Statewide Cooperative Partnership
2022 BASELINE SURVEYS
TABLES & FIGURES: CENTRALIn 2022, the Statewide Cooperative Partnership (SCP), led by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture and University of Minnesota, surveyed producers, supply chain partners, and consumers across Minnesota to collect baseline data on the state’s local and regional markets. This document features data tables and figures from these three surveys that can be copied and pasted for use to support local and regional market development. Alt text is provided for all images. All data are available in the accompanying spreadsheet <SCP 2022 data tables & figures – central.xlsx>.
This report pertains to the Minnesota Farm Link Central region including Benton, Kandiyohi, McLeod, Meeker, Morrison, Renville, Sherburne, Stearns, Todd, and Wright Counties.
Suggested citation: Peterson, H.H. & McNichols, C. (2023). Statewide Cooperative Partnership 2022 Baseline Surveys [Data set]. Retrieved from the Data Repository for the University of Minnesota. https://doi.org/10.13020/vz18-2k54.
For more information about the Statewide Cooperative Partnership for Local and Regional Markets and the data collected, please visit: www.mda.state.mn.us/marketing/local-regional-partnership.



Table of Contents
Profile of Participating Producers - Central	6
Table 1. Comparison of SCP Producer Survey Respondents (Central) and 2017 Ag Census – Overview	6
Table 2. Comparison of SCP Producer Survey Respondents (Central) and 2017 Ag Census – Producer and Farm Characteristics	6
Table 3. Crop Sector Summary - 2022 SCP Producer Survey (Central)	7
Table 4. Livestock Inventory - 2022 SCP Producer Survey (Central)	7
Figure 1a. Farms by Acres – 2017 Ag Census (50,272 responses)	8
Figure 1b. Farms by Acres – 2022 SCP Producer Survey (Central, 65 responses)	8
Figure 2a. Farms by Value of Sales – 2017 Ag Census (68,822 responses)	9
Figure 2b. Farms by Value of Sales – 2022 SCP Producer Survey (Central, 70 responses)	9
Figure 3. Participation in USDA Census of Agriculture (Central, 67 responses)	10
Figure 4a. Race of Farm Operators – 2017 Ag Census (111,760 responses)	11
Figure 4b. Race of Farm Operators – 2022 SCP Producer Survey (Central, 60 responses)	11
Figure 5. Participation of 2022 SCP Producer Survey by County	12
Figure 6. Reasons for Farming (Central, 58 responses)	12
Profile of Participating Supply Chain Businesses - Statewide	13
Table 1. Summary - 2022 SCP Supply Chain Survey Respondents	13
Figure 1. Respondents by Number of Employees – 2022 SCP Supply Chain Survey (37 responses)	13
Figure 2. Respondents by Total Gross Sales of Food Products and Services in 2021 – 2022 SCP Supply Chain Survey (29 responses)	14
Figure 3. Types of Customers SCP Supply Chain Businesses Serve	15
Figure 4. Types of Suppliers SCP Supply Chain Businesses Use	16
Profile of Participating Consumers - Central	17
Table 1. Summary of Household Food Expenses (July – December 2022) - 2022 SCP Consumer Survey (Central, 98 responses)	17
Figure 1. Role in Minnesota Food System - 2022 SCP Consumer Survey (Central, 98 responses)	17
Figure 2. Share of Household Food Shopping - 2022 SCP Consumer Survey (Central, 98 responses)	18
Figure 3. Age of 2022 SCP Consumer Survey Respondents (Central, 98 responses) compared with 2021 American Community Survey 5-year Estimate for Minnesota	18
Figure 4. Educational Attainment of 2022 SCP Consumer Survey Respondents (Central, 98 responses) compared with 2021 American Community Survey 5-year Estimate for Minnesota	19
Figure 5. Household Income of 2022 SCP Consumer Survey Respondents (Central, 98 responses) compared with 2021 American Community Survey 5-year Estimate for Minnesota	19
Figure 6a. Race and Ethnicity – 2020 Census for Minnesota	20
Figure 6b. Race and Ethnicity – 2022 SCP Consumer Survey (Central, 98 responses)	20
Figure 7. Participation of 2022 SCP Consumer Survey by Zip Code	21
Producer Access to Land & Resources - Central	22
