Paper presented at the International Conference

Cooperative Responses to Global Challenges, Berlin 21.-23.03.2012

Community-Supported Agriculture and Consumer Cooperatives in India
Markus Hanisch
Humboldt-Universitt zu Berlin
Landwirtschaftlich-Grtnerische Fakultt, Department fr Agrarkonomie, Fachgebiet
Kooperationswissenschaften
Luisenstr. 53
10099 Berlin
Phone: +49 (0)30 20936500; Email: hanischm@rz.hu-berlin.de

Nina Osswald
Brombergerstr. 3
74321 Bietigheim-Bissingen
Phone: +49 (0)176 38486986; Email: osswald.nina@gmail.com

Abstract:
Since the start of this century, several innovative approaches to organic food distribution through
regional and local networks have emerged in urban India. These initiatives are often organized as
cooperatives, and they share several other characteristics with alternative food networks and
community-supported agriculture (CSA) found in other parts of the world. This paper is mainly
explorative. Our objective is to analyse salient features of CSA. We apply and extend concepts
developed for the characterisation of CSAs in the United Kingdom (Kneafsey et al. 2008, Seyfang
2009) in order to compare CSAs in three Indian megacities. We find many commonalities between
CSA in India and CSA in other parts of the world. We conclude with some policy recommendations
and an agenda for further research.
Keywords: Community-Supported Agriculture (CSA), Cooperatives, India, Hyderabad, Mumbai, Pune
1



1. Introduction
Around the world, a growing number of people prefer local, organically grown food and want to
support agricultural systems that provide healthy food to consumers and at the same time enable
small producers to sustain a decent livelihood from farming. Community-supported agriculture (CSA)
has become a globally accepted and growing movement (Henderson 2010). This growth can be
interpreted partly as a response to food scandals and hazards such as pesticide residues, and to an
increasingly industrialized and globalized food system that fails to provide adequate nourishment
for large numbers of people, does not account for many environmental costs, and concentrates
decisions over food in fewer and fewer hands (Henderson 2007: 11).
The literature on localized food systems and CSA initiatives is necessarily based on case studies and
some broader attempts to compare and describe the phenomenon. In the United States, Japan and
some European countries, community-oriented models of food distribution first emerged in the
1970s and have kept spreading in numbers since then. In India, on the other hand, similar initiatives
have only begun to emerge. The objective of this paper is to explore emerging CSA initiatives in India
as part of the growing organic food sector of the country, to place these initiatives within the context
of CSA as a growing global movement, and to assess their potential contribution to sustainable
development of urban food systems in India. The paper starts out with an overview of definitions and
key characteristics of CSA schemes and a review of academic literature on alternative
1

1
Several authors (for example, Holloway 2007, Kloppenburg et al. 2000, Kneafsey et al. 2008) critically point
out that the term alternative implies a dichotomy between conventional and alternative food systems,
where in reality a broad variety of initiatives have been labelled alternative for different reasons, and
many of these share aspects of conventional food systems to some extent. We nevertheless use the term
alternative food networks in the present paper because it is best suited to capture the main
characteristics distinguishing CSA from conventional food supply chains and the mainstream of food
distribution and marketing.
food
networks. Frameworks for analyzing alternative food networks and their potential contributions to
sustainable development were developed by several authors with reference to case studies in the
USA and Europe (Holloway et al. 2007; Kneafsey et al. 2008; Seyfang 2006; Seyfang 2009). These
frameworks are presented in sections 2. An outline of the institutional background of the agricultural
sector as well as the role of cooperative approaches in India sets the local context of cooperatives,
2



agricultural marketing and organic food in India in section 3. In section 4 we present three case
studies of young community-driven organic food distribution schemes in metropolitan areas of South
and West India, namely Hyderabad, Mumbai and Pune. The key characteristics of these case studies
are examined and their contributions to sustainable development assessed.
This explorative paper of the young CSA sector in India is based on empirical data gathered in a
mixed-method study
2
2. Framing Community-Supported Agriculture Initiatives
conducted in several intervals over the course of three years. The
methodology combined field visits, participatory observation, interviews with organizers, producers
and participants/consumers, a literature review and document analysis. To our knowledge, no
published academic literature exists to date on the emerging CSA sector in India, apart from the MSc
thesis by Gillan (2010) that discusses a case study from Pune, India, which is one of the first CSA
initiatives in India and is also presented in this paper.
The action manual A Share in the Harvest published by the Soil Association the principal
organization promoting the CSA concept in the UK defines CSA as a partnership between farmers
and consumers where the responsibilities and rewards of farming are shared. (...) CSA is a shared
commitment to building a more local and equitable agricultural system, one that allows farmers to
focus on good farming practices and still maintain productive and profitable farms (Soil Association,
2009: 3). This definition emphasizes partnerships wherein producers and consumers commit to share
the risks involved in any farming enterprise, for example by way of consumers holding a farm share,
prepaying for the seasons produce, or signing a contract giving the farmers a purchasing guarantee.
A subscription or purchase commitment on the part of consumers allows farmers to plan production
based on a more accurate estimate of demand than in conventional supply chains, thus minimizing
the risk of wastages due to surplus production. The risk of a failed harvest is shared by all
participants, rather than being borne solely by the farmers. Prepaid systems and revolving loan funds

