This article was downloaded by: [Univ of Salford]On: 25 April 2013, At: 12:55Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Marketing ManagementPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjmm20

Thinking locally, acting locally?Conscious consumers and farmers’marketsMorven G. McEachern a , Gary Warnaby b , Marylyn Carrigan c &Isabelle Szmigin da Lancaster University Management School, UKb University of Liverpool, UKc Open University, UKd University of Birmingham, UKVersion of record first published: 03 Feb 2010.

To cite this article: Morven G. McEachern , Gary Warnaby , Marylyn Carrigan & Isabelle Szmigin(2010): Thinking locally, acting locally? Conscious consumers and farmers’ markets, Journal ofMarketing Management, 26:5-6, 395-412

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02672570903512494

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representationthat the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of anyinstructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primarysources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Thinking locally, acting locally? Conscious consumersand farmers’ markets

Morven G. McEachern, Lancaster University Management School, UKGary Warnaby, University of Liverpool, UKMarylyn Carrigan, Open University, UKIsabelle Szmigin, University of Birmingham, UK

Abstract The emergence of a more reflexive and discerning customer hascreated inter alia a demand for ‘better’ food (i.e. quality and ‘authenticity’) interms of sourcing, processing, and specialist distribution/retailing. As aconsequence, the food production/distribution industry is under pressure tochange many of its practices. One manifestation is the emergence of farmers’markets and the associated emphasis on ‘local’ food. This paper aims to identifythe extent to which ‘conscious’ consumers are committed to buying localfoodstuffs and supporting local food producers, especially from farmers’markets. Given the exploratory nature of this research, a qualitative approachwas undertaken using in-depth interviews with ‘conscious’ consumers. Theresults reveal that ‘conscious’ consumers recognise their own limitations(i.e. time, convenience, and price) but also demonstrate that integrating ethicalconsiderations into their consumption behaviour is a complex and flexible task.A number of strategic actions for farmers’ markets are proposed to helpdifferentiate their provision, particularly in terms of capitalising on perceptionsof authenticity and locality.

Keywords farmers’ markets; conscious consumers; local; flexibility ofconsumption; ethics

Introduction

The recent development of farmers’ markets and the associated emphasis on ‘local food’has, according to Morris and Buller (2003, p. 560), arisen from ‘a complex combinationof political, economic and socio-cultural conditions’. A consequence of this has been ‘areaction, by producers and consumers alike, to the standardised and mass-producedfood products of the globalised food economy, typically associated with trans-nationalfood processing and retail companies, in which ever greater distances (anddisconnection) have been created between the production and consumption of food’(see also Holloway & Kneafsey, 2000). More specifically, a succession of crises in theagricultural sector, such as BSE and Foot and Mouth Disease, have increased consumer

ISSN 0267-257X print/ISSN 1472-1376 online

# 2010 Westburn Publishers Ltd.

DOI: 10.1080/02672570903512494

http://www.informaworld.com

Journal of Marketing ManagementVol. 26, Nos. 5–6, May 2010, 395–412

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013

fears relating to food quality and safety (McEachern & Warnaby, 2005). This has led toreduced confidence in a food system where increasing concentration in food-processingactivities ‘has enabled those who transform and sell the processed food product tocapture most of the value of rural produce’ (La Trobe, 2001, p. 182). The emergenceof a more reflexive and discerning customer (Morris & Buller, 2003) has also created ademand for better food – Guthrie, Guthrie, Lawson, and Cameron (2006, p. 560)mention a shift in emphasis from synthetic to authentic food, reflecting a ‘greaterwillingness to move from conspicuous consumption to conscious consumption’.Although all forms of consumption are regarded as value-laden activities (Miller,1998), conscious consumers are one neo-tribe that demonstrate higher levels ofconcern about ‘industrialised forms of food provisioning’ and knowledge of the‘socio-economic benefits in buying local’ (Weatherell, Tregear, & Allinson, 2003, p.234), but may not be as strident in their espousal of these issues as more committed‘ethical’ consumers. Consequently, this paper aims to identify the extent to whichconscious consumers are committed to buying local foodstuffs and supporting localfood producers, the concomitant implications for their perceptions and use ofsupermarkets, and the importance of locality in their food buying and consumption.The central questions we address are: How committed are conscious consumers towardsusing alternative food markets? Do other ethical/sustainability concerns supersede localfood purchases? What are the driving factors that motivate conscious consumers to buyinto a local food market – place, quality, and/or reconnection with producers? Theresults will help to determine recommendations to ensure the future development andcontinuity of local food markets, with particular reference to farmers’ markets. Prior todescribing the adopted methodology, the following section offers a brief empiricaloverview of the conscious/ethical consumer to provide a contextual foundation to thereader. Following this, we present a review of the literature relating to the historicaldevelopment of markets and the current renaissance of farmers’ markets as a keymechanism by which producers can reclaim the ‘value’ of rural produce and,simultaneously, improve societal relations with consumers.

The conscious consumer

As more ethical choices enter consumer consciousness (Cherrier & Murray, 2002;Shaw, Grehan, Shiu, Hassan, & Thomson, 2005), understanding why those choicesare made has become an important area of consumer research. Consequently, variousethical-consumer ‘profiles’ and ‘typologies’ have been created to help advance ourunderstanding of ethical consumption (see, for example, Diamantopoulos et al., 2003;McEachern & McClean, 2002; Memery, Megicks, & Williams, 2005). However, moststudies investigating ethical consumption have limited their research enquiries tospecific aspects of ethical behaviour rather than investigating them from within thebroader consumption picture. It is unsurprising then that research studies often revealattitude–behaviour gaps (Carrigan & Attalla, 2001; De Pelsmacker, Driesen, & Rayp,2005; McEachern & Schroder, 2002) but tell us little about how these come about,what they mean to consumers, and, indeed, what implications they have for ethicalpurchasing in general. In their review of voluntary simplicity, McDonald, Oates,Young, and Hwang (2006) note that ethical consumption can be conceptualised as acontinuum. At one end lie ‘voluntary simplifiers’ defined by Etzioni (1998, p. 620) asthose who, out of free will, ‘limit expenditures on consumer goods and services’ and‘cultivate non-materialistic sources of satisfaction and meaning’, while at the other lie

396 Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 26

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013

‘non-voluntary simplifiers’ who are either indifferent, unaware, or opposed tosimplifier values. McDonald et al. (2006) identify a range of motivations inspiringvoluntary simplifiers but propose that more theoretical and empirical attention shouldbe paid to those individuals who fall between the extremes, whose lifestyles mayinvolve elements of voluntary simplifier behaviour but who would not be describedas fully committed to this way of life. They describe this group as Beginner VoluntarySimplifiers (BVS) who, while they are concerned about consumption levels, are notnecessarily radically anti-consumerist. Such people are significant both as a targetgroup and for developing understanding amongst others of the importance ofsustainable consumption. The problem with this term is that it implies a progressionto a more advanced form of voluntary simplification. While recognising that the BVSmay be a relevant category, we also propose the conscious consumer as an importantgroup who exhibit a complex mix of behaviours. Essentially a work in progress, theconscious consumer’s purchase decisions centre around whether ‘to consume withsensitivity through selecting ethical alternatives’ (Szmigin & Carrigan, 2005, p. 609).Examining ethical consumption in this way reveals the ‘competing priorities,paradoxical outcomes, and the nature of compromises reached in real decisionprocesses’ (McDonald et al., 2006, p. 529). Similarly, Peattie (1999) suggests thatthe best way to understand ethical consumerism is to view each individual’sconsumption as a series of transaction decisions that include decisions to engage orsometimes not to engage in alternative consumption behaviour.