Table 1. Farm Characteristics by Self-Selected Farm Description (Central)	22
Table 2. Land Ownership and Financing by Self-Selected Farm Description (Central)	22
Table 3. Barriers to Financing by Self-Selected Farm Description (Central)	23
Table 4. Sources of Technical Advice by Self-Selected Farm Description (Central)	24
Figure 1. Land Ownership (Central, 64 responses)	25
Figure 2. Financing (Central, 64 responses)	25
Figure 3. Barriers to Financing (Central, 62 responses)	26
Figure 4. Sources of Technical Advice (Central, 58 responses)	26
Producer Access to Markets - Central	27
Table 1. Market Channels Used by Producers (Central, 71 responses)	27
Table 2. Sales Channel Use by Self-Selected Farm Description (Central)	27
Table 3. Barriers to Marketing by Self-Selected Farm Description (Central)	28
Figure 1. Direct To Consumer (DTC) Channels Used (Central, 58 responses)	29
Figure 2. Supply Chain Businesses Sold To (Central, 24 responses)	30
Figure 3. Community Institutions Sold To (Central, 9 responses)	30
Figure 4. Barriers to Marketing (Central, 65 responses)	31
Local Food Promotion & Minnesota GrownTM - Central	32
Figure 1. Membership Status of Producer Survey Participants (Central, 64 responses)	32
Figure 2. Reasons for Not Renewing Membership (Central, 7 responses)	32
Figure 3. Value of Membership to Farm Operation (Central, 29 responses)	33
Figure 4. Familiarity with Minnesota Grown among Consumer Survey Respondents (Central, 93 responses)	33
Figure 5. Involvement with Minnesota Grown (Central, 19 responses)	34
Figure 6. Perceived Recognition of Minnesota Grown among Customers of SCP Supply Chain Survey Respondents	34
Figure 7. Words to Describe the Minnesota Grown Logo (Central, 98 responses)	35
Figure 8. Products Seen with a Minnesota Grown Logo, July-December 2022 (Central, 98 responses)	36
Figure 9. Quality Expectations of Minnesota Grown Products	37
Food Safety - Central	38
Figure 1. Returns to Investment in On-Farm Food Safety Practices (Central, 64 responses)	38
Figure 2. Soil Amendments Used by Farms (Central)	39
Figure 3. On-Farm Use of Animals and Animal Products (Central)	40
Figure 4. Consumer Familiarity with Food Safety Terms (Central, 98 responses)	41
Figure 5. Consumer’s Perceived Food Safety Risks with Different Sources of Food (Central, 98 responses)	42
Figure 6. Consumer’s Perceived Food Safety Risks with Different Food Products (Central, 98 responses)	43
Figure 7. Consumer Opinion: How Much Regulatory Oversight Contributes to Food Safety (Central, 98 responses)	44
Consumer Market Access to Local Foods - Central	45
Figure 1. Where Food Was Purchased (July-December 2022) (Central)	45
Figure 2. Purchases of Minnesota-Origin Products (Central)	46
Figure 3. Availability of “Local” Foods (Central)	47
Figure 4. Satisfaction with Own “Local” Food Consumption (Central)	48
Figure 5. Levers of Behavioral Change (Central)	49
Figure 6. Openness to Change (Central)	50
Figure 7. Business Communication of “Localness” to Customers	51
Demand for & Expectations of Local Foods - Central	52
Figure 1. Agree or Disagree: "When Purchasing Food, I Care Where It Is Grown" (Central)	52
Figure 2. Reasons for Caring about Where Food Comes From (Central)	52
Figure 3. Definition of “Local” among Consumers (Central)	53
Figure 4. Definition of “Local” among Supply Chain Businesses	53
Figure 5. Average Percent Premium Consumers Are Willing to Pay over Products with Unknown Origins (Central)	54
Figure 6. Average Percent Premium Supply Chain Businesses Think Their Customers Are Willing to Pay for Minnesota-sourced Food Products over Price They Typically Pay	54
Figure 7. Perceived Customer Demand for Minnesota-Sourced Products (Compared to Similar Substitutes) among Supply Chain Businesses	55
Figure 8. Consumer Expectation of "Local" Food Products That Are Processed (Central)	55
Figure 9a. Perceived Comparison of “Local” Foods to Foods from Non-local Places (Central)	56
Figure 9b. Perceived Comparison of “Local” Foods to Foods from Non-local Places (Central)	56

