# Exploring the nexus of food citizenship and local food consumption in America's rural-urban blend: Insights from Will County (Illinois)

Marie Asma Ben Othmen, Jerry Kavouras

► To cite this version:

Marie Asma Ben Othmen, Jerry Kavouras. Exploring the nexus of food citizenship and local food consumption in America's rural-urban blend: Insights from Will County (Illinois). Journal of Rural Studies, 2024, 109, pp.103323. 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2024.103323. hal-04668950

HAL Id: hal-04668950

https://hal.science/hal-04668950v1

Submitted on 6 Sep 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

Public Domain
1

Ben-Othmen, M. A. and Kavouras, J. H. (2024) ‘Exploring the nexus of food citizenship and local food consumption in America’s rural-urban blend: Insights from Will County (Illinois)’, *Journal of Rural Studies*, 109, p. 103323. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2024.103323.

2

3

4

5

# Exploring the Nexus of Food Citizenship and Local Food Consumption in America's Rural-Urban Blend: Insights from Will County (Illinois).

6

7

8

## Abstract

9

This paper uses Will County in Illinois as a case study to examine the relationship between food citizenship and local food consumption in what we term to be the rural-urban blend of America. Food citizenship is participating in food-related actions promoting democratic, socially and economically equitable, and environmentally sustainable food systems. On the other hand, local food consumption is choosing and preferring to buy and eat local food over other conventional forms of food. The study used data analysis from a survey of 342 residents in Will County, Illinois, to test a conceptual model that considers various socio-psychological traits that food citizens might have, which could explain their preferences for local food, including local patriotism, perceived similarity with local farmers, social concern for the community's well-being, and environmental concerns. The findings reveal the intertwined nature of local patriotism and place identity, shedding light on their direct influence on food citizens' preferences. The perceived similarity with farmers and active engagement with local food producers deepen food citizens' understanding and connection, ultimately influencing their preferences for locally sourced food. The study also highlights the distinct roles of men and women in local food preferences, with local patriotism being more significant for men aged 40 and above. Finally, the results underscore the Midwest's unique socio-political landscape and the complex interplay of factors shaping local food preferences within rural-urban blends like Will County.

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

**Keywords:** community engagement, sustainable food system, local patriotism, local farmers, attitudes, SEM, rural-urban areas

29

30

31
32

# 1. Introduction

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

In the modern world, food citizens, people who are well-informed about food and make conscious decisions to improve the sustainability of our food system, are of paramount importance. Admittedly, food sustainability has gained significant recognition in the past few years for several reasons, including the increasing global population, the rise of obesity rates, the impacts of climate change, and the environmental consequences of our current food system (Sanderson et al., 2023). At the same time, citizens are called upon to participate actively in creating sustainable food systems (Turunen et al., 2023). However, for individuals, communities, and the entire population to commit to sustainable food consumption and eating behavior, adequate support and empowerment must ensure their transition to becoming active food citizens (Hatanaka, 2020; O'Kane, 2016).

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

Food citizenship refers to participating in food-related actions that promote the development of democratic, socially and economically equitable, and environmentally sustainable food systems (Wilkins, 2005). Tavernier (2012) expands on this definition by emphasizing the importance of feeling connected and committed to a particular place and recognizing the rights and responsibilities associated with sustainable food consumption. Examples of food citizenship include engaging in urban gardening and community-supported agriculture (CSA), supporting local farmers by buying and consuming locally grown food, and prioritizing alternative food sources like food cooperatives and local farmers' markets (Poulsen, 2017).

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

As a concept, food citizenship has become increasingly popular in the literature on alternative and sustainable food networks and practices (Coelho de Souza et al., 2023; Weber et al., 2020). Studies increasingly emphasize its essential role in achieving sustainable, fair, and just food systems that promote local communities' social, economic, and environmental well-being. Lozano-Cabedo & Gómez-Benito (2017) suggest that the rise of food citizenship is intricately linked to reassessing traditional notions of citizenship and food consumption. Factors such as the challenges faced by globalization, the diminishing sovereignty of nation-states, pandemics, and the ecological crisis have triggered a rethinking of citizenship from a multifaceted and evolving standpoint. Moreover, consumers are becoming increasingly disengaged by distant and industrialized food production and retailing systems dominated by multinational corporations, leading to food citizenship to emerge as a support for individuals in becoming informed and engaged in food-related matters, including conscious selections about the food they purchase and eat with consideration to its environmental impact and social implications in addition to its nutritional value (Paddock, 2017). Such actions are vital for shifting the focus of individual food-related behaviors from consumption to citizenship.