2
Research for this paper was funded by the Germany Ministry of Education and Research in the context of
the project Climate and Energy in a Complex Transition Process towards Sustainable Hyderabad. Mitigation
and Adaptation Strategies by Changing Institutions, Governance Structures, Life Styles and Consumption
Patterns. We gratefully acknowledge the help of the organizers of Sahaja Aharam, MOFCA and GORUS for
support during field research.
3



which some CSA initiatives have developed allow farmers to make investments at the beginning of
the planting season. Many CSA schemes are organized as cooperatives or cooperative associations.
CSA is an adaptable concept, and Henderson (2010) notes that [o]nce they seize upon the basic
principles, farmers and citizen-consumers in each culture are adapting CSA to their local conditions.
Gillan (2010) uses the umbrella term Local Solidarity Partnership between Producers and
Consumers to refer to CSA in Anglophone countries, and similar systems in other parts of the
world
3
. The CSA system originated in Japan in 1971 as the teikei (partnership) movement. Later in
the 1970s, similar movements emerged in Switzerland, from where the system was carried to the
USA in the 1980s. By the end of the millennium, the USA alone had over 1000 such projects, most of
them small-scale organic or bio-dynamic family farms which retained conventional marketing
channels in addition to supplying to nearby urban consumer groups. In recent years, the locavore
movement together with food scandals and global financial crises caused these numbers to multiply,
and the range of CSAs in terms of size and degree of consumer involvement has become more varied
(Henderson 2010)
4
Holloway et al. (2007) and Kneafsey et al. (2008) developed a framework of seven heuristic analytical
fields for analysing food productionconsumption networks. We add to this an eighth field, namely
contributions of CSA to sustainability, which is based on the sustainable consumption concept
developed by Seyfang (2009). Following this framework, we first characterize key features of CSA
before applying these characterizations to three case studies from India. It will become obvious in
the next paragraphs that specific aspects of a particular CSA project may relate to several of these
analytical fields.
.
Analytical Field Examples
1. Site of food production Community-garden, school grounds, urban brownfield
sites, farm, rented field, allotments...
2. Food production methods Organic, biodynamic, consumer participation, horse
ploughing...

3
These include the Teikei system in Japan, Associations pour le Maintien dune Agriculture Paysanne (AMAP) in
France, Agriculture Soutenue par la Communaut (ASC) in Qubec, Reciproco in Portugal, Voedselteams in
Belgium and Solidarische Landwirtschaft in Germany.
4
Henderson (2010) gives an overview of this global history of CSA.
4



3. Supply chain Local selling/procurement, Internet marketing...
4. Arena of exchange Farm shops, farmers markets, home delivery, mobile
shops, PYO...
5. Producerconsumer interaction Direct selling, email, newsletters, cooking demonstrations,
food growing work, farm walks, share/subscription
membership schemes...
6. Motivations for participation Business success, making food accessible,
social/environmental concerns, anxiety avoidance, sensory
pleasure...
7. Constitution of individual and group
identities
Customers, participants, stakeholders, supporters groups,
childrens groups, disability groups, care-givers, womens
groups...
8. Contributions to sustainable development Localized, reduced ecological footprint, encouraging
community-building and collective action, building new
infrastructures of provision
Table 1: Framework for analyzing community-supported agriculture initiatives, based on Kneafsey
et al. (2008) and Seyfang (2009)

1. Site of food production: The majority of CSA farms in the US are small to mid-scale farms
(Henderson 2010). The CSA system is more suited to small farms because it requires diversity
of production and intensive management, because consumers can more easily connect with
and participate in small farm enterprises, and because small farms cannot use economies of
scale in order to compete with larger commercial farm enterprises. For small farms, CSA
systems may provide better returns than other marketing models (Brown and Miller 2008).
Most CSA farms use only part of their land for the CSA scheme and continue to use other
marketing channels.
2. Food production methods: CSA typically use organic, biodynamic or other sustainable
farming systems. While some CSA farms in the USA are highly mechanized, the majority have
diverse vegetable production that involves a lot of hand labour (Henderson 2010). CSA farms
typically produce diverse crops, which is important both to maintain ecological sustainability
of the farm and to satisfy consumer expectations in terms of product variety. The vast
majority of CSA focus on vegetables as their primary product.
3. Supply chain: CSA farms are typically located near urban centres and operate locally or
regionally, with short supply chains. Proximity and strengthening of local food networks are
5



among their core objectives. CSA is a specific form of direct marketing in which produce is
marketed directly from producer to consumer without any intermediaries. Supply chains are
organized using different levels of technology, ranging from low-tech direct supply on a local
level to Internet-based solutions of supply chain management.
4. Arena of exchange: CSA comprises a wide range of different initiatives with different supply
chain models, and accordingly, exchange of produce takes place in a variety of spaces. Some
CSAs ask consumers to pick up supplies from the farm or a farm shop, some distribute
through roadside stalls, farmers markets, mobile sales points, retail stores or other pickup
points, and others operate as box delivery schemes. In addition to the space where the
material exchange of produce takes place, this field also refers to the object of the exchange,
for example food is exchanged for money, work or financial commitments in the form of
subscriptions.
5. Producer-consumer interaction: CSA schemes involve some form of personal interaction and
face-to-face contact between the two groups, which may occur frequently and regularly, for
example if consumer-members work on the farm, or may be limited to occasional farm visits
by the consumers. Accordingly, CSAs can have varying degrees of consumer involvement.
While some operate as box delivery schemes and treat consumers mainly as customers,
others oblige members to contribute a certain number of hours of volunteer work on the
farm, and some hire part of their member base as harvest helpers to solve the farm labour
problem.
6. Motivations for participation: Producers and consumers can have different motivations for
participating in a CSA scheme. Gillan (2010) found in her survey that important reasons for
starting a CSA are to grow healthy food, foster producer-consumer partnerships, increase
farm viability, create a better environment, increase local food sovereignty and respond to
globalized food systems. On the part of consumers, participation is motivated for instance by
the desire to eat fresh and healthy organic produce, support local peasants and sustainable
6



farming practices, and reconnect with the sources of ones food. Seyfang (2009) found that
advantages perceived by direct marketing customers include supporting a local business,
better quality produce, convenience (in the case of box delivery), reduced packaging, ethical
shopping (as opposed to shopping in supermarkets), reduced food miles and friendly
atmosphere.
7. Constitution of individual and group identities: The basic principle of CSA fosters values of
participation, ownership and food sovereignty, cooperation and community-building, and
reconnection with producers and the origin of ones food. This process of reconnection and
of forming partnerships contributes to the formation of specific identities for both producers
and consumers. Many CSA initiatives aim to educate consumers and raise awareness of
issues like sustainable farming systems, environmental conservation, rural livelihood security
or the globalization of food systems. CSA projects challenge dominant food systems and
supply chains and offer possibilities for resistance to centres of power in food systems
(whether or not this is an explicit objective of a project [...]) and to engage in active remaking
of food productionconsumption relationships in accordance with their particular ways of
imagining better food networks. (Holloway et al. 2007: 10)
8. Contributions to sustainable development: The rhetoric of sustainability and sustainable
food systems is used by many actors for widely different purposes, and with widely different
conceptions of what makes a food system better or sustainable. Several authors
developed economic, social and environmental criteria for defining sustainable food systems.
For example, the criteria used by Van Loon, Patil, and Hugar (2005) include profitability,
competitiveness in the local market, number and type of farm workers, compensation and
benefits for employees, sourcing of inputs and self-sufficiency, crop management, and pest
and weed management, and crop diversity. Kloppenburg et al. (2000) concluded from a
participatory process with stakeholders who are actively involved in constructing alternative
food networks that sustainable food systems should be environmentally sustainable,
7