Note: the abbreviation SCP refers to survey data collected by the Statewide Cooperative Partnership in 2022. Only items with enough responses to be reported at the regional level are included. Responses from the Supply Chain Survey are only reported at the state level due to the small number of responses.


Profile of Participating Producers - Central

Table 1. Comparison of SCP Producer Survey Respondents (Central) and 2017 Ag Census – Overview
	 
	 
	2017 Ag Census
	2022 SCP Survey (Central)
	SCP 
/Ag Census

	Number of farms (count)
	68,822
	71
	0.72%

	Land in farms (acres)
	25,516,982
	14,794
	0.16%

	 
	Total cropland (acres)
	21,786,756
	7,683
	0.11%

	 
	Permanent pasture & rangeland (acres)
	1,073,788
	7,110
	0.42%

	 
	 
	
	
	 

	 
	Average size of farms (acres)
	371
	208
	 

	 
	 
	
	
	 

	Market value of products sold ($)
	18,395,390,000
	13,300,000
	0.25%

	 
	Average per farm ($)
	267,289
	190,546
	 



Table 2. Comparison of SCP Producer Survey Respondents (Central) and 2017 Ag Census – Producer and Farm Characteristics
	 
	 
	2017 Ag Census
	2022 SCP Survey (Central)
	 
	2022 SCP Survey (Central) responses

	Producer characteristics (%)
	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	Woman
	15% - 31%*
	52%
	 
	64

	 
	Hispanic, Latinx, or of Spanish origin
	1%
	5%
	 
	64

	 
	Middle East or North African
	N/A
	0%
	 
	64

	 
	Veteran
	10%
	12%
	 
	57

	 
	New & beginning farmers (<=10 years)
	21%
	48%
	 
	71

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Farm characteristics (%)
	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	Farm organically
	1%
	17%
	 
	58

	 
	Sell directly to consumers
	5%
	82%
	 
	71

	 
	Hire farm labor
	28%
	55%
	 
	58

	 
	Farm full time
	41%
	63%
	 
	64

	 
	Produce value-added food products for human consumption
	N/A
	42%
	 
	64


*"Primary producer" vs. "All producers" (counted up to 4 operators per farm)



Table 3. Crop Sector Summary - 2022 SCP Producer Survey (Central)
	 
	Number of responses
	 
	 58

	 
	
	Avg acres/farm
	Avg number of specific crops grown on farm (#/farm)

	 
	Grain, oilseed, and other field crops
	214.9
	2.8

	 
	Fruits
	25.4
	4.9

	 
	Vegetables
	44.8
	21.6

	 
	Tree nuts and herbs
	1.0
	6.5

	 
	Nursery crops
	2.1
	1.8



Table 4. Livestock Inventory - 2022 SCP Producer Survey (Central)
	 