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

Furthermore, local food consumption, while seen as a response to address the growing demand for authentic food and one way of demonstrating one's responsibility and engagement with the local community and the food system, is increasingly considered central to the expression of food citizenship (Carolan, 2017; Seyfang, 2006). Choosing and preferring to buy and eat local food over other conventional forms means also consumers using their purchasing power to develop a new area for the social agency by supporting local farmers and producers (Brune et al., 2023) and, in turn, creating a new type of consumer-producer cooperation in which consumers play a dynamic role in promoting sustainable and local food systems (Turunen et al., 2023).

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

Local food systems have gained increased attention as a research field since Dahlberg and Allen's seminal work in 1993, which suggested regenerative food systems to broaden the scope of their sustainability. Feenstra (1993) further elucidates the concept of the local food system and defines it as collaborative endeavors to establish more self-reliant and locally-based food economies. This comprehensive approach integrates sustainable practices across food production, processing, distribution, and consumption, thereby fostering economic, environmental, and local health benefits within specific regions.

79

80

In addition to its recognition as a burgeoning research field, local food systems have garnered increasing attention as a social movement, dietary choice, and economic strategy (DeLind, 2011). This
multifaceted interest has spurred the development of various conceptual frameworks aimed at understanding the potential role of consumers within the agrifood system. Inspired by diverse representations and interpretations of local food in scholarly literature, including ethical considerations (Manyukhina, 2017; Sacchi, 2018) and reflexive consumption (Manganelli, 2020), these frameworks often depict consumers as individuals committed to aligning their actions with ethical beliefs wielding their purchasing power to influence upstream practices and catalyze transformations within supply chains (Hatanaka, 2020). 81 82 83 84 85 86 87

While various conceptual frameworks probe the potential role of consumers within the agrifood system, DeLind (2002) offers a critical perspective, arguing against reducing local food to mere transactional exchanges. Instead, she posits that the burgeoning local food movement signals a broader societal shift towards community-oriented approaches, where individuals actively shape food systems. Central to this ethos are the principles of civic agriculture, advocating for the consumption of locally sourced food and its integration into place-based practices for sustainability and community empowerment (Lyson, 2005). Initiatives such as community gardens and farmers' markets strengthen connections between individuals and their food sources. They also empower communities to assert control over their food systems and foster a more equitable and community-centered approach to food production and distribution. This community-centric ethos aligns with the evolving goals of the local food movement, as highlighted by Kaika and Racelis (2021), who argue that civic agriculture not only satisfies local demand for high-quality food but also nurtures social and economic development within communities, encouraging the growth of social networks and connections. Through active participation in direct marketing initiatives like farmers' markets and community-supported agriculture (CSA), alongside embracing alternative food production methods such as community gardens and small-scale organic farms, individuals transcend mere consumption decisions to become food citizens, reclaiming agency in shaping their communities (Ben-Othmen et al., 2023; Bródy & de Wilde, 2020). 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104

Kaika and Racelis (2021) highlight a significant gap in current understanding regarding the conceptualization of civic agriculture in relation to diverse indicators such as demographics, community cohesion, power dynamics, and civic engagement. They emphasize the necessity for additional research to explore the interconnectedness among local food systems, social welfare, and local food consumption, as these elements are fundamental to food citizenship, which is central to the expression of food democracy. This call for an investigation is crucial for elucidating the complex relationships and causalities between these factors, thus advancing our comprehension of the intricate dynamics within food systems and their broader societal implications. 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112

Building upon these calls for further exploration, recent studies have delved into the underlying factors influencing local food consumption choices, shedding light on the motivations and ideologies shaping consumers' behaviors. Including the intricate relationship between pro-social and pro-environmental claims and food choices (O'Neill et al., 2023). Other studies have examined how psychological factors like altruism and “warm glow” affect consumers' evaluation of food items with ethical claims such as fair trade, organic or carbon neutral (Iweala et al., 2019), with recent evidence showing that supporting local farmers and the economy is essential in consumers' buying local food (Birch et al., 2018; Mesić et al., 2021). 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120