Consumers possess a range of strategies to deal with both simple and complexdecision environments (Beach & Mitchell, 1978). These can range from highlyanalytic strategies involving extensive information gathering and analysis to non-analytic processes, which employ simple rules or heuristics (McAllister, Mitchell, &Beach et al., 1979). Payne (1982) notes that decision making is also highly contingentupon the complexity of the task. Unlike conventional consumers who may seek outinformation during more complex decision environments only, ethically motivatedconsumption is often accompanied with a stronger desire towards seeking out productand manufacturer information regardless of the decision-making complexity (Berry &McEachern, 2005). Decision behaviour can also be sensitive to contextual and socialfactors. Contextual influences, for example, could relate to the number of ethicalproduct options offered, the quality/price of the goods, and the time pressure placedon the individual. Flexible decision making remains completely unexplored withinethical consumption. Therefore, including such a factor in our broader understandingof ethical consumption may help to explain and to understand the consumer better,whose rationales for purchasing may be in transition or flux, underlying tensions andcompeting values may not always be resolved consistently, and the consumptionbehaviour may be unpredictable and heavily context dependent. Economics clearlysuggests an association between flexibility and elasticity, confirming the existence offlexible consumption amongst consumers in response to marketing contexts such asprice/sales promotion settings (see, for example, Ailawadi & Neslin, 1998; Bell, Iyer,& Padmanabhan, 2002; Sun, 2004). However, a key barrier to further exploration anduptake of the flexibility concept in other disciplines is that the idiom ‘flexible’, itsapplication, and measurement remain undefined (Anell & Wilson, 2000; Combe &Greenley, forthcoming; Gerwin, 1993). In the absence of a consumer-based definitionof the term, flexibility is described here as the inherent ability to change, adapt, and/orreact to decision-making environments with little forfeiture of time, effort, cost, orproduct performance (see Szmigin. Carrigan, & McEachern, 2007). Consequently, theconscious consumer is viewed here as a decision maker whose decisions may be

McEachern et al. Thinking locally, acting locally? Conscious consumers and farmers’ markets 397

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013

dictated by individual preferences (e.g. voluntary simplification or anti-consumption),situational influences (e.g. convenience or information availability), and/or socialfactors. This paper seeks to provide further insight into the role of flexibility withinconsumption behaviours, with specific reference to conscious consumers and theirpurchasing behaviour at farmers’ markets in the UK.

Markets in history

Baron, Davies, and Swindley (1991, p. 115) define a market as ‘an event (often regularlyoccurring) designed to provide the opportunity for individuals and organizations tomeet for the purpose of buying and selling merchandise’ and as ‘a place, especially anopen square or other arena within a town where such merchandise sales take place’.Adapting Bucklin’s (1972) US-based model of retail development (which proposesvarious stages based on average retail operating costs and level of economicdevelopment and urbanisation) to a British context, Shaw and Wild (1979) classifyperiodic markets/fairs (and craftsmen/retailers) as comprising a pre-industrial stage ofdevelopment – to be superseded by the industrial stage, involving retail specialisation,and latterly, the development of large-scale retail institutions. This is admittedly anidealised oversimplification – Shaw (1992) makes the point that new dominant forms ofretailing do not sweep away older ones. Despite the development of large-scale retailingin the nineteenth century, markets remained important elements of the retail provisionin urban economies, particularly for the provision of food (Hodson, 1998; Scola, 1982a;Shaw, 1982). Scola (1982a) emphasises the dynamic nature of urban markets in thisperiod, concluding that markets in the major urban centres were the most successful andwere populated by a mixture of traders (not just producer–retailers – see also Hodson,1998), and that this composition changed over time. While markets became increasinglyconcerned with wholesaling (Scola, 1982a; Shaw, 1982), Scola also makes the point that‘their importance for many, as real incomes rose and leisure time increased, was toprovide an opportunity for a Saturday outing and the chance to supplement amonotonous diet with some seasonal vegetable or fruit’ (1982a, p. 157).

By the Victorian period, Scola (1982b, p. 256) suggests that ‘perhaps the majorfactor in their continuing retail function was the attraction of the general marketatmosphere’, especially as more facilities (such as lighting and cover from theelements) were provided. Indeed, during the nineteenth century, the development of‘fixed’ or ‘covered’ retail markets – termed ‘municipal stores’ by Hodson (1998) –were, in many places, regarded as emblems of civic pride and, indeed, rivalry. Hodsonargues that the relationship between shops and markets could be described as a‘broadly complementary’ coexistence, with markets having a particular role in theprovision of perishable commodities (1998, p. 107). Jefferys and Knee (1962) arguethat market-stall operators still had a role in the early twentieth century: in agrarianeconomies as a link between producer and consumer, and in urbanised economies as achannel of distribution for agricultural products to reach urban areas.

More recently, markets have been regarded as a manifestation of informal (or atleast less formal) retailing (Davies & Ward, 2002; O’Brien & Harris, 1991), alongwith car-boot sales, flea markets, swap meets, and so on. Indeed, many of the basicprinciples of the earliest markets are replicated in such events. This continuity isemphasised by Braudel (1982, p. 28) who states that ‘In their elementary form,markets still exist today’, and describes them as ‘survivals of the past’. Nowhere isthis more so than with farmers’ markets.

398 Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 26

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013

Farmers’ markets

Farmers’ markets have been variously defined (see, for example, Bentley, Hallsworth, &Bryan, 2003; FARMA, 2006a; La Trobe, 2001). However, there is a consensus as to theircommon characteristics: (1) involving direct selling to the consumer by the person whogrew, reared, or produced the foods; (2) in a common facility where the above activity ispracticed by numerous farmers; (3) who sell local produce. ‘Local’ is usually defined asconstituting foodstuffs originating from a defined area, usually within a 30–50-mileradius of the market location. However, Morris and Buller (2003, p. 561) argue thatthere are definitional issues, not least for consumers themselves (IGD, 2005; Lamb &Leat, 2007), and that the term ‘local food sector’ is ‘empirically contestable and spatiallyindeterminate’ (see also Holloway & Kneafsey, 2000).

