NAFSN 2012-2019 Food System Development Practitioner Survey Reportpdf
NAFSN 2012-2019 Food System Development Practitioner Survey Reportpdf
Page 1 of 290
Amy Christian shared this file. Want to do more with it?
  1. Trends in the Food Systems Development Professionin the US and Canada: A Comparison of 2012 and 2019SummaryThe Food Systems Development Survey is conducted periodically by the Thomas A. Lyson Center for Civic Agriculture and Food Systems on behalf ofthe North American Food Systems Network1(NAFSN). We conducted the baseline survey in 2012 (N=1,321),and in the spring of 2019 (N=654). Resultspresented in this report thus provide a first look at trendsin the professional development needs of food systems practitioners.One of the big questions regardingfood system development is: “What are the challenges and training needs of current and prospective food system development practitionersover time?” NAFSN believes that improved knowledge and skills of practitioners are likely to lead to more effective and efficient programs, and ultimately to more resilient food systems.While Cooperative Extension and other national nonprofits and agencieshave been practicing food system development for a long time,for many organizations and their staff or volunteers,this is new territory. In addition, much of the current focus in this emerging field lacks established foundations for practice. Out of this,we are identifying an emerging need for the kind of information, training opportunities, and networking that enable food system development practitioners to be effective in the important work of building and strengthening local and regional food systems.Key Findingsof 2019 Results Compared to the 2012 Baseline•Working with socially disadvantaged groups is now the #1 training needreported by professionals. Food hubs and value-adding strategies were tied for second in 2019.•Racial and cultural dividesand addressing the underlying causes of problemsas opposed to symptoms of problemsrose significantly as perceived challenges between 2012 and 2019.1NAFSN’s founding partners include American Farmland Trust, Black Urban Growers, Center for Environmental Farming Systems (North Carolina State Universityand NC A&T University), Center for Regional Food Systems (Michigan State University), Community, Local & Regional Food Systems Community of Practice (CLRFS CoP), Farms to Grow, Inc., Food Systems Planning and Healthy Communities Lab (SUNYBuffalo),Institute for Sustainable Food Systems(Kwantlen Polytechnic University), Iowa State University, Lyson Center for Civic Agriculture and Food Systems, National Association of Community Development Extension Professionals, Sustainable Agriculture Educators Association (SAEA), Food Systems (University of Vermont). More information about NAFSN can be found in theNAFSN White Paper(https://www.dropbox.com/s/i976xwjptsm6b53/NAFSN%20White%20Paperv8PDF.pdf?dl=0)
  2. •While economic impact and project benchmarkingcontinue to be the top technical skills training in demand,the level of interest in food system mapping (GIS), asset mapping, and shareholder engagement of disenfranchised groups rose in 2019.•Interest in networking with professionals within their specific technical field continues to be the top professional development opportunity. However, in 2019, online training, an online portal with distance learning, and a food systems development certification program grew in interest, while more conventional training opportunities like conferences, live scheduled programs (e.g., webinars), and e-newsletters declined somewhat.•In 2019, larger shares of respondents desired increased funding, salary, benefits, and better utilization of their food systems expertise.•More respondents are staff of nonprofits, institutions, and public agenciesin 2019.•More respondents report working full-timein 2019.•The share of respondents reporting more than 10 years of experience rose dramatically.•Highly educated white women continue to dominate the professionin 2019.•Respondents are increasingly focused on larger geographic scales.•The primary foci of food system development professionals continue to be related to fostering knowledge, vision, and/or leadership, and increasing food securityand access to healthy food.•Two-thirds of respondents consider themselves to be food justice activists. Of these,about the same percentage expressed interest in participating in a paid leave-of-absence program for food justice activists. •Interest in joining NASFN generally remains high, with only 5% of respondents in 2019 indicating no interest in joining NAFSN.Overall, these data from the two surveys indicate there are some positive trends in food systems development work as a profession, including growing career opportunities (as evidenced by respondents’ increasing hours and full-time employment). It should benoted, however, that the baseline survey was conducted at the end of the “Great Recession,” when funding was more difficult to secure. In any case, our results suggest that food systems development work is still a fragile occupation, with respondents expressing vulnerability to the economy, dependence on grants, and having to respond to what is sometimes viewed as the less-informed whims of employers and funders. Coupled with these concerns is an increased demand for more convenient, self-paced training and professional development.MethodsIn consultation with agroup of national agriculture and food system development leadersin 2012,the Lyson Center for Civic Agriculture and Food Systemsdeveloped aquestionnaire todiscern the key needs of food systemdevelopmentprofessionals. The 2012 survey was put into SurveyMonkey and beta tested, edited, and tested asecond time. The survey was translated into French (forQuebec respondents) and tested. Both surveys wereanonymous unless the respondent chosesto sharetheircontact information.
