Brewer, Linda

Lev, Larry

Stephenson, Garry

English

Research Papers in Economics

Western Economics Forum, Fall 2006 
 
 
  9
More Change Than You Think: Tracking Oregon Farmers’ Markets  
and Their Managers 1998-2005 
 
Larry Lev, Linda Brewer and Garry Stephenson
1 
 
Introduction 
 
In recent years, the number of farmers’ markets has increased rapidly in both the United States 
and Oregon (Thilmany and Watson 2004). According to USDA statistics, the number of markets 
in the United States grew by 111% over the period 1994 to 2004 to a total of 3700 markets in 
2004. (USDA-AMS 2006). Focusing only on the net increase in markets, however, hides the full 
extent of change. The 1753 markets in the 1994 USDA database were not simply joined by 
1947 new markets over that ten year period. A more complete accounting must track all of the 
markets that opened over that period and also all that closed. In this paper, we carry out that 
task for Oregon and document that for the period 1998-2005 the net increase of 30 markets is 
exceeded by the 32 markets that closed and dwarfed by the 62 new markets that opened. 
 
It should be no surprise that not all farmers’ markets succeed. Brown (2002) has previously 
documented highly variable growth rates in numbers of markets as well as long stretches in 
which the number of markets declined. But her research looked at net changes rather than the 
actual numbers of new and failed markets. Related research on small business survival rates 
provides a more useful basis for beginning this study. According to Bureau of Labor Statistics 
data, about 10% of all small businesses close in a given year and a similar percentage of new 
businesses open. More specifically, this research documents that new businesses are less likely 
to survive than existing businesses with 34% of new businesses failing in their first two years 
and a total of 56% failing in the first four years (Knaup 2005). 
  
This article fills a significant gap in our understanding of farmers’ markets and a caution to the 
nearly unrestrained enthusiasm for their spread by providing a more detailed examination of the 
changes in market numbers and market management for the period 1998-2005 in Oregon. This 
additional information should challenge prospective markets to more carefully consider their 
startup decisions and should motivate existing markets to take a hard look at their own 
performance and plans. The data presented here will also help the diverse organizations 
including universities, state departments of agriculture and state farmers’ market associations 
that provide educational services to markets and managers to recognize the size and nature of 
the challenge that they face.  
 
In this report, we track the status of individual markets and examine annual data for:  
 
•  The net increase in markets. 
•  The number of new markets that open. 
•  The number of markets from the previous year that closed. Technically these are markets 
that did not reopen and therefore the change is noted in the subsequent year.  
•  Changes in market managers from the previous year. 
•  Changes in market location from the previous year. 
                                                 
1 All three authors are at Oregon State University. Lev is a Professor in Agricultural and Resource Economics, Brewer 
is a Research Associate in Horticulture and Stephenson is an Associate Professor in Crop and Soil Science. This 
research was supported by a USDA/IFAFS grant. The authors acknowledge the reviewers’ useful suggestions. Western Economics Forum, Fall 2006 
 
 
  10
All of the tables except Table 4 present the data for seven regions within the state in order to 
further highlight the year to year variability in results. This paper focuses on quantifying these 
changes and provides only limited discussion of the underlying reasons. 
 
The data cited here were gathered from the Oregon Farmers’ Markets brochure for 1998-2005 
inclusive. Prior to 1998, no organization compiled a list of all markets in the state. The Oregon 
Department of Agriculture published the brochure from 1998-2002, and the Oregon Farmers’ 
Markets Association thereafter. The information was taken from the brochure as published with 
a limited number of exceptions detailed in the Appendix.  
 
The number and regional distribution of Oregon farmers’ markets for the years 1998 to 2005 are 
shown in Table 1. For this period, the number of markets increased by 30 or an average of 4.3 
markets per year. The growth was uneven, however, as the state gained as many as twelve 
markets in one year (2000-2001) but actually lost a market in another (2003-2004).  
 