As studies delve deeper into the motivations and ideologies driving local food consumption, questions emerge regarding the unique role of food citizens in fostering sustainable and community-based food systems. Yet, amidst these inquiries, a notable gap persists in understanding the consumption drivers specific to this group and how their civic engagement influences their purchasing behaviors. Addressing these pivotal questions is essential for steering collective efforts toward resilient and community-driven local food. However, it is crucial to recognize that while research on local food is expanding, its focus remains predominantly urban-centric. This concentration overlooks rural areas' distinct experiences and challenges, resulting in a scarcity of tailored policies and interventions to address their specific needs and development goals. As rural-urban disparities in food availability 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129
130
131

attributes continue to widen, it becomes increasingly imperative to rectify this imbalance in research focus (Jablonski et al., 2019).

132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142

In this paper, we aim to address this gap by analyzing the local food consumption behavior of food citizens within a unique setting that we refer to as a rural-urban blend in the United States. This term refers to regions that straddle the divide between rural (non-metro) and urban (metro) areas with a distinct socio-economic and cultural landscape. By focusing on these contexts, we hope to shed light on the complex dynamics that shape the consumption choices of food citizens. To do so, we consider food more than just a commodity and people are more than mere consumers and define "food citizens" as individuals who not only engage in growing their own food, either individually or within community gardens, or participate in community-supported agriculture programs, but also regularly buys groceries from various outlets such as farmers' markets, health food stores, and ethnic food stores where locally grown food is available. These individuals conscientiously select their food sources and actively contribute to promoting local, sustainable, and community-oriented food systems.

143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151

Furthermore, following Brune et al. (2023), in this paper, we define local food in terms of the specific locality where it is produced (e.g., the county) as opposed to defining it in terms of distance (e.g., food produced within 100 miles of commercialization) or market outlets (e.g., food brought directly from the farmer). We argue that local food plays a significant role in the lives of the residents of a specific county and provides opportunities for citizenship that translate into specific consumption behavior. We aim to enhance our knowledge about the various factors that affect local food consumption. We also intend to gain insights into the behavior of individuals residing in rural-urban areas who are already involved in alternative food systems and practices. This knowledge will help advance the development of sustainable and community-centered food systems.

152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166

Our research case study is based on the experience of food citizenship in Will County, a suburban county of Chicago, the most populous city in the Midwestern United States, and located in one of the most historically significant agricultural states in the US: Illinois. Counties around Chicago, including areas like Will County, epitomize a distinctive urban-rural blend, offering an interplay between urban and rural lifestyles and where agriculture remains a vital economic activity reflecting the area's agricultural heritage. At the same time, residents benefit from access to urban amenities while enjoying the tranquility and charm of rural landscapes. Drawing on the data analysis from a survey conducted with 342 Will County residents, we present and test a conceptual model that considers many socio-psychological traits that food citizens may have. In addition, the factors that are recognized to impact attitudes towards local food (healthiness, freshness, concerns for the environment, and concerns for the local economy) (Kumar & Smith, 2017). The conceptual model within this study draws on contributions from the literature on pro-social behaviors, such as local patriotism (Richey, 2022) and perceived value similarity between consumers and local farmers (Skallerud & Wien, 2019). Additionally, this research examines the role of demographics, such as gender and age, in understanding food citizens' consumption behavior.

167

## 2. Background and hypothesis

168

### 2.1. Food Citizenship and Local Food Consumption

169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176

In contemporary consumer trends, alongside assessing the tangible aspects of food products, there is a growing emphasis on social, environmental, and ethical considerations. These factors significantly shape what scholars refer to as "Alternative Food Systems" (AFNs) (Bui et al., 2016; Carzedda et al., 2018). The emergence of these AFNs, intricately woven into distinctive environmental, social, and economic contexts, has captured considerable interest, catalyzing a growing body of literature. This burgeoning discourse delves into the pivotal role of individual consumer behavior in steering the trajectory toward a sustainable food system. Moreover, it provokes contemplation on whether these AFNs could serve as vehicles for prefigurative politics, envisaging and enacting more democratic and
177