  3. For the purposes of the surveyswe defined a“food system development practitioner"asanyonewho,“as a significant portion of their work, uses communitydevelopment strategies in workingwith farmers, business people, government agency staff, local residents, or other persons orentities to create or strengthen the viability, equity, and sustainability of food systems.” Thisdefinitionincludes paid staff,consultants, volunteers, and activists working in the fieldofagriculture and other kinds of food production, processing, distributing, marketing, andretailing, as well asfood securityand food waste management.In both years werecruited participants through anannouncementwith links to the survey posted severaltimes on major national listservs,includingNAFSN, COMFOOD, SANET, FOOD PLANNING, URBANAG, and others. However,it should be noted that,due to a lack of resources,the Quebecoise version of the survey was not implemented in 2019, and our outreach to national organizations to spread the announcement of the survey was very limited. We believe these limitations explain, in part,the lower response levelin 2019 than in 2012.Still, we are confident that we received enough responses in both years to discern general issues and trends.ResultsFood Systems Development EmploymentWe are interested in seeing how the occupation of food systems development professional is changing over time. We therefore asked questions about types of employers, hours of work per week, length of employment (tenure), and geographic area of work.Occupation ClassificationNonprofit organizations, institutions, and public agencies continue to be the primary employersof food systems development professionals (see Figure 1). However, the share of those reporting they are the staff of nonprofit organizations increase significantly between 2012 and 2019, from 30% to 38% of respondents. Figure1. Which ONE of the following best describes your current food system development situation?(2012 N=1,216; 2019 N=623)
  4. Level of EmploymentWe were interested in seeing much time professionals spend on food systems development (see Figure 2).Figure 2. About how many hours per week do you currently spend on food system development work?(2012 N=1,216;2019 N=623)The share reporting 1to 10 hours declined over time,while the share reporting 31 or more hours increasedsignificantly, from 37% in 2012 to 45% in 2019.Length of Tenure as a Food Systems Development ProfessionalWe are also interested in whether food systems development work is providing career opportunities as evidenced by trends in the length of time professionals report being in food systems work. Figure 3 shows that the share of respondents with three or fewer years of work in the field is in decline, while the share with four years or greater experience grew significantly.Figure 3. How long have you been doing food system development work?(2012 N=1,216;2019 N=623)Geographic Area Working InFigure 4 shows that mostrespondents work in cities and/or rural areas. However, food system development professionals are increasingly working in a greater range of geographic areas, perhaps suggesting that they are increasingly engaged in projects that link producers and consumersacross geographies.Haven't started yetLess than one year1 to 3 years4 to 10 yearsMore than 10years20121%8%29%36%25%20190%4%20%39%36%1%8%29%36%25%0%4%20%39%36%0%10%20%30%40%50%
  5. Figure 4. Check the boxes of the geographic area(s) you work in.(2012 N=1,216;2019 N=623)Food System Development Issues Worked OnFood system development practitioners address a wide range of issues spanning the three principle domains of the food system: production, distribution, and consumption. We want to see how the focus of these professionals changes over time.Over the 7-yearperiod, the percentof issue focus and the rank order of focus stayed remarkably stable (see Figure 5).Figure 5. Please select the PRIMARY issues on which you personally work. You may choose more than one.(2012 N=1,216;2019 N=623)Training Needs We want to know more specifically about thetraining needs of professionals over time.Both the percentage and rank order of training needs changed somewhat between 2012 and 2019 (see Figure 6). While training in working with socially disadvantaged groups climbed to the #1 spot in 2019, Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) declined steeply. Marketing and value-adding continue to be among the top training needs identified. We did not ask about food hubs in 2012, but the level of training interest ranks it near the top in 2019.