proximate, economically sustaining, self-sufficient, participatory, just, healthful and diverse,
knowledgeable, communicative, sustainably regulated, culturally nourishing, seasonal,
relational and based on value-oriented associative economics.
While there can be no universal and timeless definition of a sustainable food system, we
found the set of sustainable consumption criteria developed by Seyfang (2009) localisation,
reducing ecological footprints, community-building, collective action and building new
infrastructures of provision to be both clear and comprehensive. The description of the
seven previous analytical fields illustrates the many ways in which CSAs respond to these
facets of sustainable consumption. Seyfang applied the five criteria to a UK case study of a
grassroots-based sustainable food initiative and found that it fulfils all of them. Other studies
also concluded that CSA can contribute to sustainable development in various ways, for
example a feasibility study by the Soil Association found that CSA has many benefits for both
farmers and consumers, and Lass et al. (2001) concluded from the largest survey of CSA
farms in the USA to date that the system may help maintain or improve the economic and
environmental condition of farm enterprises.
3. Institutional background in India
The CSA movement reached India through grassroots NGOs as well as consumer and producer
activists, some of whom were inspired by international examples of CSAs. In India, cooperatives have
a strong role in society in general, from urban housing societies to producer cooperatives in the
agricultural sector. While many producer groups have been organized as cooperatives for a long
time, urban consumer cooperatives in the food sector are a relatively new phenomenon. Since
legislation does not provide for any form of incorporation that allows for donor funding and
commercial revenue at the same time, many CSAs opt for a hybrid model of organization: While an
externally-funded non-profit organization such as a registered society or trust facilitates rural
production by providing technical assistance, capacity building services and infrastructure, a for-
profit company or producer cooperative handles the commercial marketing activities.
8



The Indian agriculture sector is dominated by small and marginal farmers producing in low-input
rainfed production systems; at the same time, farming systems in regions that cater to large urban
markets are highly intensive and dependent on chemical inputs. Economic sustainability of farming is
a matter of particular urgency in light of the agrarian crisis and farmer suicides. Between 1997 and
2010, nearly 200,000 farmers ended their lives to escape the debt cycles caused by chemical farming
and dependence on agri-input corporations (Sainath 2010). In response to this crisis, the Indian
grassroots organic movement of pioneer farmers, political activists and NGOs has promoted
sustainable farming systems for many decades. Efforts to improve marketing strategies and establish
outlets in urban centres were added to the agenda more recently, and emerging CSA initiatives can
be seen largely as part of these efforts.
The dominant mode of food distribution in Indian cities to date has been through markets, street
vendors and small traditional retailers, the kirana stores; supermarkets and hypermarkets only
started to spread with the Indian retail revolution since the new millennium. Organized retail had
reached a market share of 5% in 2008, and is expected to grow to 14-18% by 2015 (McKinsey 2008).
Neither traditional nor organized modern retail currently provide adequate marketing channels for
small organic producers. The increase in availability of organic food in urban markets over the past
decade has mostly been limited to dry produce, such as staples, spices, sugar, tea and coffee. Until
recently, fresh organic produce was hardly available in urban markets at all, except for occasional
and inconsistent supplies through single organic outlets, NGOs or informal exchange on a personal
basis. At the same time, demand for organic produce in metropolitan areas is projected to grow
significantly in future, and vegetables are the product category for which demand is greatest
(Osswald and Menon 2012; Rao et al. 2006). This constitutes a major opportunity for local organic
food initiatives to establish vegetable supply chains that bridge the current demand-supply gap.
4. Three community-supported agriculture initiatives in India
In the context of the UK, Seyfang (2009) notes a recent revival of localised food supply chains and
[...] rise in demand for specifically local organic produce (ibid.: 83). While in Indian cities this
9



demand is still a negligible niche in quantitative terms, there is an emerging grassroots movement
that explicitly aims to foster values such as local food, organic production methods, fair trading
relations and closer links between producers and consumers of food.
In the following section we present three case studies of niche, grassroots-based sustainable food
initiatives three cities of South and West India in order to explore key characteristics of alternative
food networks and CSA in India, and to assess their potential contributions to the sustainable
development of the food systems of expanding metropolitan areas and their peri-urban linkages.
Case Study Hyderabad: Sahaja Aharam Organic Consumer and Producer Cooperative
The Hyderabad-based NGO Centre for Sustainable Agriculture works with farmers cooperatives to
promote various aspects of sustainable rural development. Cooperative members are small and
marginal farms across Andhra Pradesh who produce organically under a Participatory Guarantee
System. In order to facilitate marketing of organically grown produce, the NGO developed the
farmers brand Sahaja Aharam (Natural Food) and helped set up the Sahaja Aharam Mutually Aided
Cooperative Federation, a federation of farmers cooperatives and an urban consumer cooperative.
Initially, Centre for Sustainable Agriculture concentrated on developing local markets in rural areas,
and later on started its marketing activities in Hyderabad with a farmers market on its office
premises. As the cost of commuting to Hyderabad on a regular basis was too high for the farmers, in
2010, the Sahaja Aharam Organic Consumer and Producer Cooperative opened a cooperative store in
the Centre for Sustainable Agriculture office premises instead. The store is open to the general public
and in 2011 its regular customer base had grown to 150. The range of products and availability of
fresh vegetables also expanded gradually. Apart from the store, the cooperative runs a vegetable
delivery system. Customers order on a weekly basis and receive a basket of mixed seasonal
vegetables, for which they pay upon delivery. A cooperative-owned van delivers to two hundred
households in a radius of 30 km. To make logistics manageable, all households in one area come to a
collection point at a specified time to pick up their produce. The cooperative decided to focus on
delivery, rather than opening up more shops across the city, because real estate has become very
10