equitable food consumption models (Fonte, 2013). This discussion goes beyond just theory and encourages practical involvement by exploring community engagement opportunities within AFNs. These opportunities are recognized as a way for individuals to participate in community issues and are encapsulated by Lang (1999) as "food democracy." This concept emphasizes individuals' active role in sourcing food, including identifying and supporting local food initiatives. Hassanein (2003) champions this idea of "food democracy" as a pivotal avenue toward attaining social, economic, and ecological equity. Central to this notion is residents' active involvement and engagement, as Lyson (2005) underscored, to empower both individuals and communities. Conversely, Johnston (2008) shifted the focus toward the concept of "food citizens," a blend of citizen and consumer with specific ideological frameworks and seen as instrumental in the enlargement and configuration of alternative food systems in multiple ways (Welsh & MacRae, 1998), including co-producing food and sustainability through engaging in the governance of the food system (Lozano-Cabedo & Gómez-Benito, 2017). Indeed, citizenship is not only about having access to enough nutritious and high-quality food but also about recognizing our responsibilities towards nature and society. These duties can have a positive impact, such as supporting fair, healthy, and sustainable food systems, or a negative impact, such as avoiding actions that can harm the environment, the welfare of animals, and the sustainability of food systems (Gómez-Benito & Lozano, 2014). Scholars, including Cumbers et al. (2018) and Kingsley et al. (2019), concur on the necessity of nurturing a proactive sense of responsibility through citizenship among community members and individuals, emphasizing its crucial role in fostering fairer agro-food systems.

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

193

194

195

196

197

Most studies that delved into understanding the characteristics attributed to food citizenship draw a clear distinction between the conventional idea of consumers and the broader concept of citizens, highlighting that the term "consumer" falls short of comprehending food consumption patterns (Dubuisson-Quellier et al., 2011). In contrast, the citizen concept recognizes an individual's interests and influence, especially in their capacity to endorse or reject products and services. It is recognized as an alternative theorization of the potential role that consumers can play in the food system and is regarded as a pivotal driver for instigating change and interest in studying food choices and preferences (Prost et al., 2018). Food citizens even imply complex societal relationships, specifically in local communities. For some, these relationships could be captured within the concept of "social embeddedness," suggesting that individuals and their behavior are shaped by the social and cultural contexts in which they live; accordingly, consumers manifest a desire to access moral and aesthetic anchors in their food choices (Hedberg & Zimmerer, 2020) or to reconnect with rural roots (Hinrichs, 2000). Skallerud and Wien (2019) have found that values, such as the sense of allegiance that residents of particular places may hold to their local communities, social concerns and environmental awareness, as well as interpersonal ties between local food consumers and producers, could explain preferences for local food in Norway. These results support previous findings by Oleniuch and Cichocka (2015), putting forth a profile of "local patriot" consumers with a high level of regional ethnocentrism that explains their significant loyalty to regional food products in Poland. The authors also suggest that consumers increasingly understand the global nature of food markets and that their food choices have consequences for their communities, as well as for people from other countries and future generations. Therefore, exercising food citizenship means being aware of these issues and acting accordingly.

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216

217

218

219

While food citizenship presents promising opportunities for consumer involvement in fostering sustainable food systems, scholarly examination of its daily manifestations remains limited (Lozano-Cabedo & Gómez-Benito, 2017). Furthermore, the absence of a standardized measurement scale for assessing food consumption behavior among food citizens underscores the need for deeper exploration. This gap is particularly pertinent in contexts where urban and rural influences intersect, shaping unique preferences and behaviors. This article addresses this gap by proposing a framework to understand the specific drivers influencing food citizens' local food preferences and consumption behaviors.

220

221

222

223

224

225

226
227

Building on the pro-social behavior theory (Penner. et al., 2004), we argue that food citizens' behavior captures at least part of the tension between re-embedding food in social relations, self-gratifying benefits, and rebuilding places and local communities, which interact in shaping food citizens' preferences for local food. We hypothesize that these preferences are grounded in personal values (environmental and social concerns) and an internal locus of control (local patriotism and perceived similarity with local farmers). The former are considered deep-seated fundamental beliefs and principles that guide individual attitudes, behaviors, and decisions. At the same time, the latter refers to the personal beliefs of individuals that they control the events affecting their lives.

228

229

230

231

232

233

234

235

236

237

238

239

240

The following discusses the four constructs selected for our model: social concerns, environmental concerns, local patriotism, and perceived similarity (Fig.1) and the hypothesis adopted regarding the attitudes and preferences of food citizens for local food.