  6. Figure 6. Select all of the food system development activities that you feel you need additional trainingin.(2012 N=1,188;2019 N=609)Current Challenges FacedOrganizations working in challenged communities often experience challenges themselves. To develop training that helps build organizational capacity, we want to know more about the challenges organizations face(see Figure 7).The percentage of respondents addressing racial and cultural divides and the underlying causes of problems rose significantly between 2012 and 2019. Figure 7. Select all of the CHALLENGES your project, program, organization, or business faces at this time. (2012 N=1,154;2019 N=598)Changes DesiredWe also want toknow more about what changes in the respondents’current work or situation would improve their personal and professional satisfaction. This information is helpful in developing training programs that address concerns for personal and professional growth.Between 2012 and 2019,larger shares of respondents desired increased funding, increased salary, expanded benefits, and better utilization of their food systems expertise (see Figure 8).
  7. Figure 8. Percentage of respondents who indicated they desired moderate to significant change in their current work situation.(2012 N=1,113;2019 N=579)Technical Skills Training DesiredIn addition to the training needs identifiedinFigure 6, we wantto know more about the technical training needs respondentsneed to become highly skilled food system development practitioners(see Figure 9). Figure 9. Select the technical skillsyou believe you need training in.(2012 N=1,089;2019 N=563)While economic impact and project benchmarking continue to be the top technical skills training in demand,the level of interest in food system mapping (GIS), asset mapping, and shareholder engagement of disenfranchised groupsrose.Professional Development Needs and InterestsWe wanted to get a sense of how professionalslike to receive training and share knowledge(see Figure 10).
  8. Figure 10. Select the following professional development forums and opportunities you would likely participate in if they became available. (2012 N=1,098;2019 N=567)Interest in networking with professionals within theirspecific technical field continues to be the top professional development opportunity. However, online training, an online portal with distance learning, and a food systems development certification program grew in interest, while more conventional training opportunities like conferences, live scheduled programs,and e-newsletters declined a little.Interest in Paid Leave-of-Absence (Sabbatical)ProgramIn the 2019 survey (but not in the 2012 survey),we askedif foodsystems development professionals who considered themselves food justice activistsmight be interested in a paid leave-of-absence (sabbatical) program.This program, proposed by Christine Porter of the University of Wyoming,would allow participating activists to participate in professional development activities such as writing and publishing reflective essays,program materials, guides, and strategic plans.Two-thirds of respondents consider themselves to be food justice activists (see Figure 11). Of these,about the same percentage expressed interest in participating in a paid leave-of-absence program for food justice activists (see Figure 12). Figure 11. Do you consider yourself a food justice activist? That is, someone who works on issues related to racial equity and inclusion?(N=553)Yes66.73%No33.27%
  9. Figure 12. As a food justice activist, would you be interested in a paid leave-of-absence program (sabbatical) that includes support in documenting your front-line expertise and knowledge?(N=388)Yes65.72%No34.28%Of course, taking a leave could be disruptive or inconvenient,and so we asked respondents to comment on what their organization would need to support their sabbatical(see Figure 13).Money to support the sabbatical, replacement staff, training, and time were the top needs reported. Figure 13. Please describe what you and (if relevant) your organization would need for you to succeed in creating knowledge products (e.g., papers, videos, guides) while taking a break from front-line work.Feel free to add any additional comments or questions.