expensive in the expanding metropolitan area of Hyderabad, especially in the well-off
neighbourhoods where organic consumers tend to be concentrated.
The main objective of the cooperative federation is to reduce transaction costs in marketing and to
valorize the organically grown products of farmers in peri-urban areas of Hyderabad. If farmers do
not have an outlet for their organic produce, products end up in conventional supply chains, losing
much of their added value as a result. The bulk of produce is sourced directly from local farmers
cooperatives, located within a radius of 150 km of Hyderabad. All vegetables are seasonal; only
wheat is sourced from Maharashtra because it is not grown in Andhra Pradesh. Approximately 500
farmers who are members of Sahaja Aharam cooperatives supply to consumers in Hyderabad. On
average, each farmer uses half an acre of land to grow vegetables for the cooperative in a mixed
cropping model so that units can be rotated depending on market demand.
Currently four employees work full-time for the Sahaja Aharam marketing activities, and volunteers
do about half of the work. In the long run, the goal is to use volunteers for awareness raising and
promotion of the cooperative, and to run the core marketing activities professionally. The mid- to
long-term vision is to triple monthly sales from the current 8.5 tonnes per month, and expand the
customer base to 3,000 households so that the marketing activities can become financially self-
supporting. The cooperative plans to do more frequent deliveries with more staff, and in the longer
run to decentralize delivery by outsourcing it to local franchisees across the city. This option would
become feasible once production volumes increase and would require tamper-proof packaging
rather than just cloth-bags so that the organic product quality remains ensured. The cooperative is
also planning to start wholesales and to add a cold storage facility in the store in order to avoid losses
due to spoilage and pests.

Case Study Mumbai: Greens in a Box: Hari Bhari Tokri
In 2009, fresh and locally grown organic vegetables were difficult to come by in Mumbai. In response,
a group of organic farmers located in peri-urban areas of Mumbai got together with activists of
11



Mumbais organic movement and a number of conscious consumers keen on a regular supply of
organic vegetables. They became the Mumbai Organic Farmers and Consumers Association (MOFCA),
an organization which has since organized weekly deliveries of a mixed basket of vegetables known
as Hari Bhari Tokri or Green Full Basket. It is a first-of-its-kind initiative in Mumbai (Ansari 2010).
Since the first season, the number of farmers associated with MOFCA grew from nine to twenty-five
who in 2011 cultivated a total of 8 acres of vegetables and rice for the tokris. The farms are located
up to 200 km from Mumbai, and produce is delivered to pick-up points across Mumbai within 36
hours of harvest. The baskets are stocked with a variety of whatever vegetables are seasonally
available, and consumers pay a farm-share of INR 3,000. in advance for sixteen weekly baskets of
seasonal vegetables. If consumers fail to pick up their tokris from the pick-up points, it is their loss
because the subscription is prepaid for the entire season. Since 2011 there is also an option to get
the tokri delivered for an additional charge.
The initiative aims to be more than a supply of fresh, local, seasonal and organically grown produce.
As one of the organizers puts it: We are not just another vegetable vendor! One of the primary
aims of MOFCA is to place people before profit in the production of food. Toward this goal, they
are establishing direct relationships between the people who grow food and those who eat it
thereby supporting local farmers as well as supplying good food to urban consumers at affordable
rates. The three primary goals of the tokri scheme are to demonstrate and share sustainable farming
techniques, to create an alternative market model with shared risks and fair prices for farmers and
consumers, and to educate consumers in order to create and sustain demand for seasonal, local and
organic food.
In winter 2011, 190 consumers held farm-shares and received weekly deliveries. Even though MOFCA
promotes its activities only through word-of-mouth and email lists, another 800 consumers are
already on a waiting list, which indicates the huge demand for fresh organic produce. Participants are
a broad spectrum of people, and MOFCA does not specify any particular target group. MOFCA
occasionally offers activities such as demonstrations, workshops and farm visits giving members an
12



opportunity to learn about growing and eating seasonal, local and organic food. Although consumers
have the opportunity to visit the farms at any time and see the production methods for themselves,
few of them made use of this opportunity so far. Ubai Husein, one of the founders of MOFCA and a
supplying farmer, speculates that many customers do not have the time and those who already know
the farmers and the organizers personally trust them without having seen the farms themselves.
The learning curve during the pilot phase was steep for the organizers who are still in the process of
refining the system and the supply chain. Due to limitations of supply, only 250 kg of vegetables
50% percent of the initial target were delivered per week during the first growing season. In 2011,
supply volumes reached 800 kg per week. For future seasons, the objective is to further scale up
production in order to make the system more viable financially. Overall, the model has been well
received by consumers and is in high demand. The biggest challenge in terms of scaling up is the
limited number of farmers who are able to supply organic produce.

Case Study Pune: GORUS: Organic veggies in my inbox
GORUS
5
In order to organize their supply chain efficiently, GORUS makes use of latest technology: Customers
order their weekly deliveries through an online form that contains a list of 35-40 vegetables and
other organic groceries. Once orders are placed, the GORUS coordinators send a message to each
farmer via mobile phone, specifying the exact quantities they should harvest. The farmers bring this
, or Gomukh Centre for Rural Sustainability, is a CSA scheme that was initiated as a pilot
project by Gomukh Environmental Trust for Sustainable Development. For more than fifteen years,
this NGO has worked with small farmers in the Pune region on sustainable rural development and
integrated watershed development. In 2008, GORUS started growing a variety of vegetables
organically on a small plot of land at the Gomukh Trusts farm, located 45 km from Pune. Initially, the
produce was sold to a small number of households in Pune, but by 2011, 25 farmers became involved
and the customer base grew to 150 households.