## 2.2. Food citizens' attitudes toward local food

241

242

243

244

245

246

247

248

249

250

251

Consumers' personal traits rarely directly influence behavior. They do so instead through specific attitudes that refer to a person's positive or negative beliefs about a particular behavior and provide the foundation for shaping the intention to behave in a specific way (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). Studies have identified several attitudes linked to local food purchases, including higher perceived quality, freshness (Meyerding et al., 2019), healthiness (Bimbo et al., 2021), and wholesomeness (Zhang et al., 2022). Despite this extensive research on attitudes and their formation and interactions regarding local food, there remains a gap in the literature concerning the disconnect between consumers' stated attitudes and their actual behavior (Ran et al., 2022). Studies indicate that the quantity of regularly purchased food could be deficient even if consumer interest in local food is relatively high (Chen, 2020). Furthermore, studies focusing on understanding the specific attitudes of food citizens are almost non-existent. Therefore, an attitude construct was included in the model.

252

H1: Positive attitudes towards local food result in a positive preference for local food.

253

## 2.3. Social concern

254

255

256

257

258

259

260

261

262

263

264

265

266

Social concern refers to the cognitive interest in caring for other members of one's local community or society. It reflects a desire to help when other individuals in the community face difficulties. Previous studies have shown that social concern plays a significant role in explaining moral decisions involving assisting others, such as those reported by Granzin & Painter (2000) and Snyder & Omoto (2007). While much of the literature on AFNs acknowledges their foundation upon alternative social norms (Fonte, 2013), within the realm of food citizenship, social concern encompasses a multitude of non-economic purchasing motivations. These include fostering social connections, engaging in civic activities, and practicing reciprocity and pertain to the sentiment that consumers will act altruistically and support local food producers rather than their self-interest (Megicks et al., 2012) upholding values that can be framed as "economies of regard" (Sage, 2003) or economy of care" (Kirwan et al., 2013). In relationships between food citizens and local farmers, social interaction and accountability are key features that extend beyond financial evaluations. Based on this evidence, we propose the following hypothesis:

267

H2. Social concern results in a positive attitude towards local food.

268

269

## 2.4. Local patriotism

270

271

272

273

274

275

276

Emerging in the 1980s, political consumerism characterizes a proactive consumer ethos marked by a sense of duty and moral responsibility. It involves making product and producer choices based on political or ethical considerations, intending to influence institutional or market behavior (Micheletti, 2003). Consumption becomes a political arena where conscientious consumers play a pivotal role, manifesting their political engagement through what is termed the "vote at the checkout" (Jacobsen & Dulsrud, 2007). Individual purchasing decisions hold collective significance, as consumer actions in private spheres reverberate in the public realm, thereby influencing the political landscape. Within this
framework, the concept of the citizen-consumer emerges—a persona capable of satisfying personal desires while upholding collective responsibility and the common good (de Bakker & Dagevos, 2012; Schudson, 2007). The decision to support or abstain from certain products, “*buycott or boycott*,” becomes the measure of consumer-citizens engagement, shaping power dynamics, socioeconomic outcomes, and environmental contributions. This context paved the way for the expression of patriotism in consumption patterns, predominantly stemming from consumers' moral convictions, mainly those who believe that purchasing imported goods leads to job losses, undermines the local economy, and indirectly harms themselves and their communities (Alsughayir, 2013). While traditionally considered at the national level, patriotism is increasingly acknowledged as a local phenomenon in scholarly discourse. Richey (2022) supports this shift in perspective and suggests that individuals hold strong sentiments toward their localities, influencing their civic engagement and collective actions.

As to local food purchases, the literature puts forth ethnocentrism - a related but distinct concept from patriotism- as a prevalent factor in explaining consumer behavior. While patriotism refers to the sense of pride and loyalty through consumption choices, ethnocentrism is driven by a self-belief in the superiority of one's own culture and a preference for supporting local offerings. Highly ethnocentric consumers are willing to purchase local products, even if they perceive them to be lower quality than non-local alternatives. Their motivation stems from the belief that supporting local products safeguards the local economy and contributes to its growth (Fernández-Ferrín et al., 2020). This inclination is also reinforced by the sense of belonging to a particular group or a local community and the desire to uphold its values (Steenkamp et al., 2010). Following Skallerud & Wien (2019), this article adopts a narrow local patriotism construct that expresses love and attachment to one's local community, in this case, a semi-rural county. It is hypothesized to be an antecedent of both food citizens' attitudes and preferences for local food.