The number of farmers’ markets has grown substantially in the last decade. LaTrobe (2001) states that there were two farmers’ markets in 1997. The first market,according to Holloway and Kneafsey (2000), was established in Bath in September1997. In response to Local Agenda 21,1 the market was set up by Bath and North EastSomerset Council and other key stakeholders to help provide a marketplace for localproducers to sell local produce to local people, as well as attract visitors to the town(see http://www.bathfarmersmarket.co.uk). Notably, differences between rural andurban-based farmers’ markets are also apparent, as they attempt to differentiatethemselves by promoting ‘different social constructions and equations with ecology,locality, region, quality convention and consumer cultures’ (Renting, Marsden, &Banks, 2003, p. 394). Bentley et al. (2003) state that 250 were in existence by 2000,and FARMA (2006a) estimate that there are currently over 500 such markets in theUK. The current market value of farmers’ markets increased by 7% between 2005 and2006, taking it to £225m (The Co-operative Bank, 2007). This growth has beenregarded by some (see, for example, Bentley et al., 2003; Guthrie et al., 2006) as ademonstration of continuity with the traditional role of markets in history, and as amanifestation of the concept of community (Szmigin, Maddock, & Carrigan, 2003).Guthrie et al. (2006, p. 261) make a distinction between countries such as France,Spain, and Italy, where ‘farmers’ markets have persisted for centuries without a break’,and others such as New Zealand, Australia, Britain, Canada, and the USA, wherefarmers’ markers had disappeared (largely due to the advent of supermarkets) but haverecently re-emerged – such markets being termed ‘new generation’ farmers’ markets byCoster and Kennon (2005). Despite this expansion, they still only manage to attract13% of shoppers (Cooke, 2006). Consumer dislikes surrounding the market formatclearly impacts upon their usage. For example, Farmers’ City Market (2006), a south-east retail chain, reveal the top three criticisms made by consumers to be the paymentformat (i.e. having to pay cash at each individual stall rather than at the end of theirshop); the lack of trolleys (i.e. impacting on the actual amount of produce purchased);and the inconsistent nature of supply (i.e. not knowing which farmers would be thereor the extent of produce availability). Higher prices are often quoted as anothergrievance aimed at farmers’ markets (IGD, 2005), but this criticism appears to becontradictory. A recent study revealed that consumers are indeed willing to pay more

1Local Agenda 21 was first described in Agenda 21 – the global blueprint for sustainability that was agreed atthe United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in 1992 (the Rio Earth Summit). It refersto local-government-led, community-wide, and participatory effort to establish a comprehensive actionstrategy for environmental protection, economic prosperity, and community well-being in the local jurisdic-tion or area.

McEachern et al. Thinking locally, acting locally? Conscious consumers and farmers’ markets 399

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013

for locally produced and UK-grown food (Traill, 2006) and, in some cases, perceiveproduce sold at farmers’ markets to be cheaper than similar quality produce sold insupermarkets (La Trobe, 2001; McGrath, Sherry, & Heisley, 1993; Youngs, 2003).

Thepotentialbenefits arising fromthedevelopmentof farmers’markets, asperceivedby various stakeholders (i.e. the local community, farmers, consumers, etc.) have beenidentified by various authors. The benefits that may accrue to the local community andeconomy include:

� Drawing people into the area (Guthrie et al., 2006; Holloway & Kneasfsey, 2000; LaTrobe, 2001);

� The nurturing of local economic development through the support of local traders(Bentley et al., 2003; FARMA, 2006b; Guthrie et al., 2006; La Trobe, 2001);

� Increased local economic sustainability (FARMA, 2006b; La Trobe, 2001);

� Ameliorating the adverse economic and environmental impact of transport and‘food miles’ (Bentley et al., 2003; FARMA, 2006b; Guthrie et al., 2006);

� Markets may act as a regeneration initiative for the local economy (Bentley et al.,2003; FARMA, 2006b; Guthrie et al., 2006; La Trobe, 2001) – for example, Fort(2006) cites the farmers’ market at Stroud (a small town in the UK) directlycontributing £950,000 to the town’s economy each year, with a similar amountbeing spent in local shops by customers drawn to the town by the market;

� A practical route to changing perceived negative aspects of conventional productionand consumption systems (Monbiot, 2001; Seyfang, 2007; Szmigin et al., 2003).

For farmers, these markets provide:

� A new local market for produce, which may be more secure and regular (Bentleyet al., 2003; FARMA, 2006b; La Trobe, 2001);

� Increased profit margins through a shortening of the supply chain (Bentley et al.,2003; Guthrie et al., 2006; Tregear & Ness, 2005), enabling farmers to retain moreof the retail price of their product (La Trobe, 2001);

� A diversification strategy, which may facilitate survival as a business (La Trobe,2001; Youngs, 2003);

� A regular (perhaps the only regular) income source (Youngs, 2003);

� A source of redressed power in the marketplace, bypassing the supermarketsupply chain (Seyfang, 2007).

As far as consumers are concerned, it has been suggested that farmers’ marketsprovide:

� A more enjoyable and sociable shopping experience (Guthrie et al., 2006; LaTrobe, 2001) with an increased sense of community (Szmigin et al., 2003;Moore, 2006) and ‘immediacy’ (Sherry, 1990)

� A reduced carbon footprint and enhanced connectivity to the community (McGrathet al., 1993; Seyfang, 2007);

� A more diverse range of products compared to supermarkets (Guthrie et al.,2006);

400 Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 26

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013

� Improved access to fresh, locally grown, and often organic foods (Bentley et al.,2003; FARMA, 2006b; La Trobe, 2001; Szmigin et al., 2003);

� Increased consumer knowledge and confidence arising from buying from knownand trusted sources (La Trobe, 2001; McGrath et al., 1993; Moore, 2006);

� Assurances concerning social and moral issues relating to food production, suchas exploitation of people/livestock and so on. (Bentley et al., 2003; La Trobe, 2001;Szmigin et al., 2003);

� An opportunity for individuals to exercise consumer sovereignty in their dailypurchasing (Seyfang, 2007; Szmigin et al., 2003).

Many of the above statements illustrate common benefits for both producer andconsumer. Of particular importance are the opportunities for conscious consumers tomake local connections and communicate value-laden associations with the productionmethods employed as well as the values held by the producer/seller (Bentley et al., 2003;Guthrie et al., 2006; La Trobe, 2001; Szmigin et al., 2003). In contrast, for foodproducts sold in self-service supermarkets, conventional food labelling does not (andcannot) offer comparable space to communicate this information. However, as a resultof ‘local’ being ‘framed as a site of new opportunities for value-added generation’ (DuPuis & Goodman, 2005, p. 364), both manufacturers and supermarkets have attemptedto build relationships with consumers by employing quality-led constructions thatinduce perceptions of locality, quality, or speciality (see, for example, Jackson, Russell,& Ward, 2007; Marsden, Banks, & Bristow, 2002). Recently, manufacturing giantHeinz launched a range of ‘Farmers’ Market’ tinned soups and, despite claiming thatthe soups are manufactured using ingredients from British farms, FARMA accusedHeinz of commercial exploitation and called for consumers to boycott the range(Hickman, 2007). Similarly, a new initiative – one that is expected to be replicated byother supermarkets across the UK – from Asda Wal-Mart in conjunction with YorkshireFarmers’ Market Ltd saw the launch of in-store farmers’ markets across the Yorkshireregion. Richard Pearson (2007), head of local sourcing for Asda, viewed the initiative asa way to help ‘reduce our overall carbon footprint . . . increase the amount of localproducts available to our customers and it makes life simpler for hundreds of localproducers’. Many ethical consumers (i.e. especially voluntary simplifiers) would viewsuch activities as a cynical PR exercise to regain consumer trust in the mass-producedfood supply chain. Consequently, this paper seeks to explore whether perceptions offarmers’ markets are sufficient to build and sustain conscious consumers’ commitmenttowards buying local foodstuffs and support for local food producers. Moreover, dothey strengthen bonds of local identity, and permit greater product differentiation andperceptions of ‘authenticity’?