Table 1.  Number of markets by region 
  1998 1999 2000 2001  2002  2003  2004  2005 
Portland  Metro  13 18 17 20  18  21  22  25 
Willamette  Valley  10 12 13 17  20  19  18  18 
Southern  Oregon  8 6 7 8  9  8  7  6 
Eastern  Oregon  1 1 1 2  5  5  5  5 
Oregon  Coast  4 4 6 9  7  7  7  9 
Central  Oregon  1 1 1 1  1  1  1  3 
Columbia  Gorge  1 1 1 1  1  1  1  2 
Annual  total  38 43 46 58  61  62  61  68 
 
 
New Markets and Closed Markets  
 
While most government reports and press accounts focus only on the growth in the number of 
markets, further analysis of the annual market listings provides the opportunity to gain a more 
detailed understanding of the changes in this sector. Table 2 provides annual information on 
new markets and closed markets from the base year of 1998 until 2005. As an example, Table 1 
indicates that the number of markets in Oregon grew from 38 in 1998 to 43 in 1999. Table 2 
more precisely documents that between the end of the 1998 season and the beginning of the 
1999 season, 11 new markets opened and 6 existing markets closed. Over the entire 1998-
2005 period, 62 markets opened and 32 closed for a net gain of 30. These are startling 
numbers, even for those familiar with the sector. The number of new markets for this period is 
much higher than is generally recognized and averages nearly 9 markets per year or 14% of the 
total markets open. This is significant because new markets request much more assistance than 
established markets and therefore the workload for education providers varies more as a 
function of the number of new markets rather than as a function of the net increase in markets.  
 
The number of markets that closed during this period of substantial growth in markets is equally 
surprising. These 32 failed markets highlight the fragility and risk associated with operating a 
farmers’ market and is a part of the story rarely mentioned in the glowing articles on the 
development of this sector. The overwhelming majority of markets that closed had short life 
spans as 15 markets (nearly 47%) did so following their first season and 24 of the 32 failed 
markets (75%) closed during the first three years of operation. Examination of the 16 markets 
that opened in 2001 reveals that eight or 50% failed within the first four years. Both sets of data 
demonstrate that failure rates for new markets are broadly similar to failure rates for small Western Economics Forum, Fall 2006 
 
 
  11
businesses. Most markets that close are small. They close for a combination of four reasons: (1) 
an inability to attract sufficient vendors (supply), (2) an inability to attract sufficient consumers 
(demand), (3) low administrative revenue, and (4) insufficient management often provided by a 
poorly paid or volunteer manager. (Stephenson 2006; Stephenson et al. 2006) Although failed 
markets are an unpleasant experience for their organizers, vendors, and customers, the 
“churning” within the overall market sector that these data portray, the opening of new markets 
at the same time that others are closing, should be recognized as having positive aspects as 
well since poorly performing markets are disappearing while potentially stronger ones are 
opening.  
 
The last line in Table 2 parallels the results in Table 1 by revealing a high degree of year by 
year variation in the numbers of both new and closed markets. On average, almost nine 
markets per year opened, but in 2001 sixteen markets opened while in 2004 only four markets 
opened. There were no significant federal or state level policy initiatives that were driving these 
year by year differences; they resulted from independent decisions by the diverse types of 
groups that chose to open farmers’ markets. Neighborhood associations, local governments, 
groups of vendors, and business associations are the primary market organizers. There was 
less variation for closed markets as the average was 4.6 and the yearly numbers were all 
between two and six. The regional data further highlight the season-by-season variation as, for 
example, new markets that opened in Portland Metro in a given year ranged from one to seven 
during this period. Figure 1 provides a graphic portrayal of the data from these first two tables. 
 