**H3:** Local patriotism translates into a positive attitude towards local food.

**H4:** Local patriotism translates into a positive impact on preferences for local food.

## 2.5. Perceived similarity with local farmers

Perceived similarity denotes the degree to which an individual perceives themselves as similar to another person or group regarding attitudes, values, beliefs, behaviors, or other relevant characteristics. Previous studies have shown that it can impact social interactions and relationships, as individuals tend to feel more comfortable and attracted to those they perceive as similar (Granzin & Painter, 2000). Mainly Goodwin (1996) has shown that social support is most effective when it comes from a network of individuals who are similar to the person seeking support and have shared similar experiences. As a concept, perceived similarity emphasizes the deep bond that food citizens strive to establish with local farmers and, in turn, view themselves as part of the same collective effort. We suggest that food citizens often develop a strong identification with local farmers. This connection may arise from farming being part of the geographic region's history and an integral aspect of the local community, contributing to their sense of identity. Within this framework, the critical factor that captures food citizens' interest is their perception of similarity—the feeling of sharing common traits or a close connection with local farmers who face challenges. Following Baldassarri and Abascal (2020), we hypothesize that when consumers perceive a substantial similarity with local farmers, it can elicit behavior that strengthens community cohesion.

**H5:** Perceived similarity leads to positive attitudes toward local food.

**H6:** Perceived similarity translates into a positive impact on preference for local foods.

## 2.6. Environmental concern

Abundant research suggests that individuals sensitive to environmental issues and adopting sustainable behaviors are likelier to purchase and eat local food (Byker et al., 2012; Feldmann & Hamm, 2015; Kumar & Smith, 2017). Knight (2013) even highlights that “*localness is one of the hottest trends in*
326

*the world of food,*” with most ethically minded consumers seeking environmentally sustainable food.

327

Similarly, Birch et al. (2018) found that environmental concerns were key drivers among "mindful

328

consumers," a term they coined to describe altruistic motivations among Australian consumers.

329

Nonetheless, despite the extensive body of literature, there is no consensus regarding the significance

330

of environmental concerns in explaining local food purchasing behavior. For instance, Grunert et al.

331

(2014) found a significant relationship between consumers' environmental concerns and local food

332

purchasing frequency in Spain, Germany, and France. Conversely, Durham & Roheim (2009)

333

analyzed survey data from three regions in the US and found that consumers ranked reducing the

334

environmental impact of food production as the fourth reason for choosing local food. This ranking

335

was lower than the support for the local economy and community businesses. Other studies from the

336

UK report that a minor proportion (less than 4%) of surveyed consumers declare selecting food based

337

on its characteristics of being less harmful to the environment (Kemp et al., 2010). The literature has,

338

however, given little attention to understanding the role of environmental concerns in shaping food

339

citizens' behavior and food choices; therefore, within this research, we hypothesize that:

340

**H7:** Environmental concerns translate into a positive attitude towards local food.

341

**2.7.** *Moderation effects of demographics*

342

Demographics as moderators have been relevant in explaining consumption behavior in varied settings

343

(Akbarov, 2022). Gender has been recognized as crucial in considering how people perceive,

344

approach, and select their food (Bellows et al., 2010). For instance, women tend to display higher

345

awareness and a greater willingness to act based on ethical and nutritional principles. At the same

346

time, men generally exhibit a more conservative approach to their eating habits (Beardsworth et al.,

347

2002). Moreover, studies have shown that age differences play a pivotal role in shaping consumer

348

decision-making, as they exert significant moderating effects (Song & Im, 2018). In order to

349

understand the influence of demographics on food citizens' preference for local food, this research

350

deploys a conceptual model that applies gender and age as moderators.

351

352

**H8:** Gender and age moderate the effect of attitudes, local patriotism, and perceived similarity.

353

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /><figcaption>**Figure. 1.** Conceptual model outlining food citizens' preferences for local food</figcaption></figure>

354

355

356

357

**3. Research Methodology**

358

**3.1.** *Case study presentation: Local Food in Will County (Illinois, USA)*
359
360
361
362
363
364

The geographical context for this study is Will County, in the northeastern part of Illinois, which is approximately 80% farmland, including some of the most fertile soil in the United States<fnref n="1" />. Will County is a neighboring county of Chicago<fnref n="2" />, the third largest city in the United States. It is also Illinois' fourth most populous and fastest growing county, experiencing significant population growth and economic development as people and businesses migrate outward from the city center, with the urban population representing 94% of its population<fnref n="3" />.