	 
	2022 SCP Survey (Central)
	Central
/Total SCP

	 
	Broilers and other meat-type chickens
	3,450
	22%

	 
	Cattle and calves
	2,649
	29%

	 
	   Beef 
	1,179
	17%

	 
	   Dairy
	1,470
	66%

	 
	Goats
	913
	37%

	 
	   Dairy goats
	250
	58%

	 
	   Meat goats
	663
	33%

	 
	   Other goats
	0
	0%

	 
	Hogs and pigs
	30,468
	53%

	 
	Horses and ponies
	10
	17%

	 
	Layers
	2,092
	18%

	 
	Sheep and lambs
	870
	42%

	 
	   Lamb for meat
	130
	15%

	 
	   Wool sheep
	32
	9%

	 
	   Hair sheep
	708
	84%

	 
	   Dairy sheep
	0
	0%

	 
	Turkey
	330
	55%

	 
	Geese
	63
	13%

	 
	Quail (eggs)
	30
	32%

	 
	Ducks
	195
	7%

	 
	Bison
	60
	5%

	 
	Elk
	0
	-- 

	 
	Rabbits for meat
	20
	3%

	 
	Bee colonies
	5,088
	69%

	 
	Alpaca
	20
	42%




Figure 1a. Farms by Acres – 2017 Ag Census (50,272 responses)


Figure 1b. Farms by Acres – 2022 SCP Producer Survey (Central, 65 responses)



Figure 2a. Farms by Value of Sales – 2017 Ag Census (68,822 responses)


Figure 2b. Farms by Value of Sales – 2022 SCP Producer Survey (Central, 70 responses)




Figure 3. Participation in USDA Census of Agriculture (Central, 67 responses)




Figure 4a. Race of Farm Operators – 2017 Ag Census (111,760 responses)


Figure 4b. Race of Farm Operators – 2022 SCP Producer Survey (Central, 60 responses)


Figure 5. Participation of 2022 SCP Producer Survey by County


Figure 6. Reasons for Farming (Central, 58 responses)


Profile of Participating Supply Chain Businesses - Statewide 

Table 1. Summary - 2022 SCP Supply Chain Survey Respondents
	 
	 
	Count
	Avg number of employees
	Avg total gross sales ($M)
	Avg TCOG (total cost of goods) in food category ($M)*

	Businesses that responded
	37
	80
	1.564
	2.398

	Business functions (all applicable are selected)
	 
	 
	 

	 
	Processing, food manufacturing
	15
	58
	1.179
	1.580

	 
	Distribution, wholesale, warehousing
	13
	131
	2.465
	3.280

	 
	Retail
	12
	96
	2.475
	4.071

	 
	Food service
	18
	112
	0.891
	3.223

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	(Number of usable responses
	 
	37
	29
	32)


*Avg TCOG is exceeding Avg total gross sales because responses that were only available for TCOG were large values.

Figure 1. Respondents by Number of Employees – 2022 SCP Supply Chain Survey (37 responses)



Figure 2. Respondents by Total Gross Sales of Food Products and Services in 2021 – 2022 SCP Supply Chain Survey (29 responses)




Figure 3. Types of Customers SCP Supply Chain Businesses Serve



Figure 4. Types of Suppliers SCP Supply Chain Businesses Use


 


Profile of Participating Consumers - Central

Table 1. Summary of Household Food Expenses (July – December 2022) - 2022 SCP Consumer Survey (Central, 98 responses)
	Number of responses
	98

	Food grocery expenses, avg ($/week)
	$157.94

	% respondents that acquired food through hunting, fishing, gathering, gardening, etc.
	52%

	 
	Value of food acquired through hunting, fishing, gathering, gardening, etc., avg ($/week)
	$94.90

	Non-grocery food expenses, avg ($/week)
	$81.32

	Total food expenses, avg ($/week)
	$225.35



Figure 1. Role in Minnesota Food System - 2022 SCP Consumer Survey (Central, 98 responses)



Figure 2. Share of Household Food Shopping - 2022 SCP Consumer Survey (Central, 98 responses)


Figure 3. Age of 2022 SCP Consumer Survey Respondents (Central, 98 responses) compared with 2021 American Community Survey 5-year Estimate for Minnesota





Figure 4. Educational Attainment of 2022 SCP Consumer Survey Respondents (Central, 98 responses) compared with 2021 American Community Survey 5-year Estimate for Minnesota


Figure 5. Household Income of 2022 SCP Consumer Survey Respondents (Central, 98 responses) compared with 2021 American Community Survey 5-year Estimate for Minnesota



Figure 6a. Race and Ethnicity – 2020 Census for Minnesota


Figure 6b. Race and Ethnicity – 2022 SCP Consumer Survey (Central, 98 responses)




Figure 7. Participation of 2022 SCP Consumer Survey by Zip Code


Producer Access to Land & Resources - Central

Table 1. Farm Characteristics by Self-Selected Farm Description (Central)
	 
	 
	Count
	% Responses
	Avg farm sales
	Avg crop acres
	% acres in fruit,veg,tree nuts & herbs
	% raises animals

	All SCP Respondents
	70
	100%
	 $     190,546
	110
	30%
	62%

	Self-selected Farm Descriptions
	Women-owned
	32
	46%
	 $     211,258
	133
	28%
	56%

	
	Minority-owned
	6
	9%
	 $     100,000 
	37
	5%
	33%

	
	Tribal-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A

	
	Veteran-owned
	4
	6%
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	LGBTQ+-owned
	1
	1%
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	First-generation farm
	29
	41%
	 $   162,362 
	54
	56%
	55%

	
	Multi-generation farm
	17
	24%
	 $   390,471 
	320
	22%
	82%

	
	Immigrant-owned
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	Owned by person(s) w disabilities
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	Family owned
	48
	69%
	 $   204,958 
	137
	21%
	67%

	
	Cooperative-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A



Table 2. Land Ownership and Financing by Self-Selected Farm Description (Central)
	 
	 
	Count
	% Responses
	Land ownership
	Self-finance w non-farm funds
	Self-finance w operation funds

	All SCP Respondents
	70
	100%
	86%
	63%
	59%

	Self-selected Farm Descriptions
	Women-owned
	32
	46%
	90%
	70%
	57%

	
	Minority-owned
	6
	9%
	67%
	67%
	50%

	
	Tribal-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A

	
	Veteran-owned
	4
	6%
	D
	D
	D

	
	LGBTQ+-owned
	1
	1%
	D
	D
	D

	
	First-generation farm
	29
	41%
	86%
	75%
	61%

	
	Multi-generation farm
	17
	24%
	80%
	53%
	53%

	
	Immigrant-owned
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D

	
	Owned by person(s) w disabilities
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D

	
	Family owned
	48
	69%
	86%
	60%
	67%

	
	Cooperative-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A





Table 3. Barriers to Financing by Self-Selected Farm Description (Central)
	 
	 
	Count
	% Responses
	Barrier: 
lack of info
	Barrier: logistics
	Barrier: have not faced any

	All SCP Respondents
	70
	100%
	11%
	16%
	66%

	Self-selected Farm Descriptions
	Women-owned
	32
	46%
	13%
	17%
	53%

	
	Minority-owned
	6
	9%
	50%
	67%
	33%

	
	Tribal-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A

	
	Veteran-owned
	4
	6%
	D
	D
	D

	
	LGBTQ+-owned
	1
	1%
	D
	D
	D

	
	First-generation farm
	29
	41%
	24%
	12%
	72%

	
	Multi-generation farm
	17
	24%
	6%
	6%
	71%

	
	Immigrant-owned
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D

	
	Owned by person(s) w disabilities
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D

	
	Family owned
	48
	69%
	12%
	15%
	71%

	
	Cooperative-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A





Table 4. Sources of Technical Advice by Self-Selected Farm Description (Central)
	 