Methodology

In view of the exploratory nature of this initial study, we employed the use of in-depthinterviews with 15 UK participants (male and female) who identified themselves asregularly buying ethical products, and hence their classification as ‘conscious’consumers. The qualitative interview is widely accepted as one of the most widelyapplied forms of social inquiry. Miles and Huberman (1994, p. 10) claim that thespecific value gained from using the in-depth interview is that it focuses on a ‘specific,naturally occurring situation’, thus providing ‘rich and holistic’ descriptions relating to

McEachern et al. Thinking locally, acting locally? Conscious consumers and farmers’ markets 401

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013

‘real life’. Consequently, many researchers support their use, particularly their ability toexplore and gain in-depth information (Holstein & Gubrium, 2002; Krueger, 1994).Other advantages noted for face-to-face interviews are: they help to gain more detailedinformation into underpinning motivations, knowledge, and beliefs; they usually result ina higher percentage of completed answers, since the interviewer is there to explain exactlywhat is required; they facilitate the use of visual aids to demonstrate concepts; and they areeasier to arrange than focus groups (Malhotra & Birks, 2007; Silverman, 2002).Moreover, a further justification for their selection compared to other qualitativemethods of inquiry, such as focus groups, is that due to the operational difficulties inidentifying an appropriate sampling frame (i.e. conscious consumers), in-depth interviewspermitted the use of a snowball sampling method to identify potential participants.

Participants’ ages ranged from 24–61, most with families, and all but three educatedto degree level.2 Interviews took place between August and September in 2005, lastingbetween 60–90 minutes per participant. Interviews were held either in the participant’shome or a university-based venue if preferred by participants. The discussion schedulewas semi-structured in nature, but the conversation was not prompted specificallytowards farmers’ markets so as to avoid bias. At the interview stage, we were interestedin asking about how and why participants shopped the way they did, and the feelings theyhad about their shopping behaviour. The verbatim transcripts were interpreted using atranslation-of-text approach (Hirschmann & Holbrook, 1992), where the interpretiveaccount is developed through key phrases, metaphors, and patterns of meaning(Thompson, 1997). We identified recurring themes around how people shopped andfeelings about the choices they made. Given the limited nature of this exploratory studyand the relatively small sample size, it would be unwise to generalise our findings toowidely. Notwithstanding this, some pertinent issues emerged, which help to shed light onthe complex and flexible behaviour of the conscious consumer.

Perceptions and behavioural manifestations of the consciousconsumer

Ethical considerations in general were of long-term interest to participants, with levelsof commitment towards ethical activities ranging from 8 years to over 25 years. Familyupbringing, education, and travelling were identified as key influences upon theirbeliefs and attitudes:

It comes, I guess, initially from a family background, because I was brought up in afamily full of Nestle boycotts and Fairtrade and Traidcraft. (Rob, 25)

I was at university, and I think there was a big realisation of everything that wasgoing on in the papers about selling baby food to mothers and telling them itsbetter than breastfeeding and the whole scandal about that, and I think that’swhat made me start thinking really. (Peter, 39)

I think because I went off and did a bit of travelling and having gone to places like Indiaand places like that, you do realise what a difference it can make to peoples’ lives, andin South America as well, so I think with Fairtrade it was from my experience of goingto these places which made me a bit more aware and wanting to consider more theimpact these things have on communities across the world. (Caroline, 29)

2Note that pseudonyms are adopted when referring to participants throughout the remainder of this paper.

402 Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 26

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013

Participants were keen to acknowledge their limitations (most of which arose fromtime/convenience/knowledge pressures) as conscious consumers. Moreover, some feltguilty as they only pursued ethical alternatives for some product categories and not all.A frequently cited rationale for such behaviour was that ‘there is only so much you cando’. Despite this admission, many continued to feel that they were at least ‘trying to doa bit more than the average Joe in the street’. Conscious behaviours manifestedthemselves in a wide variety of formats amongst participants, some of which clearlytook precedence over others. Fairtrade purchasing was mentioned by all participants,although mainly within the context of food and drink (e.g. coffee, tea, bananas). Nomention was made of Fairtrade clothing, carpets, and so on:

I think that Fairtrade is the right thing to do, and the more that I have known aboutFairtrade, the more that I do think about the people, and I do it for that sort ofreason. (Louise, 24)

Commitment towards environmental issues was strong amongst participants. Onerespondent maintained that she has always been interested in ‘environmental stuff ’ andthat it ‘overrides interests in local and Fairtrade stuff ’. Some mentioned that they alwayspurchased environmentally friendly detergents. Another participant justified hiscommitment to the environment by ‘not ruining the Earth’. Recycling was alsoimportant. Here, the ease factor is mentioned with regard to local councils nowcollecting papers/bottles/plastic waste from the kerbside. Packaging was anotherenvironmental issue that most interviewees expressed concern about. One participantfelt it was ‘hard to buy goods without too much packaging’. Some felt frustrated thatorganic/Fairtrade fruit and vegetables often had more packaging. Others accepted that itwould be almost impossible to avoid all products with excessive packaging but that they‘try not to’ where possible. Some participants mentioned that they avoided using plasticbags and use only lifelong bags when shopping. However, many of these activities weredependent upon factors such as convenience, cost, and quality:

I’m very, very conscious that we’ve probably doubled the contents of the wheeliebin, and it is purely nappies and nappy sacks and that does eat at me a bit that I’mthrowing away so much plastic and whatever chemicals that they put into thenappies – I think I try to cover that, I mean, I am trying harder to ensure that we domore recycling and composting in a way to try and compensate for the use ofdisposable nappies. I would have loved to use washable, but it would not haveworked out to be cost effective. (Amanda, 36)

I think about food miles for vegetables mainly – I would always pick the localproduct if it was good quality. (Ella, 37)

More specifically, a clear perceived benefit underpinning the patronage of farmers’markets was a desire for locally sourced produce (Bentley et al., 2003; La Trobe, 2001;Tregear & Ness, 2005). Here, local sourcing was linked to the environment by someparticipants, mainly in terms of avoiding ‘food miles’. However, supporting the ‘localcommunity’ was cited as a primary reason for this behaviour. The main locallyproduced products purchased by participants were fresh vegetables and meat. But,despite a willingness to support this activity, some participants expressed difficulties inbuying locally sourced products (i.e. availability):

When you go to farm shops and stuff, particularly when I go home, there is a reallygood place where they do freedom-reared beef, and he hangs it all himself and he

McEachern et al. Thinking locally, acting locally? Conscious consumers and farmers’ markets 403

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013

slaughters the cattle himself, and the steak is the best steak, and it’s soexpensive. When I go home, I’ll make a point of going there and stocking up onsausages and all that kind of thing . . . but it’s much more difficult to get in the city.(Hannah, 38)

Availability of organic food is regarded as an important element of farmers’ marketsby some customers (McGrath et al., 1993). Organic food production was important tomost interviewees, although mainly for fresh produce. One participant spoke about hisuse of organic seeds for his vegetable plot in his garden. Another respondent stated that‘it was the long-term effect’ of pesticides that motivated her organic purchases and notnecessarily the taste. However, another participant added that if she ‘can’t buy anorganic version’ or if she doesn’t ‘like the organic version’ then she will ‘go for theordinary stuff ’. She also felt that ‘there are some cuts of meat that still the [price] hikeis just too much’. Another participant only recently started to buy organic fruit andvegetables since having a child. Linked to organic production values, mostinterviewees mentioned concerns about the use of animals for food, but mainly inrelation to organic/free-range eggs. Some participants mentioned that they now buytheir eggs from local farms. Despite a non-organic diet for the animals, positivecomments were made about the extensive animal conditions and that ‘they haveloads of space, they roam about, and are well looked after, they are fresh and local’.Indeed, free-range meat and eggs appeared to be a primary preference when shopping,although some complained about the lack of availability in supermarkets (i.e. similarto local sourcing issues). Participants’ rationale for their free-range preferences wasthat the meat was perceived to be ‘of a better quality’ because it wasn’t rearedintensively. One respondent, although expressing preferences for organic eggs andwelfare-friendly meat, did not transfer these preferences to other animal-relatedproducts.