365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373

In recent years, the food system throughout Illinois has bifurcated along distinct lines. On the one hand, the industrial food system, including large-scale, capital-intensive operations, aims to maximize production through centralized, corporate food management and continues to dominate the agricultural landscape. On the other hand, a locally based approach to agriculture and food production characterized by place-based networks of small-scale and community-oriented farms is gaining momentum. This shift is a response to the increasing demand for locally sourced food throughout the state (Hultine et al., 2007; Low et al., 2015). Although previous initiatives aimed at supporting local farmers and food production have mainly focused on the needs of residents in the metropolitan areas near Chicago, surrounding counties, including Will County, have received less attention.

374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388

More recently, Will County residents, supported by a group of local stakeholders, started developing initiatives for alternative food production and supply methods focused on direct markets, farm-to-school programs, community gardens, organic farming, small-scale agriculture, and community-supported agriculture (CSA). The farmers' market in Will County is also significant in promoting direct relations between farmers and residents and allowing farmers to gain better margins. These initiatives are highly valued in the community as they provide multiple opportunities to make locally produced food accessible to residents, educate them on the importance of sustainably grown food, and foster a sense of community by connecting local farmers with residents. Despite these efforts, some severe issues compromise the survival of local farmers in the areas and permanently put them under pressure, including rising constraining regulation and planning strategies incompatible with farming locally, in addition to the competition from large national agriculture cooperatives. A recent study by Ben-Othmen & Kavouras (2022) highlights the significant role of food citizens in building a community-based and resilient food system in Will County. These individuals are not just limited to food shopping but are actively involved in multiple aspects of the food system and, therefore, considered instrumental in supporting the community-based food system in the county.

389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397

## 3.2. Participants and procedures

In this research, the term "food citizen" is defined as an individual who 1—actively participates in cultivating fruits and vegetables either in personal gardens or community gardens and/or by being involved in a community-supported agriculture program. This includes activities such as planting, tending, and harvesting produce for personal consumption; 2. Consistently purchasing groceries from one or more of the following sources: farmers' markets, health food stores, food co-ops, and ethnic food stores. This involves regularly obtaining food items such as fruits, vegetables, grains, and other produce from these alternative food sources rather than solely relying on traditional supermarkets or grocery chains.

<footnote n="1">¹ Illinois is also part of the Midwestern Corn Belt that spans Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin, with some analyses including North and South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas (Green et al., 2018). With the first seven states, Illinois has over 127 million acres of agricultural land, 75% of which is now in corn and soybean (USDA Climate Hubs, 2017)</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2 Will County is considered one of the surrounding Cook County, where Chicago is located. The collar counties include DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, and Will County. These counties are adjacent to Cook County and often share economic and social ties with the city of Chicago.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Hoagland (1912) reports that although urban areas increased by 30% in a decade at the beginning of the 19th century, rural areas increased by only 0.3% in Illinois.</footnote>
398 In the first screening question, we are looking for individuals who are committed to sustainable food practices and have a connection to the source of their food. These individuals may be harvesting their own produce or receiving regular supplies of fresh produce directly from the farm as a CSA member.
399
400 By including such activities, we aim to focus our sample on those individuals who are already involved in local food systems and environmental sustainability and have a basic understanding of agricultural processes. The second screening question of our study is focused on understanding the consumption behavior of food citizens residing in Will County. We want to know about their chosen outlets for buying fresh food and vegetables. We are particularly interested in participants who make conscious choices about their food sources and actively support local, sustainable, and community-based food systems. This will help us gain insights into individuals' consumption patterns and attitudes vis-à-vis local and sustainable food systems.
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408

409 In order to study this specific group, a survey was conducted with Will County residents through face-to-face interviews by three trained research assistants from Lewis University who were well-versed in survey methods. The research team used a random sampling technique to select and approach individuals in various locations, such as bars, restaurants, coffee shops, in major urban areas in Will County, including Joliet, Bolingbrook, Plainfield, Romeoville, Lockport, New Lenox, and Homer Glen. They interviewed every fifth person entering the venue and screened them to ensure they met the eligibility criteria for the survey. Eligible participants had to be over 18 years old, residents of Will County, regular fruit and vegetable shoppers, and engaged in local food practices such as gardening or participating in CSAs. The research assistants were trained to approach potential respondents consistently to minimize bias and ensure fairness in the selection process. They used a standardized script to maintain uniformity across interviews and a randomized method to minimize bias and ensure that the selected respondents provided a representative sample of the broader population of Will County. The survey was conducted in the spring and summer of 2019 (May through August); 962 residents were approached, and only 342 respondents were considered to align with the food citizen profile.
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423