Table 2. New (N) and closed (C) markets, by region and by year. 
  1998 1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005 
  n=  N  C  N C N C N C N C N C N C 
Portland  Metro  13  7  2  1 2 4 1 1 2 4 1 2 1 3 - 
Willamette  Valley  10  3 1 1 - 5  1 4 1 2 3 - 1  3  3 
Southern  Oregon  8  1 3 1 - 2  1 1 - - 1  1 2 -  1 
Eastern Oregon  1  -  -  -  -  1  -  3  -  -  -  1  1  -  - 
Oregon  Coast  4  - - 2 - 4  1 - 2 - - - - 2  - 
Central  Oregon  1  -  -  - - - - - - - - - - 2  - 
Columbia  Gorge  1  -  -  - - - - - - - - - - 1  - 
Annual total  38 11  6 5 2  16 4 9 6 6 5 4 5  11 4 
 
 
New Managers  
 
Table 3 documents the number of markets that began a season with a different manager from 
the one who finished the prior season. For the seven-year period, 101 existing markets changed 
manager from one year to the next. This represents an annual average of 14 markets or 25% of 
markets. As in Table 2, both the annual totals and the regional data show substantial year-by-
year variation. With very few exceptions, these new managers had not previously managed a 
farmers’ market. 
 
Since, by definition, all new markets open with a new manager, the 62 new markets can be 
added to arrive at a grand total of 163 new managers for this period. Once again with rare 
exceptions, the new markets were managed by individuals without prior market management 
experience. On a percentage basis, 59% of Oregon markets opened with the manager from the 
previous year and 41% were either new markets or existing markets with new managers. Table 
4 summarizes manager status data on an annual basis. 
 Western Economics Forum, Fall 2006 
 
 
  12
 
Figure 1. Tracking year by year changes in Oregon farmers’ markets. 
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
1
9
9
9
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
3
2
0
0
4
2
0
0
5
N
u
m
b
e
r
 
o
f
 
M
a
r
k
e
t
s
Net Increase
Total new
Did not reopen
 
 
 
From an educational standpoint, one key implication in Oregon has been a consistently high 
level of demand for the most basic level of market management training and mentoring. These 
training services have been provided by the Extension Service and the statewide farmers’ 
market organization through annual conferences, print and web publications, a dedicated list 
serve, and one on one meetings.  
 
Table 3. Existing markets that reopened under a new manager.   
  1999 2000 2001 2002 2003  2004  2005 
Portland  Metro  4 5 4 6 2  8  4 
Willamette  Valley  2 2 3 6 6  5  1 
Southern  Oregon  4 0 1 1 2  4  3 
Eastern  Oregon  0 1 1 1 2  1  2 
Oregon  Coast  2 2 3 2 2  1  1 
Central  Oregon  1 1 0 1 0  0  0 
Columbia  Gorge  1 0 1 0 1  0  1 
Annual totals  14 11 13 17 15  19  12 
 
 
Location Change 
 
Table 5 shows, by year, the number of markets operating on a new site. Over the seven year 
period, there were 46 changes in location or an average of just over 6.5 changes per year. 
Table 4: Summary of manager status by year. 
  1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004  2005  Total  Percent 
New  Markets  11  5  16  9 6 4 11 62 16% 
Existing market,  
New manager 
14 11 13 17 15 19  12  101  25% 
Existing market,  
Returning manager 
18    29 35 41 38  45  236  59% 
Annual totals   43 46 58 61 62 61  68  399   Western Economics Forum, Fall 2006 
 
 
  13
These figures do not include new markets, which also must learn to operate in new sites. Few 
markets change their site by choice. In almost all instances they have been forced to look for a 
new site because the former site was no longer available. Location changes add to a 
management burden that already includes the need to enforce market rules and diverse 
governmental regulations, to manage the selection of vendors and products, to attract 
customers and community support, and to meet environmental challenges such as weather, 
paucity of site amenities and parking space (Stephenson 2006). 
 