Only a minority of participants were regular users of farmers’ markets. Purchases ofmeat and produce from farmers’ markets were motivated by what might becharacterised as supply-chain concerns:

We buy [bacon] once a month at the farmers’ market, because we know thewoman who is curing the bacon with her home-bred pigs. So rather than buy sixpacks of bacon from the supermarket, we buy two lots of bacon from her andthat’s it for the month. (Amanda, 36)

However, use of farmers’ markets was not widespread, and they were notnecessarily perceived as a source of regular food provisioning because of theirperiodic nature. Consequently there was a perception that shopping at farmers’markets was not as convenient as the ‘one-stop shop’ nature of supermarketshopping, with obvious implications for use of time:

There’s a market in town and it’s lovely. I love walking past it, but by the time I’velooked through, we’ve spent our shopping bill anyway, and then it’s getting homeagain. I would love to have a drive out on a Saturday and do our shopping there –it’s just time and money. It’s so easy to pop up to Sainsburys and buy it all in onego. (Peter, 39)

Participants, however, were critical of supermarkets along certain ethicaldimensions, such as the impact of the industrialisation of food production uponsuppliers, particularly those from developing countries:

404 Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 26

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013

I feel somebody is suffering somewhere because the big supermarkets want to beable to give people cheap products . . . then somebody is losing money somewhere,it’s not Tesco or Waitrose or whatever, it’s the producers. (Sheena, 40)

The scale of supermarket operations and their expansion, as well as sourcingpolicies, also came in for criticism:

I won’t shop at Asda because it’s part of the Wal-Mart chain, which is part of thereason why I might avoid some other supermarkets, but . . . they’re much of amuchness . . . I guess they’d all be the biggest and the worst if they could. (Ethan, 28)

I want to buy something that’s not been flown halfway across the world and then Iwant to get things from the north west if I can, but when you buy from Tesco, it canseem a bit limited. I mean they just buy things that’ll make them more moneyunfortunately. (Maurice, 38)

However, these concerns were tempered by pragmatism, with the result thatparticipants continued to shop at supermarkets. For some, a conscious ranking ofthe supermarkets was perceived and acted upon, with participants seeking to patronisethose retailers they regarded as addressing some of these issues:

I shop at Co-op, I guess for ethical reasons. They’re quite good because they don’tput a lot of things in packages as much as other supermarkets (Hannah, 25).Probably 80% of the time, I shop at Waitrose, which I didn’t use to but they’ve got abetter range of organic stuff. (Sadie, 45)

Thus, participants regarded their food-buying choices as an inevitable ‘trade-off ’between principles, cost, and convenience. The contradictions between actualbehaviour and ethical principles were obvious:

I think, like everybody else, it’s definitely a time issue. But that could be a bithypocritical. Although the farmers’ market might sell locally grown and organicstuff, I can’t get everything in the one place. So the fact that you can get everythingin one place – it’s difficult to try and compromise between the two. (Maurice, 38)

There’s the local farmers’ markets, but its time more than anything. We justhaven’t got the time to go and look round – and the expense. Our shopping comesdown to money and what we can and can’t afford. I wish supermarkets would do alot more [in terms of ethical issues]. (Peter, 39)

Visiting farmers’ markets was often perceived more as a leisure activity than as partof regular shopping behaviour because of the issues highlighted above. This attitude issummed up in the statement below:

We have been to the odd farmers’ market but that’s more just as a day out ratherthan . . . Y’know, you have to drive miles away and you couldn’t rely on it to get allthe stuff you need weekly. (Maurice, 38)

This attitude has resonance with McGrath et al. (1993, p. 283) and their descriptionof the function of farmers’ markets being an ‘economic–festive dialectic’, followingSherry’s (1990) schema of marketplace structure and function. Thus it can be seenthat for conscious consumers, who it could be argued would be most likely toregularly patronise farmers’ markets and possess a preference for locally producedproducts (i.e. given their environmental, social, and economic benefits), a number ofpragmatic issues are raised that militate against their use. The implications for farmers’markets and their future are discussed below.

McEachern et al. Thinking locally, acting locally? Conscious consumers and farmers’ markets 405

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013

Discussion and conclusions: the future of farmers’ markets

It is clear from the results reported above that these conscious consumers perceive limitsto their ethical behaviours arising from time, convenience, and cost, even though theyhave an ‘ethical’ orientation towards consumption. This could be regarded as analogousto the flexibility concept mentioned previously. Indeed, the concept of flexibility mayoffer a theoretical explanation as to what may appear as inconsistencies betweenattitudes and behaviour in previous ethical studies of consumer behaviour (Carrigan& Attalla, 2001; De Pelsmacker et al., 2005; McEachern & Schroder, 2002). Here,conscious consumers exhibit a mix of complex behaviours, some of which could bedescribed as overtly ethical (i.e. as practiced by voluntary simplifiers), while others couldbe influenced more by convenience and cost (i.e. as practiced in general by the majorityof consumers). Moreover, there are certain manifestations of conscious-consumptionbehaviour (i.e. buying Fairtrade and organic products) that are much more prevalentthan others, such as buying the bulk of foodstuffs in farmers’ markets. This is despite thevery positive connotations that farmers’ markets hold for this group. Consequently, amajor challenge for those responsible for the organisation and management of farmers’markets is to move consumers’ perceptions of shopping at such events from being anoccasional ‘leisure’ pursuit to a regular, ongoing shopping pattern. In other words, usingSherry’s (1990) notion of an economic–festival dialectic, moving customers fromprimarily festival to economic reasons for using farmers’ markets. In order to achievethis, the obvious advantages of farmers’ markets (as outlined above) need to becapitalised upon – and communicated to all stakeholders – more effectively. While it isunlikely that the majority of shoppers – even these ‘conscious’ consumers – will forsakesupermarkets entirely, it is feasible, given the increasing concern for ethical issuesincluding support for local and ‘authentic’ food-production systems, that a greaterproportion of food shopping could take place in farmers’ markets in the future.Indeed, this is recognised by mainstream retailers and manufacturers who haveattempted to blur the boundaries between themselves and real farmers’ markets, andappropriate the values inherent to farmers’ markets to their own operations. Howeverunsatisfactory and however much of a compromise of their ethical principles, thepragmatism demonstrated by conscious consumers suggests that, at least for some,such activities may be successful in attracting the more pragmatic conscious consumer.Alternatively, initiatives such as Asda’s recent launch of in-store farmers’ markets may beviewed more negatively by some conscious consumers, as in the case of Ethan who didnot patronise Asda due to it being part of the Wal-Mart chain. The conscious consumer’sflexibility is further demonstrated by the fact that most of the participants, who didpatronise supermarkets, denoted certain grocery retailers – such as the Co-op andWaitrose – as companies that they would be more likely to frequent due toperceptions of greater compatibility between the companies’ underlying principlesand their ethical values.