	 
	Count
	% Responses
	Ask extension
	Ask MDA
	Ask other farmers

	All SCP Respondents
	70
	100%
	33%
	26%
	79%

	Self-selected Farm Descriptions
	Women-owned
	32
	46%
	36%
	18%
	71%

	
	Minority-owned
	6
	9%
	17%
	17%
	67%

	
	Tribal-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A

	
	Veteran-owned
	4
	6%
	D
	D
	D

	
	LGBTQ+-owned
	1
	1%
	D
	D
	D

	
	First-generation farm
	29
	41%
	25%
	17%
	83%

	
	Multi-generation farm
	17
	24%
	40%
	40%
	93%

	
	Immigrant-owned
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D

	
	Owned by person(s) w disabilities
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D

	
	Family owned
	48
	69%
	26%
	29%
	92%

	
	Cooperative-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A



Table 4. Continued
	 
	 
	Count
	% Responses
	Ask businesses
	Ask non-profit
	Ask Internet

	All SCP Respondents
	70
	100%
	45%
	24%
	48%

	Self-selected Farm Descriptions
	Women-owned
	32
	46%
	25%
	43%
	43%

	
	Minority-owned
	6
	9%
	33%
	17%
	17%

	
	Tribal-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A

	
	Veteran-owned
	4
	6%
	D
	D
	D

	
	LGBTQ+-owned
	1
	1%
	D
	D
	D

	
	First-generation farm
	29
	41%
	38%
	33%
	67%

	
	Multi-generation farm
	17
	24%
	60%
	27%
	53%

	
	Immigrant-owned
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D

	
	Owned by person(s) w disabilities
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D

	
	Family owned
	48
	69%
	55%
	16%
	55%

	
	Cooperative-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A





Figure 1. Land Ownership (Central, 64 responses)


Figure 2. Financing (Central, 64 responses)

Figure 3. Barriers to Financing (Central, 62 responses)

Figure 4. Sources of Technical Advice (Central, 58 responses)

Producer Access to Markets - Central

Table 1. Market Channels Used by Producers (Central, 71 responses)
	Market Channels:
	Count
	% Responses
	Avg farm sales
	Avg crop acres

	DTC (Direct-to-Consumer)
	58
	82%
	 $      174,469 
	126

	DTI (Direct-to-Institution)
	28
	39%
	 $      309,705 
	109

	Sales to supply chain businesses
	24
	34%
	 $      479,533 
	290

	Sales to community institutions
	9
	13%
	 $      477,222 
	260

	Donation
	33
	46%
	 $      261,470 
	164



Table 2. Sales Channel Use by Self-Selected Farm Description (Central)
	 
	 
	Count
	% Responses
	Avg DTC share
	Avg DTI share
	Avg sales to supply chain share
	Avg sales to commu-nity
	Avg donation share

	All SCP Respondents
	70
	100%
	59%
	11%
	19%
	2%
	2%

	Self-selected Farm Descriptions
	Women-owned
	32
	46%
	67%
	12%
	14%
	1%
	3%

	
	Minority-owned
	6
	9%
	45%
	13%
	11%
	14%
	1%

	
	Tribal-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A

	
	Veteran-owned
	4
	6%
	D
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	LGBTQ+-owned
	1
	1%
	D
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	First-generation farm
	29
	41%
	69%
	9%
	15%
	2%
	2%

	
	Multi-generation farm
	17
	24%
	49%
	11%
	31%
	2%
	1%

	
	Immigrant-owned
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	Owned by person(s) w disabilities
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	Family owned
	48
	69%
	60%
	8%
	22%
	1%
	1%

	
	Cooperative-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A

	
	
	
	
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	
	Minnesota Grown member
	29
	34%
	65%
	13%
	15%
	1%
	24%





Table 3. Barriers to Marketing by Self-Selected Farm Description (Central)
	 
	 
	Count
	% Responses
	Barrier: lack of processing
	Barrier: packing require-ment
	Barrier: trans-portation
/delivery logistic
	Barrier: price below cost