5
Organic veggies in my inbox is the title of a newspaper article published about GORUS (Dharmadhikary
2010)
13



produce to the collection centre, where the individual boxes are packed. In combination with the
small scale and regional focus, this system of harvesting only what is ordered and delivering it within
36 hours allows farmers to minimize wastage and risks. Whatever produce is left over gets dried or
processed into powder and puree, using adapted small-scale technology like a solar drier and manual
pulping machine to promote value-addition on the village level.
Three days a week, a total of 600 to 700 kg of organically grown vegetables is distributed to different
parts of Pune by the GORUS truck. Upon delivery, customers are requested to check the delivered
products against the bill and to sign a delivery register. GORUS has implemented a prepaid system in
which customers make an advance payment of INR 2,000 from which their weekly purchases are
deducted. One of the challenges for GORUS is the fact that some consumers are slow to settle their
bills and even owe money, even though the project has little working capital but needs to pay the
farmers regularly.
Ashwin Paranjpe, initiator and coordinator of GORUS, had previous experience with CSA in the USA
and in Spain. He emphasizes that he considers GORUSs activities to be decidedly different from a
typical certified organic marketing model. It is not just a relationship of buying and selling; in addition
to supplying fresh, local and seasonal organic produce, the aim is to promote personal interaction
and exchange, to redefine the farmer-consumer relationship and bring consumers closer to the farm
and farmers. To this end, GORUS arranges farm visits for participating consumers on three weekends
a year. In 2011, 150 to 200 people from Pune joined each of the farm visits, many of them with their
families. Both farmers and consumers enjoy this personal interaction, which also helps to build long-
term customer loyalty, educate consumer about principles of organic agriculture, and raise
awareness of broader issues such as rural livelihood conditions, environment and health.
The farmers involved with GORUS have an average landholding of 2-3 acres of which 1/4 acre is
cultivated as vegetables. GORUS encourages farmers to have a highly diversified farm system with
crops that can be marketed well in the city. With the income they have already made from the
vegetable marketing activity, some farmers are now able to set up small greenhouses that help them
14



expand the growing season. For the farmers, the most important advantages of selling through
GORUS are having an assured market for their produce and avoiding the risks of price fluctuations.
They are paid the same rate per kg for every vegetable throughout the year and receive a share of at
least 50% of what the consumer pays. Salaries for labourers are also above the local average. This
Fairtrade model has worked so far without any legal bond or contract with the farmers, who are
officially considered suppliers. Since Gomukh Trust has worked in the area for a long time, their
verbal guarantee has been sufficient. In fact, it was their good reputation in the region that helped
win the farmers trust in the first place.
Gomukh Trust initially facilitated the project by co-funding staff salaries and providing land, capital
and infrastructure facilities. Since 2011, marketing activities are financially independent of the NGO
and run as a commercial venture with a social focus. Ashwin Paranjpe hopes that in another five
years all infrastructure costs are fully covered by the vegetable marketing. The projects base of
farmers and consumers has grown steadily. While there is already a waiting list of interested
consumers, GORUSs rate of expansion has been deliberately slow so as to give farmers time to
expand their production gradually. The target capacity is a maximum of 200 families and 50 farmers,
a scale at which the project can maintain its basic principles of regional focus, environmental
sustainability, and Fairtrade relationships.

Analytical Field Case Study Hyderabad:
Sahaja Aharam
Case Study Mumbai:
MOFCA
Case Study Pune:
GORUS
1. Site of food
production
500 mall and marginal
farms within 150 km of
Hyderabad
25 farms within 200 km of
Mumbai
25 small and marginal
farmers within 60 km of
Pune
2. Food production
methods
Diverse multi-cropping
planting system; non-
certified organic (PGS)
Diverse multi-cropping
planting system; non-
certified organic (PGS)
Diverse multi-cropping
planting system; non-
certified organic (PGS)
3. Supply chain Fresh from farm; box
delivery to pick-up points
and cooperative retail store
Fresh from farm; box
delivery to pick-up points,
or to households at extra
charge
Fresh from farm; box
delivery to households
4. Arena of exchange 200 subscribers pay on
delivery for a weekly mixed
seasonal vegetable basket
190 members pay a farm
share for every growing
season in advance for a
mixed seasonal vegetable
basket delivered weekly
150 subscribers pay a
prepaid balance from
which weekly orders of
seasonal vegetables get
deducted
15



5. Producer
consumer
interaction
Annual member assembly Occasional workshops and
farm visits
Three farm visits per year
6. Motivations for
participation
Farmers: higher and more
stable income, minimized
risk of wastage
Consumers: regular supply
of fresh organic produce,
desire to support local
farmers
Farmers: higher and more
stable income, minimized
risk of wastage
Consumers: regular supply
of fresh organic produce,
desire to support local
farmers
Farmers: higher and more
stable income, minimized
risk of wastage
Consumers: regular supply
of fresh organic produce,
desire to support local
farmers
7. Constitution of
individual and
group identities
Some consumers are
cooperative members and
shareholders; some are
customers; some work as
volunteers
Consumers are
shareholders; some work
as volunteers
Consumers are subscribers;
no volunteers
8. Contributions to
sustainable
development
Diverse organic farming
systems, reduced food
miles and packaging,
improved livelihood
security for small and
marginal farmers,
reconnection of producers
and consumers, providing
healthy food
Diverse organic farming
systems, reduced food
miles and packaging,
promoting sustainable
consumption habits and
educating consumers on
local and seasonal produce,
building new institutions of
food provision, providing
healthy food
Diverse organic farming
systems, reduced food
miles and packaging,
improved livelihood
security for small and
marginal farmers,
reconnection of producers
and consumers, increased
consumer awareness,
providing healthy food
Table 2: Properties of the case studies from India in relation to the analytical fields suggested in
section 2 (cf. Table 1)

Site of food production: The case studies indicate that the common starting point CSAs in India is
either a group of urban consumers with an educated background or a rural development NGO who
had worked with small and marginal farmers for many years and recently started focusing on
marketing in urban centres. The CSA approach is compatible with the basic values of these
organizations, such as participation, solidarity, anti-corporatism and sustainable development. It also
gives resource-poor small and marginal producers an opportunity to market organic produce. Most
of the farms in the case studies have landholdings of less than 5 acres.
Food production methods: All three CSAs in the case studies source from farmers who produce
organically but explicitly do not aim for third-party organic certification. The documentation process
required for certification is an obstacle for farmers, many of whom are illiterate. To date, certification
is mandatory only for organic exports, and the benefits of certification are not perceived to justify
the high cost. By giving producers and consumers an opportunity to interact with each other directly,
the CSA model enhances transparency, mutual trust and consumer confidence in organic production.
16