Therefore, to counteract the threat of losing the future patronage of consciousconsumers to further retail-led and/or manufacturer-led initiatives such as those ofHeinz’s Farmers’ Market soup range, the management of farmers’ markets may haveto become more proactive to fulfil their potential. This could be manifested in termsof, for example, more overtly ‘managing’ the mix of farmers attending in order towiden the range of merchandise available in a particular market. Whilst not quite a‘one-stop’ shopping destination, this would create the plurality of choice that manyconsumers seek (Seyfang, 2007). This may also enable the development of a critical

406 Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 26

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013

mass of farmers in order to ameliorate perceived problems of limited availability ofproduce after individual stallholders have sold out. In addition, those responsible forthe management of farmers’ markets, both at a local and national level, may need tomore overtly and explicitly communicate the potential benefits of selling at markets (asoutlined above) to individual farmers. This may be done through direct marketing or,indeed, by personal visits to farmers by market managers, in such a way as to beanalogous to personal selling.

McGrath et al. (1993) argue that farmers’ markets can be likened to servicescapes(Bitner, 1992). Thus the experiential elements of shopping at farmers’ markets couldbe more strongly emphasised. This concept of farmers’ markets as retail theatre hasbeen manifested recently in central London with the recent entrance of US chainsWhole Foods Market (Renton, 2007) and Farmers’ City Market (Balakrishnan, 2007),and in Asda stores across North Yorkshire (Pearson, 2007). These examples illustratethe paradox identified by McGrath et al. (1993, p. 309), whereby such ventures couldbe regarded as a ‘designed experience’ attempting to recreate ‘an authentic,unmediated experience of a simpler, more wholesome era’ and are incompatiblewith aspirations of conscious consumers and their willingness to support local short-supply chains. As such, they are arguably just as much a part of the ‘placeless foodscapeof contemporary Britain’ (Holloway & Kneafsey 2000, p. 295) as the supermarkets,which many conscious consumers are critical of.

By definition, farmers’ markets are grounded in a locale (FARMA, 2006a;Holloway & Kneafsey, 2000; La Trobe, 2001) and are manifestations of ‘short’food-supply chains (Marsden, Banks, & Bristow, 2000) characterised by trust andmeaningful interaction between producer and consumer (McGrath et al., 1993;Moore, 2006). Consequently, farmers’ markets have an obvious opportunity tocapitalise upon concerns regarding the issue of ‘food miles’, and also perceptionsrelating to the importance of locality and community for some customers (Szmiginet al., 2003). Therefore, any marketing-communications activity may emphasise thebenefits (outlined above) of farmers’ markets in terms of their contribution to the localeconomy, while fostering a sense of community within a particular locale. They shouldalso emphasise that they provide an outlet for conscious consumers to enact theirecological citizenship values, however incompletely. Indeed, given the ubiquity ofmultiple retailers and subsequent concerns relating to the ‘cloning’ of Britain’s highstreets (New Economics Foundation, 2004, 2005), which have generated much debate(e.g. Baggini, 2005; Elliott, 2005; Walker, 2005; Woolcock, 2004), then the potentialof farmers’ markets as a means to differentiate retail provision within an urbanlocation should not be ignored. The importance of marketing urban retail provisionhas been emphasised by Warnaby, Bennison, Davies, and Hughes (2002) and Warnaby,Bennison, and Davies (2005), and the potential role of independent retailers in helpingto accomplish this has also been noted (Bennison, Pal, & Warnaby, 2004; Warnaby,Bennison, & Medway, 2006; Warnaby & Bennison, 2006). In this particular context,farmers’ markets could be regarded as one manifestation of the wider ‘food town’concept. Here, local food production and consumption facilities are used as a means topromote a particular locality (see, for example, http://www.food-town.co.uk, whereGrimsby is seeking to capitalise on its historic strengths in food production in order todifferentiate itself in economic development terms).

This focus on ‘place’ and community may be the most appropriate avenue forfarmers’ markets to try to differentiate their offering, particularly as performance onother issues relating to ‘ethical’ consumption (e.g. climate change) are increasinglyhighlighted by their supermarket rivals in an attempt to create consumer goodwill and

McEachern et al. Thinking locally, acting locally? Conscious consumers and farmers’ markets 407

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013

obtain competitive advantage. Often supermarkets focus on issues such as organicproduce and Fairtrade, which may not necessarily benefit local producers. Byemphasising their inherent locality (i.e. as opposed to the spurious locality of thelarge retail multiples), farmers’ markets, particularly in rural areas where they mayhave been a permanent fixture in the local economy, may be able to secure an effectivefuture market positioning in the minds of conscious consumers, for whom this is asignificant driver of behaviour.

As knowledge of the complex and flexible behaviour of conscious consumers iscentral to our understanding of consumer behaviour (particularly within an ethicalcontext), significant scope exists to extend the above research further, either from abroader qualitative or quantitative perspective. Moreover, greater insight of thediscourses surrounding the patronage of farmers’ markets may be achieved byundertaking a cross-cultural comparison of conscious consumers from countriessuch as France, Italy, and Spain, where farmers’ markets are not necessarilyconsidered as an ‘alternative’ grocery-shopping option.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the research assistance of Lorna Stanyer, Masters

graduate, Birmingham Business School.

References

Ailawadi, K.L., & Neslin, S.A. (1998). The effect on promotion on consumption: Buying moreand consuming it faster. Journal of Marketing Research, 35(3), 390–398.

Anell, B.I., & Wilson, T.L. (2000) The flexible firm and the flexible co-worker. Journal ofWorkplace Learning: Employee Counselling Today, 12(4), 165–170.

Baggini, J. (2005, June 7). Send in the clones. The Guardian G2, p. 5.Balakrishnan, A. (2007, February 17). A warm glow: Entrepreneurs start up ‘farmers’ markets

without the draughts’. The Guardian, p. 33.Baron, S., Davies, B., & Swindley, D. (1991). Macmillan dictionary of retailing. London:

Macmillan Press.Beach, L.R., & Mitchell, T.R. (1978). A contingency model for the selection of decision

strategies. Academy of Management Review, 3, 439–449.Bell, D.R., Iyer, G. & Padmanabhan, V. (2002). Price competition under stockpiling and flexible

consumption. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(3), 292–303.Bennison, D., Pal, J., & Warnaby, G. (2004, June 18). Support your local retailers. Planning, p. 14.Bentley, G., Hallsworth, A. G., & Bryan, A. (2003). The countryside in the city – Situating a

farmers’ market in Birmingham. Local Economy, 18(2), 109–120.Berry, H., & McEachern, M.G. (2005). Informing ethical consumers. In R. Harrison, T.