(N=157)Interest in Joining NAFSNNAFSN’s mission is to support the development of food systems development professionalsby helping coordinatenew and existing programs and services around North America toclosetraining gaps in professional development, maximize impact, and minimize redundancy and waste of resources.Interest in NASFN remains high, with 95% of respondents interested in NAFSN or already a member (see Figure 14).Response CodesNo.PercentMoney = 494931%Staffing (Fill missing roles and replace other areas of work) = 333321%Training (Support organization with guidance in creating knowledge products) = 21 2113%Time = 181811%Network (Community of practitioners to start discussion on what's been done, what needs to be done, and how these resources can be best delivered) = 14149%Resources (Technical equipment to streamine information, produce videos, distribute content, etc.) = 11117%"I don't know" = 11117%Totalling 89 "other" reponses157
  10. Figure 14. Which of the following best represents your interest in joining NAFSN?(2012 N=1,090;2019 N=556)Demographics of RespondentsTo better design and target potential programs, we want to know more about the demographics of food system development professionals. The percentage and rank order of racial and ethnic categoriesin 2019remainsabout the same as in 2012(see Figure 15). Figure 15. How do you identify your race or ethnicity?(2012 N=1,075;2019 N=554)Similarly, the gender distribution of respondents remained the samebetween 2012 and 2019 (see Figure 16).I'm veryinterested.I'm already amember :-)Maybe (pleaseexplain in boxbelow).Not interested(please explainin box below).201254%0%39%6%201938%12%45%5%54%0%39%6%38%12%45%5%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%
  11. Figure 16. Please tell us your gender.(2012 N=1,080;2019 N=550)There appears to be a modest correlation between the number of respondents by state and state population, with California, New York, and Illinois being in the top 10(see Figure 17). However, the highest share of respondents (10%) in 2012hailed from the state of Michigan,whileMinnesota generated the most respondents in 2019(11%).Figure 17. What State or Province are you located in?(2012 N=1,080;2019 N=555)State or Province20122019MI10%5%CA8%5%WI7%3%NY6%6%IL5%3%NC4%4%MA4%3%Ontario4%2%VT3%1%WA3%3%British Columbia3%5%Other (please specify)3%3%OR2%2%PA2%4%VA2%3%WY2%1%IA2%1%MN2%11%MD1%1%FL1%2%MO1%2%NV1%0%UT1%1%CT1%1%IN1%2%OH1%2%CO1%1%TX1%1%AL1%0%KY1%1%NH1%1%NM1%0%AZ1%3%FemaleMalePrefer not to say201273%24%3%201973%24%3%73%24%3%73%24%3%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%
  12. GA1%0%ME1%1%LA1%1%Yukon1%0%AR1%0%NJ1%1%SC1%0%TN1%0%Manitoba1%0%Newfoundland/Labrador1%0%OK0%1%RI0%0%WV0%1%Saskatchewan0%0%ID0%2%MS0%0%MT0%0%Wash. D.C.0%2%AK0%1%HI0%1%KS0%1%ND0%0%U.S. Territories0%0%Quebec0%0%SD0%0%Nova Scotia0%1%Prince Edward Island0%0%DE0%0%NE0%1%Puerto Rico0%0%Alberta0%1%New Brunswick0%0%Northwest Territories0%0%Nunavut Territory0%0%Food systems development professionals are highly educated overall, with a growing share of respondents reporting receiving a master’s degree(see Figure 18). Of course, it is possible that professionals with higher degrees are more likely to respond to our surveys.Figure 18. What is your educational attainment?(2012 N=1,079;2019 N=552)Additional CommentsFinally, we offered an open space in the survey for respondents to share their thoughts. We coded these responses into several categories(see Figure 20). Beyond appreciation for the opportunity to participate in the surveyand concerns about wording of some questions (e.g., Less thanhigh schooldegreeHigh schoolgraduate(includingGED orequivalent)SomecollegeAssociatesdegreeBachelorsdegreeMastersdegreeDoctorateorprofessional degreeOther(pleasespecify)20120%1%5%1%33%43%14%4%20190%0%5%3%30%48%13%2%0%1%5%1%33%43%14%4%0%0%5%3%30%48%13%2%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%
We use cookies to provide, improve, protect and promote our services. Visit our Privacy Policy and Privacy Policy FAQs to learn more. You can manage your personal preferences, including your ‘Do not sell or share my personal data to third parties’ setting using the “Customize cookies” button below.