Table 5. Number of markets changing locations.   
  1999  2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 
Portland  Metro  0  3 3 4 3 5 1 
Willamette  Valley  2  1 2 2 2 2 1 
Southern  Oregon  0  3 1 0 2 1 0 
Eastern  Oregon  0  0 0 0 1 2 0 
Oregon  Coast  0  1 1 0 0 1 0 
Central  Oregon  0  0 0 0 0 0 0 
Columbia  Gorge  1  0 0 0 0 1 0 
Annual totals  3  8 7 6 8  12  2 
 
 
Summary 
 
Although it has been widely reported that farmers’ markets have grown in recent years, few 
observers have recognized what lies behind the commonly cited numbers. While Oregon saw 
an increase from 38 markets to 68 markets during the period 1998-2005, the even more 
dramatic figures from this period are that 62 new markets opened and 32 markets closed. Over 
this time period, the failure rate among Oregon markets was roughly similar to the failure rate 
among small businesses. During the same period, 101 existing markets re-opened the following 
season with a new manager. Adding in the 62 new markets means that 163 markets, or on 
average 23 per year, opened a season with a new manager. In addition, many markets each 
year must change their location.  
 
These more complete numbers are important for several reasons. First, they provide dramatic 
evidence that even in a period of rapid expansion both existing markets and prospective market 
organizers must recognize that many markets do not succeed. Second, the educational 
challenges for working with new markets and new managers are much greater than has been 
previously recognized. For this period at least, there were twice as many new markets as has 
been assumed, even more new managers, and frequent location changes. The growth of 
farmers’ markets is all the more remarkable given the magnitude and types of changes that 
individual markets cope with on an annual basis. 
 
References 
 
Brown, A. 2002. Farmers’ Market Research 1940-2000: An Inventory and Review. American 
Journal of Alternative Agriculture 17(4). 
 
Knaup, A. 2005. Survival and Longevity in the Business Employment Dynamics Data. 
Monthly Labor Review 129(5): 50-56. 
 
Oregon Department of Agriculture. 1998-2002. Oregon Farmers’ Market Brochure.  
 Western Economics Forum, Fall 2006 
 
 
  14
Oregon Farmers’ Market Association. 2003-2005. Oregon Farmers’ Market Brochure.  
 
Stephenson, G. 2006. Success, Failure and the Management Ecology of Oregon’s Farmers’ 
Markets. Unpublished dissertation. University of Oregon, Eugene, OR. 
 
Stephenson, G., L. Lev and L. Brewer. 2006. When Things Don’t Work: Some Insights into 
Why Markets Close. Oregon Small Farms Technical Report Number 25. Oregon State 
University Extension Service, Corvallis, OR.  
 
Thilmany, D. and P. Watson. 2004. The Increasing Role of Direct Marketing and Farmers 
Markets for Western US Producers. Western Economics Forum 3(2): 19-25. 
  
USDA Agricultural Marketing Service. Farmers Market Directory. 
http://www.ams.usda.gov/farmersmarkets/map.htm (Accessed September 2006). 
 
 
Appendix  
 
• In  the  Oregon Farmers’ Markets brochure, the Sherwood Saturday Market was reclassified 
from the “Willamette Valley” region to the “Portland Metro” region beginning in 2003. 
Klamath Falls was moved from the “Southern Oregon” region to the “Eastern Oregon” region 
in 2004, and on to “Central Oregon” in 2005. In this report, each market remains in its 
original region, and changes in market dynamics are recorded according to markets’ original 
regional designators.  
•  Although it is not listed in the 1999 brochure, the Beaverton Wednesday market operated 
that year and is counted as such in these calculations. 
•  The Eastbank Farmers’ Market opened in 2003, but was too late to be listed in that year’s 
brochure. Although it does not appear in the brochure until 2004, we have included it in the 
figures for 2003. 
•  Specialty or holiday markets with a separate listing in the brochure have not been treated as 
separate markets for the purposes of this report. All were closely associated with an 
established farmers’ market. 
 

Farmers’ Market Research 1940-2000: An Inventory and Review.

Success, Failure and the Management Ecology of Oregon’s Farmers’ Markets. Unpublished dissertation.

Survival and Longevity in the Business Employment Dynamics Data.

The Increasing Role of Direct Marketing and Farmers Markets for Western US Producers.

When Things Don’t Work: Some Insights into Why Markets Close. Oregon Small Farms

More Change Than You Think: Tracking Oregon Farmers’ Markets and Their Managers 1998-2005

More Change Than You Think: Tracking Oregon Farmers’ Markets and Their Managers 1998-2005

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics