FR 2025-01962

The document from the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), an agency under the USDA, outlines a proposal to reinstate a data collection initiative focused on local food marketing practices. In essence, NASS aims to assess how food is produced and marketed directly from farm producers to both consumers and retailers. This data collection seeks to provide insights into local agricultural systems across the nation, intending to support economic growth in this sector while complying with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The deadline for public comments on this proposal is March 31, 2025.

Summary and Purpose

This announcement signals the USDA’s continued interest in bolstering local food systems through detailed data collection. The initiative is grounded in the objectives of the USDA's "Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food" initiative, which emphasizes eliminating barriers to local food marketing. By reinstating the Local Food Marketing Practice Survey, NASS hopes to measure industry changes since the initial survey in 2015, potentially guiding future policy and support strategies for local food systems.

Significant Issues and Concerns

Lack of Clarity on Benefits:
The document does not explicitly articulate the benefits or outcomes expected from collecting this data. Without clear goals, there is a risk of redundancy, which could lead to unnecessary spending of public resources.

Complex Language and Legal References:
Terms such as "mandatory reporting authority" and "CIPSEA" may not be readily understood by the average reader. Simplifying the legal and technical language would make the document more accessible to the general public, fostering greater community engagement and feedback.

Estimated Burden on Respondents:
The proposal estimates an overall burden of 74,000 hours annually on respondents, primarily farmers and ranchers. However, it does not explain how this figure was calculated. Providing this data clearer could help stakeholders evaluate the proposal's feasibility and fairness.

Potential Hidden Costs:
Although the document describes several methods to inform producers about the survey, it fails to specify which methods might accrue additional costs. This raises concerns about potential hidden expenditures that could affect the survey's cost-efficiency.

Impact on the Public and Stakeholders

General Public:
While the survey's results will eventually be made public, the immediate impact on the general population is minimal. Over time, however, the insights gained could influence policy changes that boost local food economies, potentially leading to broader societal benefits such as fresher food accessibility and new economic opportunities in local communities.

Farmers and Ranchers:
For those directly involved in agriculture, particularly those engaging in direct-to-consumer sales, the data collection could imply increased administrative tasks with the notable time burden highlighted. Yet, the survey results may facilitate more supportive policies and investment in local agricultural infrastructure, creating long-term advantages.

Policy Makers:
The collected data can inform legislative and policy decisions, especially with ongoing discussions around the Farm Bill. By demonstrating shifts and growth in the local food sector, policymakers can tailor supports to encourage further development in these areas.

Consumer and Advocacy Groups:
These groups could leverage the findings to reinforce calls for increased support of local food systems. Enhanced data can substantiate claims about the importance of local agriculture in economic health and environmental sustainability, influencing future advocacy efforts and policy recommendations.

In conclusion, while the reinstatement of this survey holds potential benefits for understanding and advancing local food systems, the proposal would benefit from further transparency and clarity on its objectives, costs, and terminology to maximize public engagement and support.