	All SCP Respondents
	70
	100%
	22%
	15%
	29%
	26%

	Self-selected Farm Descriptions
	Women-owned
	32
	46%
	23%
	13%
	33%
	27%

	
	Minority-owned
	6
	9%
	17%
	33%
	33%
	67%

	
	Tribal-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A

	
	Veteran-owned
	4
	6%
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	LGBTQ+-owned
	1
	1%
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	First-generation farm
	29
	41%
	24%
	28%
	40%
	36%

	
	Multi-generation farm
	17
	24%
	35%
	18%
	35%
	24%

	
	Immigrant-owned
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	Owned by person(s) w disabilities
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	Family owned
	48
	69%
	21%
	12%
	35%
	23%

	
	Cooperative-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A

	
	
	
	
	 
	 
	 
	 

	
	Minnesota Grown member
	29
	34%
	17%
	13%
	33%
	29%



Table 3. Continued
	 
	 
	Count
	% Responses
	Barrier: buyer won't take enough volume
	Barrier: not enough volume
	Barrier: certifica-tion require-ments
	Barrier: can't find qualified labor

	All SCP Respondents
	70
	100%
	12%
	18%
	6%
	15%

	Self-selected Farm Descriptions
	Women-owned
	32
	46%
	13%
	33%
	7%
	20%

	
	Minority-owned
	6
	9%
	33%
	0%
	17%
	33%

	
	Tribal-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A

	
	Veteran-owned
	4
	6%
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	LGBTQ+-owned
	1
	1%
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	First-generation farm
	29
	41%
	12%
	32%
	12%
	8%

	
	Multi-generation farm
	17
	24%
	18%
	6%
	6%
	24%

	
	Immigrant-owned
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	Owned by person(s) w disabilities
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	Family owned
	48
	69%
	14%
	14%
	7%
	14%

	
	Cooperative-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A

	
	
	
	
	 
	 
	 
	 

	
	Minnesota Grown member
	29
	34%
	8%
	29%
	0%
	29%





Table 3. Continued
	 
	 
	Count
	% Responses
	Barrier: finding buyers
	Barrier: meeting food safety
	Barrier: racism/ discrimi-nation
	Barrier: language/ commu-nication

	All SCP Respondents
	70
	100%
	42%
	6%
	2%
	8%

	Self-selected Farm Descriptions
	Women-owned
	32
	46%
	53%
	0%
	3%
	10%

	
	Minority-owned
	6
	9%
	67%
	17%
	0%
	50%

	
	Tribal-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A

	
	Veteran-owned
	4
	6%
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	LGBTQ+-owned
	1
	1%
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	First-generation farm
	29
	41%
	56%
	4%
	4%
	16%

	
	Multi-generation farm
	17
	24%
	53%
	0%
	0%
	6%

	
	Immigrant-owned
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	Owned by person(s) w disabilities
	2
	3%
	D
	D
	D
	D

	
	Family owned
	48
	69%
	44%
	7%
	0%
	7%

	
	Cooperative-owned
	0
	0%
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A
	N/A

	
	
	
	
	 
	 
	 
	 

	
	Minnesota Grown member
	24
	34%
	42%
	0%
	0%
	4%



Figure 1. Direct To Consumer (DTC) Channels Used (Central, 58 responses)




Figure 2. Supply Chain Businesses Sold To (Central, 24 responses)


Figure 3. Community Institutions Sold To (Central, 9 responses)




Figure 4. Barriers to Marketing (Central, 65 responses) 





Local Food Promotion & Minnesota GrownTM - Central 

Figure 1. Membership Status of Producer Survey Participants (Central, 64 responses)


Figure 2. Reasons for Not Renewing Membership (Central, 7 responses)




Figure 3. Value of Membership to Farm Operation (Central, 29 responses)


Figure 4. Familiarity with Minnesota Grown among Consumer Survey Respondents (Central, 93 responses)



Figure 5. Involvement with Minnesota Grown (Central, 19 responses)


Figure 6. Perceived Recognition of Minnesota Grown among Customers of SCP Supply Chain Survey Respondents



