists and others, which emphasizes the consumption of food produced locally within a particular region. However, the capacity of local agriculture to sustain the natural resource base in these areas is limited in scope. Planners expect an emphasis on high value commodity production, marketed mainly to affluent consumers. Development pressures will continue to pose serious threats to farmland preservation. Given this scenario, the authors suggest that efforts are needed to intervene in land markets and to enhance the viability of existing farms. The effectiveness of these efforts hinges on three critical areas of public support: 1) the demand for regional farm products and services, 2) farmland protection, and 3) continued willingness of the public to provide financial support for acquisition of farmland. Although a strong base of support for rural/urban fringe agriculture and its products and services has been established, this trend will need to continue lest farmland preservation become narrowly defined as open space protection. The extent of the public's investment and sacrifice in an era of tight budgets will ultimately determine the future of agriculture in the northeast. For more information write to: Max Pfeffer, Dept. of Rural Sociology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853. (GWF.196) Contributed by Gail Feenstra [ Back | Search | Feedback ]