In many CSAs, associated NGOs help farmers get organized in groups and implement a Participatory
Guarantee System for organic quality assurance.
Supply chain: The CSAs in the case studies operate mainly with locally and regionally oriented supply
chains, making occasional exceptions for products that cannot be grown in their region. Since CSA
initiatives in India are only a few years old, they are still in a process of learning by trial and error and
working out the best supply chain model. Logistics and transport infrastructure are among the
greatest challenges for CSAs in India. For small initiatives in particular, transport is not efficient
because vehicles are not loaded to full capacity. The organizers of the case study CSAs anticipate that
this will improve once volumes get scaled up in future. In the case of the Sahaja Aharam consumer
cooperative, delivery constitutes up to 15-20% of total costs because organic consumers are
scattered across the city. At the same time, a delivery system was found to be more viable than
opening up retail outlets in the expanding metropolis of Hyderabad with its high real estate prices.
Arena of exchange: The primary objectives of all the initiatives in the case studies include a sharing
of risks between farmers and consumers. In a system of backward supply chain integration, the CSA
organizers help farmers to pre-plan production before the planting season, either based on the
number of subscribed consumers or through estimates of consumer orders that are based on the
previous seasons experience. Careful production planning together with farm shares or pre-paid
subscriptions minimizes the risk of wastages, maximizes marketability of what the farmers grow, and
results in more stable and reliable incomes. Variety and bumper yields are our shared rewards
and scarcity and losses, our shared risks. In all situations, an uncertain and variable harvest is the
medium through which we learn to respect Nature [sic!] and to live in community. (MOFCA Concept
Paper 2011)
CSAs avoid the cost of retail infrastructure and have short supply chains without intermediaries other
than a facilitating non-profit organization. This ensures that farmers get a higher share of what the
consumer pays. In addition to income, the direct marketing relationship saves farmers the troubles
and risks associated with negotiating with intermediaries. This is particularly relevant in rural India
17



where market commissioners often have a monopoly in their area, markets are not transparent and
farmers are likely to be victims of tempered weighing scales and the like. Transport logistics also
become easier for farmers; MOFCA for instance picks up produce directly from the farm.
The CSAs in the case studies operate with a cost-based model: The final cost of produce is calculated
based on what is considered to be a fair share to the farmer, plus operating costs such as packing,
transport and administration. Several CSA organizers stressed in interviews that on the whole, fixed
prices work out to the advantage of both consumers and producers. As part of their basic values, the
CSAs aim to be socially inclusive, and price levels are often comparable to local market prices while
avoiding fluctuations. Dr. Ramanjaneyulu, Director of Centre for Sustainable Agriculture, notes that
Sahaja Aharam price levels are significantly lower than in commercial organic shops and
supermarkets, and not more than 5-10% higher than the non-organic market prices. This is achieved
through various cost saving factors: short supply chains and direct marketing relationships without
intermediaries; less costly Participatory Guarantee System; NGO support, for example in the initial
pilot phase of marketing; some of the work is backed by NGO employees, and some of the
cooperative members work on a voluntary basis.
In order to expand the product range, scale up production volumes and invest in infrastructure such
as greenhouses and facilities for packing and storage, cooperatives need access to capital. Most small
farmers do not have access to loans from banks, commercial loans from the private capital market
have high interest rates, and, according to the interviewed NGOs, investors in the agricultural sector
are increasingly difficult to find. International donors are not willing to fund small-scale projects that
impact only a few dozen farmer families. Some cooperatives have started setting up their own funds
for enabling farmers to make necessary investments. GORUS has evolved a system where consumers
give small loans to farmers on a personal basis, and they are working on a revolving fund for farmers.
Producerconsumer interaction: For the CSAs in the case studies, the marketing system is not just a
relationship of buying and selling; it is as much about personal interaction and exchange, and about
redefining the farmer-consumer relationship. One of their objectives apart from supplying fresh,
18



local and seasonal organic produce is to give consumers an opportunity to reconnect with
producers, agricultural production and food traditions. Unlike in Western countries, none of the CSAs
obliges members to contribute a certain number of hours per month as volunteers. Where farm visits
are organized, these are conceived more as a leisure activity and learning experience rather than a
real contribution towards operations. Compared with consumer cooperatives, consumers in the
GORUS model are less involved in the operations because they do not contribute any volunteer
work; thus it becomes all the more important to build long-term customer loyalty through personal
interactions during the occasional farm visits.
Motivations for participation: Henderson (2010) defines the typical members of CSAs broadly as
active citizens. In India, this translates into an educated urban middle class background. While
some belong to the highest socio-economic strata for example those who can afford to dedicate a
large part of their time to working for the cause without monetary compensation their objective is
explicitly to make good food affordable, and to counteract the elitism that is often inherent in
organic food in India due to its price premium. While in Western countries consumer motivations for
purchasing organic food often centre around concerns over food scandals and environmental
aspects, consumer research (Garibay and Jyoti 2003; Rao et al. 2006) indicates that in India general
health concerns relating to pesticide residues are more prevalent. The urban consumers involved in
the CSAs in the case studies support organic agriculture out of both health and environmental
concerns.
Many of the participants of the case study CSAs share a concern for farmers' livelihood security and
political issues surrounding rural development, the Indian agrarian crisis, and broader questions of
economic development of the country and its food sector. This indicates that CSA participants in
India tend to be more politically aware and committed than average organic food consumers. If, in
future, supermarkets in India start providing fresh organic and local produce at competitive prices, in
good quality and sufficient variety, they might start competing for the same target groups as CSAs. At
19



the same time, at least some of the members of CSAs in India are explicitly opposed to the
supermarket shopping culture and the corporate food system it represents.
Constitution of individual and group identities: In accordance to the varying degrees of producer
consumer interaction and the nature purchasing commitments, the identities of the involved groups
producers, organizers and consumers vary as well. Consumers in the Sahaja Aharam model who
are not members of the cooperative are closest to being mere customers, since they pay on delivery
and make no long-term commitment. In the case of GORUS, the prepaid system and farm visits result
in a slightly stronger consumer engagement, and MOFCA has the highest level of long-term
commitment by issuing farm shares for the entire growing season. At the same time, since none of
the CSAs in the case studies asks consumers to participate in farm work, the identities of producer
and consumer remain distinct.
Part of the objective of a CSA can be to redefine those identities, and to question established notions
of consumer expectations. For instance, while GORUS members get a chance to order individual
products and quantities from a list of seasonally available produce every week, MOFCA supplies a
pre-determined mixed basket of whatever vegetables are seasonally available. While the former
system requires meticulous production planning, weekly adaptations of the produce list and online
order form, and a lot more labour for packing the personalized crates, previous experiments in Pune
showed that consumers prefer being able to choose rather than getting a fixed basket
6