Figure 7. Words to Describe the Minnesota Grown Logo (Central, 98 responses) 



Figure 8. Products Seen with a Minnesota Grown Logo, July-December 2022 (Central, 98 responses)




Figure 9. Quality Expectations of Minnesota Grown Products




Food Safety - Central

Figure 1. Returns to Investment in On-Farm Food Safety Practices (Central, 64 responses)



Figure 2. Soil Amendments Used by Farms (Central)



Figure 3. On-Farm Use of Animals and Animal Products (Central)



Figure 4. Consumer Familiarity with Food Safety Terms (Central, 98 responses)



Figure 5. Consumer’s Perceived Food Safety Risks with Different Sources of Food (Central, 98 responses)




Figure 6. Consumer’s Perceived Food Safety Risks with Different Food Products (Central, 98 responses)



Figure 7. Consumer Opinion: How Much Regulatory Oversight Contributes to Food Safety (Central, 98 responses)




Consumer Market Access to Local Foods - Central

Figure 1. Where Food Was Purchased (July-December 2022) (Central)


Figure 2. Purchases of Minnesota-Origin Products (Central)



Figure 3. Availability of “Local” Foods (Central)



Figure 4. Satisfaction with Own “Local” Food Consumption (Central)



Figure 5. Levers of Behavioral Change (Central)


Figure 6. Openness to Change (Central)



Figure 7. Business Communication of “Localness” to Customers


Demand for & Expectations of Local Foods - Central

Figure 1. Agree or Disagree: "When Purchasing Food, I Care Where It Is Grown" (Central)


Figure 2. Reasons for Caring about Where Food Comes From (Central)

Figure 3. Definition of “Local” among Consumers (Central)


Figure 4. Definition of “Local” among Supply Chain Businesses 



Figure 5. Average Percent Premium Consumers Are Willing to Pay over Products with Unknown Origins (Central)


Figure 6. Average Percent Premium Supply Chain Businesses Think Their Customers Are Willing to Pay for Minnesota-sourced Food Products over Price They Typically Pay



Figure 7. Perceived Customer Demand for Minnesota-Sourced Products (Compared to Similar Substitutes) among Supply Chain Businesses 


Figure 8. Consumer Expectation of "Local" Food Products That Are Processed (Central)



Figure 9a. Perceived Comparison of “Local” Foods to Foods from Non-local Places (Central)


Figure 9b. Perceived Comparison of “Local” Foods to Foods from Non-local Places (Central)

2

image4.png

image5.png

image6.png

image7.png

image8.png

image9.emf

image10.png

image11.png

image12.png

image13.png

image14.png

image15.png

image16.svg
             I reside &   regularly shop for   food in   Minnesota  100%  I reside in   Minnesota but   regularly shop for   food elsewhere  0%  I reside   elsewhere but   regularly shop for   food in   Minnesota  0%  Role in Minnesota Food System   (Central, 98 responses) 


image17.png

image18.svg
              More than half  19%  About half  78%  Less than half  3%  Share of Household Food Shopping   (Central, 98 responses) 


image19.png

image20.png

image21.png

image22.png

image23.png

image24.emf

image25.png

image26.png

image27.png

image28.png

image29.png

image30.png

image31.png

image32.png

image33.png

image34.svg
                     Yes, current   member  45%  Yes, organization   is member  8%  Not now but was   previously  11%  No, I am not a   member  23%  No, don't know what   MN Grown is  13%  Membership Status of Producer Survey   Participants (Central, 64 responses) 


image35.png

image36.png

image37.png

image38.png

image39.png

image40.png

image41.png

image42.emf

image43.png

image44.png

image45.png

image46.png

image47.png

image48.png

image49.png

image50.png

image51.png

image52.png

image53.png

image54.png

image55.png

image56.png

image57.png

image58.png

image59.png

image60.png

image61.png

image62.png

image63.png

image1.jpg

image64.png

image65.png

image66.png

image2.png

image3.png