Newholm, & D. Shaw (Eds.), The ethical consumer (pp. 69–87). London: Sage.Bitner, M.J. (1992). Servicescapes: The impact of physical surroundings on customers and

employees. Journal of Marketing, 56(2), 57–71.Braudel, F. (1982). Civilization and capitalism 15th–18th century, Volume 2, The wheels of

commerce, (trans. S. Reynolds). London: William Collins Sons.Bucklin, L.P. (1972). Competition and evolution in the distributive trades. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Prentice Hall.Carrigan, M., & Attalla, A. (2001). The myth of the ethical consumer – Do ethics matter in

purchase behaviour? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 560–578.

408 Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 26

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013

Cherrier,H.,&Murray, J. (2002).Driftingaway fromexcessive consumption:Anewsocialmovementbased on identity construction. In S.M. Broniarczyk & K. Nakamoto (Eds.), Advances in consumerresearch (Vol. 29, pp. 245–247). Valdosta, GA: Association for Consumer Research,.

Combe, I., & Greenley, G. (forthcoming). Marketing and flexibility [Special issue]. EuropeanJournal of Marketing.

Cooke, S. (2006, August 12). Sixty-one percent not bothered about food miles. The Grocer, p. 7.Coster, M., & Kennon, N. (2005). The role of new generation farmers’ markets in rural

communities. Kingston, Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation.In:J. Guthrie,A. Guthrie,R. Lawson, &A. Cameron, (2006). Farmers’ markets: The smallbusiness counter-revolution in food production and retailing. British Food Journal, 108(7),560–573.

Davies, B., & Ward, P. (2002). Managing retail consumption. Chichester, England: John Wiley.De Pelsmacker, P., Driesen, L. & Rayp, G. (2005). Do consumers care about ethics? Willingness

to pay for fair-trade coffee. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39(2), 363–385.Diamantopoulos, A., Schlegelmilch, B.B., Sinkovics, R.R., & Bohlen, G.M. (2003). Can socio-

demographics still play a role in profiling green consumers? A review of the evidence and anempirical investigation. Journal of Business Research, 56, 465–480.

Du Puis, M., & Goodman, D. (2005). Should we go ‘home’ to eat?: Toward a reflexive politics oflocalism. Journal of Rural Studies, 21, 359–371.

Elliott, V. (2005, June 6). It’s so wonderful to be here in Exeter – Or is this Clapham. The Times, p. 10.Etzioni, A. (1998). Voluntary simplicity characterization, select psychological implications, and

societal consequences. Journal of Economic Psychology, 19, 619–643.FARMA (2006a). What is a farmers’ market? Retrieved September 28, 2006 from http://

www.farmersmarkets.net/FAQ.htmFARMA (2006b). Starting a farmers’ market. Retrieved October 6, 2006, from http://

www.farmersmarkets.net/FAQ.htm#Question-35Farmers’ City Market (2006, September 23). Chain to recreate farmers’ market. The Grocer, p. 7.Fort, M. (2006, September 30). Around Britain with a fork. The Guardian Weekend, p. 59.Gerwin, D. (1993). Manufacturing flexibility: A strategic perspective. Management Science,

39(4), 395–410.Guthrie, J., Guthrie, A., Lawson, R., & Cameron, A. (2006). Farmers’ markets: The small business

counter-revolution in food production and retailing. British Food Journal, 108(7), 560–573.Hickman, M. (2007). Heinz soup range under attack from farmers’ markets and MPs? Retrieved

February 20, 2007 from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/heinz-soup-range-under-attack-from-farmers-markets-and-mps-395014.html

Hirschmann, E.C., & Holbrook, M.B. (1992). Postmodern consumer research: The study ofconsumption as text. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Hodson, D. (1998). ‘The municipal store’: Adaptation and development in the retail markets ofnineteenth century urban Lancashire. Business History, 40(4), 94–114.

Holloway, L., & Kneafsey, M. (2000). Reading the space of the farmers’ market: A preliminaryinvestigation from the UK. Sociologia Ruralis, 40(3), 285–299.

Holstein, J.A., & Gubrium, J.F. (2002). Active interviewing. In: D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitativeresearch: Theory, method and practice. London: Sage.

Institute of Grocery Distribution (2005). The local and regional food opportunity. Watford,England: Author.

Jackson, P., Russell, P., & Ward, N. (2007). The appropriation of ‘alternative’ discourses by‘mainstream’ food retailers. In: D. Maye, L. Holloway, & M. Kneafsey (Eds.), Alternativefood geographies: Representation and practice. London: Elsevier.

Jefferys, J.B., & Knee, D. (1962). Retailing in Europe: Present structure and future trends.London: Macmillan Press.

Krueger, R.A. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. London: Sage.Lamb, D., & Leat, P. (2007, May 26). A growing demand for local food. The Scottish Farmer, p. 10.La Trobe, H. (2001). Farmers’ markets: Consuming local rural produce. International Journal of

Consumer Studies, 25(3), 181–192.

McEachern et al. Thinking locally, acting locally? Conscious consumers and farmers’ markets 409

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013

Malhotra, N.K., & Birks, D.F. (2007). Marketing research: An applied approach (3rd Europeaned.). Harlow, England: Pearson Education.

Marsden, T., Banks, J., & Bristow, G. (2000). Food supply chain approaches: Exploring theirrole in rural development. Sociologia Ruralis, 40(4), 424–439.

Marsden, T.K., Banks, J., & Bristow, G. (2002). The social management of rural nature:Understanding agrarian-based rural development. Environment and Planning A, 34,809–825.

McAllister, D.W., Mitchell, T.R. & Beach, L.R. (1979). The contingency model for the selectionof decision strategies: An empirical test of the effects of significance, accountability andreversibility. Organisational Behaviour and Performance, 24, 228–244.

McDonald, S., Oates, C.J., Young, C.W., & Hwang, K. (2006). Toward sustainableconsumption: Researching voluntary simplifiers. Psychology and Marketing, 23(6), 515–534.

McEachern, M.G., & McClean, P. (2002). Organic purchasing motivations and attitudes: Arethey ethical? International Journal of Consumer Studies, 26(2), 85–93.

McEachern, M.G., & Schroder, M.J.A. (2002). The role of livestock production ethics inconsumer values towards meat. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 15(2),221–237.

McEachern, M.G., & Warnaby, G. (2005). Improving customer orientation within the freshmeat supply chain: A focus on assurance schemes. Journal of Marketing Management, 21(1),89–115.

McGrath, M.A., Sherry, J.F., & Heisley, D.D. (1993). An ethnographic study of an urbanperiodic marketplace: Lessons from the midville farmers’ market. Journal of Retailing,69(3), 280–319.

Memery, J., Megicks, P., & Williams, J. (2005). Ethical and social responsibility issues in groceryshopping: A preliminary typology. Qualitative Market Research, 8(4), 399–412.

Miller, D. (1998). A theory of shopping. Cambridge: Polity.Miles, B., & Huberman, M.M. (1994). Data management and analysis methods. In: M.K.

Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Monbiot, G. (2001). Captive state: The corporate takeover of Britain. London: Pan.Moore, O. (2006) Understanding postorganic fresh fruit and vegetable consumers at

participatory farmers’ markets in Ireland: Reflexivity, trust and social movements.International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30(5), 416–426.