6
Kneafsey et al. (2008) explore the interesting notion that consumers may in fact find the pre-determined
mixed basket option more convenient, because it saves them the burden of having to make shopping
choices while at the same time guaranteeing great variety of produce. The authors point out the difference
between the concepts of choice versus variety while customers at a supermarket have on overwhelming
product range of choices, the obligation to choose often means that consumers end up buying the same
products year round. By way of getting a mixed basket delivered, the variety of food that people eat often
ends up being greater, and they tend to try more unknown products such as old, rediscovered vegetable
varieties than they would otherwise.
. One of
MOFCAs objectives is to re-educate consumers about eating locally and seasonally; with the year-
round availability of the same variety of vegetables at street stalls and in modern retail, consumers
have lost much of this traditional knowledge: We are spoilt for choice. We think only mangoes are
seasonal. So, yes, the participating consumers will have to relearn a lot in terms of their eating
20



habits, says Neesha Noronha, one of the team members of MOFCA (quoted in Ansari 2010). By
supplying a basket of seasonal vegetables, box delivery schemes give urban dwellers an opportunity
to reconnect to natural cycles of agricultural production and at the same time get fresh, nutritious
vegetables.
Contributions to sustainable development: As the analysis of the seven other fields has
demonstrated, the Indian case studies make various contributions to sustainable development. The
CSAs we looked at build localized networks of food supply, thus reducing food miles and
strengthening the local economy; they reduce ecological footprints by promoting sustainable farming
systems, reducing packaging, and cutting food miles; they encourage community building and
collective action; and they contribute to building new infrastructures of food provision.
The CSAs in the case studies were initiated by NGOs or urban activist groups rather than farmers,
because at this stage rural communities in India do not have the resources and capacity to launch a
CSA initiative. While in Western countries, farmers and urban consumers tend to have similar
educational and cultural backgrounds, the differences between rural and urban India are far more
marked. Farmers are often illiterate, may have visited a city only a few times if at all, and have very
different food habits and expectations in terms of quality and variety compared to their urban
customers. This may inhibit CSA formation to be driven by farmer groups in India. They depend on
external actors as facilitators, intermediaries and investors. They also use paid staff instead of or in
addition to consumer-member volunteers for packing and delivery. The long-term aim is to build
farmer capacities and ultimately enable the CSA initiative to run independently and financially self-
sustainably.
One of the primary objectives of CSAs in India is to improve the livelihoods of local small and
marginal farmers. Conventional agriculture provides poor livelihoods for small and marginal farmers
in peri-urban areas, so that non-agricultural income options appear more lucrative. At the same time,
most farmers are not sufficiently educated to really be able to make a living in another profession,
and they lack the capital for the necessary investments. Initiatives like the CSAs in the case studies
21



give resource-poor farmers a viable alternative to the established system of growing large areas of
the same crop and then hoping for good prices at the time of harvest. It enables them to sustain their
agriculture-based livelihoods and protects them from having to sell their land, leaving their children
without a livelihood basis. In that sense, these activities cannot be measured simply in terms of
money, or economic impact, but are a model for initiating broader social change.
5. Conclusion
CSA is becoming a global phenomenon. In our paper, we set out to better understand this
phenomenon in the context of urban and rural developments in India. We found the frameworks
developed by Kneafsey et al. (2008) and Seyfang (2009) appropriate and useful for structuring our
analysis of three Indian CSAs. By combining the two frameworks, we compared overlaps and
differences of the Indian case studies and CSAs in other parts of the world, and we assessed their
contribution to sustainable development in the context of the Indian agriculture sector.
While organic food is as yet a marginal niche in the Indian food sector, consumer demand in urban
markets is increasing more rapidly than supply. On the political level, awareness is slowly emerging
that sustainable agriculture is the way ahead for the sector which has been in a severe crisis for
several decades. At the same time, farmers practicing sustainable small scale agriculture still lack
adequate market access that allows them to sell their products profitably. This context provides the
background for emerging new types of cooperatives and new linkages between rural and urban
dwellers. CSA initiatives can provide viable and sustainable marketing channels for these farmers,
bridge the demand-supply gap for organic vegetables, and promote sustainable local supply chains.
Cooperative structures shift the risk and incentive system of agriculture and marketing, and
encourage reconnection, participation and community-building. Localized food networks give
consumers an opportunity to better understand the working of their food providing system, develop
more healthy and sustainable consumption patterns and reconnect with producers.
The frameworks for analyzing CSA initiatives developed by authors in the USA and Europe were
found to be suitable for the Indian context. Although the CSA initiatives we examined vary from case
22



to case, they share many of the key characteristics found in other parts of the world. Policies in
support of CSA development must take into account the diverse and locally-adapted nature of these
initiatives. Support measures have to centre on improving the economic situation of CSAs without
forcing them to compromise on their basic principles and independence. CSA is an adaptive model
that can make an important contribution to sustainable development both in countries with a highly
industrialized food system and in countries like India where smallholder farms and rainfed agriculture
dominate the agricultural sector. In developing countries, CSA can be a viable marketing opportunity
for small farmers located in the peri-urban fringe of cities, strengthening farmers livelihood security
and promoting environmental sustainability while at the same time providing healthy food options
for urban consumers. Because healthy, fair and local food is in line with the preferences of the
growing Indian middle-classes, CSAs provide a rare opportunity for traditional farmers to participate
in the ongoing processes of urban modernization.
Interestingly, the role and perceived value of organic certification differs between the Indian context
and the context of CSA in Europe and the US. More perhaps than in Western countries, CSAs in India
depend on the involvement of an NGO or facilitating body to provide assistance in the form of
knowledge, management skills, resources and infrastructure, especially during the start-up phase.
An important but often unresolved question is how to develop the capacities of farmers to later on
become fully independent from initiating NGOs. This is an important aspect of further research on
CSA development in India. The extent to which CSA provide opportunities for consumers to
participate, learn and connect with producers differs between our case studies. These differences
have to do with the grassroots nature of the initiatives and with the different preferences of CSA
consumers. A closer look at the social composition of CSA participants would also help to better
understand the phenomenon. Given the growing number of initiatives, it is time to include
quantitative methods for the study of the phenomena in order to better compare different CSA
types.
23



