Thinking about how Farmers' Markets are organized . . .
Dependent Markets vs. Independent Markets
by Tom Roberts, February 2004
Consider for a moment the way farmers' markets are organized. Not whether or how they
are incorporated, not how many or what kind of members they have, but rather how and
whether the membership is involved in the management of the business of being a farmers'
market.
There seems to be two general categories: those that are sponsored by separate
organization and those that are self-organized. The first category I will refer to as
"Dependent Markets" and the second as "Independent Markets".
Dependent Markets
Many farmers' markets exist only because they have been created by another
organization, either a non-profit, a town, or even a business. Generally the call goes
out to farmers to come join the market, sometimes with a meeting of farmers beforehand
to determine opening & closing dates, general setup and to determine what kind of
vendors are interested in attending the market.
Some Dependent markets have their own bank account and collect dues directly from the
market members. Sometimes expenses are covered by the sponsoring organization, so there
are few market expenses and dues are kept low. Other markets pay dues directly to the
sponsoring organization which then covers market expenses.
A market manager is often hired by and is an employee of the sponsoring organization.
The market manager takes into account the interests of the sponsoring organization as
well as the market members when making decisions about the market, and when there is a
conflict, the sponsoring organization's interests tend to take precedence.
Although the individual market members benefit from attending the market, the purpose
of the market is to fulfill an objective of the sponsoring organization. Presumably
there is a close match between the interests of the sponsoring organization and the
interests of the market members, but the two drives have their origins in different
places. The former is (depending upon the organization) to promote local agriculture,
promote use of the area in town where the market meets, promote the specific location
where the market meets, or to otherwise fulfill the organization's goals. The interest
of the market members arise almost solely from the need to make a livlihood.
Although these two interests can align nicely, there are several instances where they
might not. Here are several examples. While trying to support local agriculture, the
sponsoring organization might want to have as complete a line of locally grown produce
as possible, to the point of allowing members (or non-members) to send local produce to
the market. Sometimes these can be the same items that members are already bringing to
market, although what may be perceived as in insufficient quantity. This is akin to the
question "Who is the market for, the shoppers or the members?" In other words
should the market be driven by altruism or by self-interest? Since the sponsor may be
interested in serving a non-farmer constituency, it may come down on the side of
altruism, expecting the market to be organized primarily for the shoppers. For the
sponsor, market members are a means to an end.
Another example is when the sponsoring organization's interest is to have the market
set up in a particular location to attract shoppers, yet the market members may believe
that another location would be better for business. For the members to move would mean
they would lose the organizational cocoon they have become dependent upon. They would
have to do more for their market themselves.
Diversions of interests often mean that the sponsoring organization has its way, and
the market members have to go along with it because they are dependent upon their
sponsor for so much. Members are lead to believe they are fortunate to be allowed to be
a member of the market, and they are told that the interests of the sponsor are their
interests, too.
Since it is important to the sponsoring organization for the market to be successful,
promotion of the market is often undertaken by the sponsor and not by any organization
of the market members themselves. Whether from grants or not, the sponsor often has far
deeper pockets than the market, so promotions generally occur at a level of expense the
market could not itself bear, regardless of their effectiveness.
Independent Markets
Independent markets exist because a group of farmers got together to create a market,
based on their individual self-interests. They are organized and managed by the members,
and the ongoing existance and success of the market is solely dependent upon the market
membership itself.
Sometimes groups of farmers are invited by a landlord or a town to come set up a
market at a particular location. There may also be restraints within which the market
must operate, such as not allowing crafts in the parking lot of an auditorium that also
has craft shows inside. However, beyond these restrictions, the market is free to
operate as it wishes, to set its dues and membership requirements as the members see
fit. The landlord is clearly not a sponsor and has no role in the management of the
market.
Conflicts in interests are confined to differences in interests among members, all of
whom are looking to maximize their profitability at market. Participation at market is
generally a prerequisite to selling items at market, as is selling only what has been
produced by the member.
The old question of "Who is the market organized for, the shoppers or the
members?" is almost always resolved in favor of the members. If the market isn't
working for the members, they won't keep attending. Shoppers needs and preferences are
catered to with unending subservience by the big retailers, and no market is ever going
to be successful compete with the big retailers on treating the shoppers as a mass
market.
Promotion of the market is generally discussed at membership meetings in great
detail, for it is their own meager funds they are spending. Effectiveness per dollar
spent tends to be greater, although mistakes can be made when the membership is
influenced by media professionals with high priced promotional packages to sell. But
this is self-correcting, as future membership meetings decide high profile, low
effectiveness promotions are not worth it.
Market members each operate their own business. Additionally, there is the business
of the farmers' market itself, sort of a "meta-business" that, in independent
markets, requires the attention of at least some of the membership to manage properly.
The management of that level of business is qualitatively different than that of any of
the members and needs to include and merge the interests of all of the members'
businesses.
There are many models for dealing with this higher level of business that the market
represents, ranging from autocracy (where the officers manage the market as though it
were there own business) to democracy (where all of the members have a hand in managing
the market).
The autocratic model is often adopted where market organizers "do it all"
in an effort to get things done "efficiently". Members in an autocratic market
have it easy in that they are not called upon to do anything besides show up and sell,
but they often have problems with the way the market is run, which they feel they have
no say in, regardless of any structures dictated in the by-laws.
The autocratic model has much in common with the way dependent markets are
organized, but they come about for different reasons. In dependent markets, the sponsor
often has overriding say in how things are done because the market must fit in with the
sponsor's goals. In independent markets, autocracy arises because of the impatience or
lack of skill in duty-sharing on the part of some of the more active members. Often in
autocratic independent markets there is a tension between the leaders (who feel that
"no one ever helps out") and the membership (who feel the market is run
without their input.) This tension may last for years, but it is a weakness in the
market that eventually will be addressed, sooner or later, for better or for worse.
The democratic model requires market members to come to terms with the needs of the
market as a whole, and hence with the needs of the other members. Although no market can
be expected to be a "perfect democracy", democratically managed markets do
require more of members than just attending to their own businesses. Because
attentiveness to the needs of all members is required of each member, a commitment
arises to the community of farmers, bakers and crafters who make up the market. Members
make decisions on the basis of "what's good for the whole market" rather than
only what's good for their own stand. Internal difficulties get resolved because
everyone is working together to make the market work, and working together develops
trust.
Therefore, what seems to be the ideal way to organize a farmers' market is to strive
for democratically controlled independent markets. At a market's founding, there often
needs to be considerable learning among the new membership about how to work together
for a goal greater than their individual businesses, plus the skills of whole market
promotion, management of a common treasury, and general management of a multi-member
business. It helps to have several members who have attended democratically operated
markets to show how things can be done.
What it comes down to is creating a model whereby people learn to do things for
themselves versus a model where they expect to be reliant upon an institution with
hopefully benevolent motivations. How we go about developing markets in the near and far
future shapes not only local agriculture, but our whole society.
Comments and feedback to the
author are appreciated.
|