Morris, C., & Buller, H. (2003). The local food sector: A preliminary assessment of its form andimpact in Gloucestershire. British Food Journal, 105(8), 559–566.

New Economics Foundation (2004). Clone town Britain: The loss of local identity on thenation’s high streets. London: Author.

New Economics Foundation (2005). Clone town Britain: The survey results on the bland state ofthe nation. London: Author.

O’Brien, L., & Harris, F. (1991). Retailing: Shopping, society space. London: David Fulton.Payne, J.W. (1982). Contingent decision behaviour. Psychological Bulletin, 92(2), 382–402.Pearson, R. (2007). In-store farmers’ markets to launch at Asda? Retrieved February 20, 2007

from http://www.organicinform.org/newsitem.aspx?id¼327Peattie, K. (1999). Trappings versus substance in the greening of marketing planning. Journal of

Strategic Marketing, 7, 131–148.Renting, H., Marsden, T.K., & Banks, J. (2003). Understanding alternative food networks:

Exploring the role of short food supply chains in rural development. Environment andPlanning A, 35, 393–411.

Renton, A. (2007, March 27). Ripe target. The Guardian G, pp. 5–8.Scola, R. (1982a). Retailing and the nineteenth century town: Some problems and possibilities.

In: J.H. Johnson & C.G. Pooley (Eds.), The structure of nineteenth century cities (pp.153–169). London: Croom Helm.

Scola, R. (1982b). Feeding the Victorian city: The food supply of Manchester 1770–1870.Manchester, England: Manchester University Press.

410 Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 26

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013

Seyfang, G. (2007). Growing sustainable consumption communities: The case of localorganic food networks. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 27(3/4),120–134.

Shaw, D., Grehan, E., Shiu, E., Hassan, L., & Thomson, J. (2005). An exploration of thevalues in ethical consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 4(3),185–200.

Shaw, G. (1982). The role of retailing in the urban economy. In: J.H. Johnson & C.G. Pooley(Eds.), The structure of nineteenth century cities (pp. 171–194). London: Croom Helm.

Shaw, G. (1992). The study of retail development. In: J. Benson & G. Shaw (Eds.), The evolutionof retail systems c. 1800–1914 (pp. 1–14). Leicester, England: Leicester University Press.

Shaw, G., & Wild, M.T. (1979). Retail patterns in the Victorian city. Transactions of the Instituteof British Geographers NS, 4, 279–291.

Sherry, J.F. (1990). A socio-cultural analysis of a flea market. Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 13–31.Silverman, D. (2002). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analysing talk, text and

interaction (2nd ed.). London: Sage.Sun, B. (2005) Promotion effect on endogenous consumption. Marketing Science, 24(3),

430–443.Szmigin, I., Maddock, S., & Carrigan, M. (2003). Conceptualising community consumption:

Farmers’ markets and the older customer. British Food Journal, 105(8), 542–550.Szmigin, I., & Carrigan, M. (2005). Exploring the dimensions of ethical consumption. In K.M.

Ekstrom & Helene Brembeck (Eds.), Advances in consumer research (Vol. 7, pp. 608–613).Duluth, MN: Association for Consumer Research.

Szmigin, I., Carrigan, M., & McEachern, M.G. (2007, July). Flexibility, dissonance and theconscious consumer. Advances in consumer research. European Conference of theAssociation for Consumer Research, Milan.

The Co-operative Bank (2007). The ethical consumerism report 2007. Manchester, England:The Co-operative Group.

Thompson, C.J. (1997). Interpreting consumers: A hermeneutical framework for derivingmarketing insights from the texts of consumers’ consumption stories. Journal of MarketingResearch, 34, 438–456.

Traill, B. (2006, October 21). Shoppers willing to pay up for local food. The Grocer, p. 12.Tregear, A., & Ness, M. (2005). Discriminant analysis of consumer interest in buying locally

produced foods. Journal of Marketing Management, 21(1/2), 19–35.Walker, B. (2005, June 10). Renewal blamed for sterile retailing. Regeneration and Renewal, p. 2.Warnaby, G., & Bennison, D. (2006). Exploiting the potential of SME retailers in locational

differentiation: A research agenda. Management and Management Sciences ResearchInstitute (Working Paper No. 507/06). Salford, England: University of Salford.

Warnaby, G., Bennison, D., Davies, B.J., & Hughes, H. (2002). Marketing UK towns and citiesas shopping destinations. Journal of Marketing Management, 18(9/10), 877–904.

Warnaby, G., Bennison, D., & Davies, B.J. (2005). Retailing and the marketing of urban places:A UK perspective. International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research,15(2), 191–215.

Warnaby, G., Bennison, D., & Medway, D. (2006). The role of SME retailers in locationaldifferentiation. Paper presented at Contemporary Issues in Retailing and MarketingConference: Destinations and Locations: Exploring the Multiple Identities of Place,Manchester, England.

Weatherell, C., Tregear, A., & Allinson, J. (2003). In search of the concerned customer: UKpublic perceptions of food, farming and buying local. Journal of Rural Studies, 19,233–244.

Woolcock, N. (2004, August 28). Spot the difference: How the high streets lost their identity in amove to clone towns. The Times, p. 13.

Youngs, J. (2003). Consumer direct initiatives in north west England farmers’ markets. BritishFood Journal, 105(8), 498–530.

McEachern et al. Thinking locally, acting locally? Conscious consumers and farmers’ markets 411

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013

About the authors

Morven G. McEachern is a lecturer in marketing at the University of Lancaster in the UK. Herresearch interests lie primarily in the area of consumer behaviour within the contexts of ethicalconsumption and food marketing. She is on the editorial board of the International Journal ofConsumer Studies, and has presented related papers at a number of international conferencesand published in a wide range of academic journals such as the Journal of Agricultural andEnvironmental Ethics, Journal of Marketing Management, and the International Review ofRetail, Distribution and Consumer Research.

Corresponding author: Dr Morven G. McEachern, Marketing Department, LancasterUniversity Management School, Lancaster, LA1 4YX, UK.

T 01524 593918E m.mceachern@lancaster.ac.uk

Gary Warnaby is a senior lecturer in marketing at the University of Liverpool ManagementSchool in the UK. Prior to this, he was at the Salford Business School and the ManchesterMetropolitan University Business School. His research interests include the marketing of places(in particular the marketing of towns and cities as retail destinations), town-centre management,and retailing more generally. Results of this research have been published in academic journalsincluding Environment and Planning A, Journal of Marketing Management, European Journal ofMarketing, Cities, Local Economy, and the International Review of Retail, Distribution andConsumer Research, as well as a variety of professional and trade publications.

Marylyn Carrigan is a senior lecturer in marketing ethics at the Open University Business Schoolin the UK. Prior to this, she was at Birmingham Business School. She has published extensively inthe field of marketing ethics and ethical consumption, and is on the editorial boards of theInternational Marketing Review and the Journal of Marketing Communications. Her researchinterests include marketing ethics, ethical consumption, sustainability, and family consumption.

Isabelle Szmigin is professor of marketing at the Birmingham Business School, University ofBirmingham in the UK. She has extensive publications in the fields of consumer behaviour,consumer innovativeness, services management, and relationship marketing, including a book,Understanding the Consumer.

412 Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 26

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

v of

Sal

ford

] at

12:

55 2

5 A

pril

2013