The dominant agro-industry promotes a highly specialized intensive farming system of in order to
maximize economies of scale. For the majority of Indian farmers who are small and marginal farmers
and lack access to resources, this model is not accessible. There are no established processes that
support their marketing efforts. Dr. Ramanjaneyulu of Centre for Sustainable Agriculture in
Hyderabad points out: We need to re-invent all these things. See, buying from few and then selling
to many, there's a model available. But buying from many and selling to many that model is not
worked out. That's what we are experimenting on. The CSA model can serve as an experimenting
ground for solving many of the problems that the Indian agriculture sector and urban food systems in
rapidly growing megacities face, and it can provide role models and inspiration for sustainable local
food systems of the future.
References
ANSARI, H., 2010, Soon, a tokri of organic veggies at your doorstep, DNA, August 26, Internet
Source: http://www.dnaindia.com/speakup/report_soon-a-tokri-of-organic-veggies-at-your-
doorstep_1428775-all [accessed May 16, 2011].
BROWN, C. and MILLER, S., 2008, The Impacts of Local Markets: A Review of Research on Farmers
Markets and Community Supported Agriculture (CSA), American Journal of Agricultural Economics 90
(5), 1296-1302.
DHARMADHIKARY, S., 2010, Chemical-Free Food: Organic Veggies in my Inbox, Internet Source:
http://www.indiatogether.org [accessed June 18, 2010].
GARIBAY, S.V. and JYOTI, K., 2003, Market Opportunities and Challenges for Indian Organic
Products, Internet Source: http://orgprints.org/00002684 [accessed January 15, 2009].
GILLAN, T., 2010, Local Solidarity Partnerships between Producers and Consumers: Characteristics
and Contributions to Sustainable Development, MSc Dissertation Thesis. Reading: Graduate Institute
of International Development and Applied Economics, University of Reading.
HENDERSON, E., 2010, The World of Community Supported Agriculture, Keynote for Urgenci Kobe
Conference 2010, Community Supported Foods and Farming February 22, 2010, Internet Source:
http://www.chelseagreen.com/content/elizabeth-henderson-the-world-of-community-supported-
agriculture/print/ [accessed January 25, 2012].
HOLLOWAY, L., KNEAFSEY, M., VENN, L., COX, R., DOWLER, E., and TUOMAINEN, H., 2007, Possible
food economies: a methodological framework for exploring food production-consumption
relationships, Sociologia Ruralis 47 (1), 1-19.
KLOPPENBURG, Jr., LEZBERG, S., DE MASTER, K., STEVENSON, G., and HENDRICKSON, J., 2000, Tasting
Food, Tasting Sustainability: Defining the Attributes of an Alternative Food System with Competent,
24



Ordinary People, Human Organization 59 (2) (July 1), 177-186, Internet Source: [accessed November
14, 2009].
KNEAFSEY, M., HOLLOWAY, L., VENN, L., DOWLER, E., COX, R., and TUOMAINEN, H., 2008,
Reconnecting Consumers, Producers and Food: Exploring Alternatives, Berg Publishers.
LASS, D., Bevis, A., Stevenson, G.W., Hendrickson, J. and Ruhf, K., 2001, Community Supported
Agriculture Entering the 21st Century: Results from the 2001 National Survey, Amherst, MA:
University of Massachusetts, Internet Source: http://www.cias.wisc.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2008/07/csa_survey_01.pdf [accessed February 10, 2012].
VAN LOON, G.; PATIL, S. and HUGAR, L., 2005, Agricultural Sustainability: Strategies for Assessment,
New Delhi, Sage Publications Ltd.
MCKINSEY, 2008, The Great Indian Bazaar: Organized Retail Comes of Age in India, Mumbai,
McKinsey & Company, Internet Source:
http://csi.mckinsey.com/~/media/Extranets/Consumer%20Shopper%20Insights/Reports/THE_GREAT
_INDIAN_BAZAAR_SECURE.ashx [accessed January 15, 2011].
OSSWALD, N. and MENON, M.K., 2012, forthcoming, Organic Food Markets in Urban Centres of South
and West India. Bangalore: International Competence Centre for Organic Agriculture.
RAO, K.; SUPE, R.; MENON, M.K. and PARTAP, T., 2006, The Market for Organic Foods in India:
Consumer Perceptions and Market Potential. Findings of a Nation Wide Survey, Bangalore,
International Competence Centre for Organic Agriculture.
SAINATH, P., 2010, Agriculture Crisis: Nearly 2 lakh farm suicides since 1997, India Together, January
25. Internet Source: http://www.indiatogether.org/2010/jan/psa-suicides.htm [accessed January 25,
2010].
SEYFANG, G., 2006, Sustainable Consumption: The New Economics and Local Organic Food, CSERGE
Working Paper EDM 6, 12, Internet Source:
http://www.uea.ac.uk/env/cserge/pub/wp/edm/edm_2006_12.pdf [accessed June 8, 2010].
SEYFANG, G., 2009, The New Economics of Sustainable Consumption: Seeds of Change, Palgrave.
SOIL ASSOCIATION, 2009, A Share in the Harvest: An action manual for community supported
agriculture, 2nd ed., Internet Source:
http://www.soilassociation.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=gi5uOJ9swiI%3d&tabid=204 [accessed
January 15, 2012]