424 **3.3. Measures**

425 In order to measure respondents' social concerns, environmental concerns, local patriotism, perceived similarity, and attitudes, scales were adopted from previous research and selected based on their suitability and validity. Each measure utilized a 7-point Likert scale varying from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree.
426
427
428

429 Social concerns were measured based on four items borrowed from (Skallerud & Wien, 2019a) and included: "It is my duty to purchase locally-sourced food," "I have a responsibility to support Will County local producers in the face of competition from national producers and imports," "Supporting local food production is a means of reciprocating the benefits in our community," and "Whenever I have a choice, I would opt for local produce over other options."

430
431
432
433
434 The local patriotism scale was developed with reference to the literature on the "Buy American" theme (Yoo & Donthu, 2005). These works have studied patriotism from a national point of view. Many pointed to the inconsistent use of this scale at the local level (Goldsmith & Reinecke Flynn, 1992; Skallerud & Wien, 2019). Consequently, some of its items were redesigned at the county level through stakeholder interviews and the questionnaire pre-test phase.
435
436
437
438

439 The questions translating whether Will County's residents identify with the local farmers by feeling harmonious social interdependence – perceived similarity - were adapted from Granzin & Olsen (1998). The questionnaire was designed to include relevant queries, such as, "Will County's local farmers are not that different from you and me," and "I, as a person, do not think that I am different from local farmers living in Will County."
440
441
442
443

444 The environmental concerns scale was adapted from studies that identified environmental concerns and the preservation of natural resources as the primary motivation for buying local foods (Kumar & Smith, 2017) and included statements such as, "I feel satisfaction when I buy and eat local food," "Local food is healthy," "Local food is fresh," and "Local food tastes good."
445
446
447
448

449

450

451

452

453

454

Finally, the multi-item scale aimed at identifying preferences for local food included statements such as "I prefer buying and eating local food whenever possible" and "If two food items are equal in quality and taste, I prefer the local food item even if it costs 10% more."

## 3.4. Data collection

455

456

457

458

459

460

461

462

463

The questionnaire began with questions about the general purchase behaviors of residents. All respondents bought local food within the last two weeks<fnref n="4" />. While 45% of respondents buy local food from farmers' markets, 39% are CSA members, and 27% grow their own food in community gardens (Fig.2). Overall, respondents aged 18 to 89, and 51.17% were female. 45.82% had completed a four-year college education, with female respondents having more education in our sample (62% had completed a four-year college degree). Furthermore, while our sample exhibits an overrepresentation of individuals aged 41 years and above, it is noteworthy that 33% of respondents have a household income falling within the $100K to $150K bracket. This finding aligns with the broader demographic trends observed in Will County, indicating consistency between our sample and the overall population.

464

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2.** Respondents' involvement in alternative food production and their local food shopping outlets</figcaption></figure>

465

466

467

468

469

<footnote n="4">⁴ Respondents were informed that local food here means the food grown in Will County.</footnote>
<table><caption>**Table 1** – Demographic and socioeconomic profiles of the sample<fnref n="5" />.</caption><thead><tr><th>Characteristics</th><th>N = 342</th><th>Pourcentage</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>Gender</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Male</td><td>168</td><td>49</td></tr><tr><td>Female</td><td>174</td><td>51</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Age</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>18-25-year-old</td><td>44</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>26-40-year-old</td><td>94</td><td>28</td></tr><tr><td>41-63-year-old</td><td>154</td><td>45</td></tr><tr><td>63-year-old and above</td><td>48</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Education</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Less than a high school diploma</td><td>44</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>High school diploma or equivalent</td><td>68</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>Bachelor's degree</td><td>185</td><td>54</td></tr><tr><td>Master's degree</td><td>27</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td>Doctorate Degree</td><td>7</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>10</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Household Income</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Below $10k</td><td>38</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>$10k-$50k</td><td>55</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>$50-$100k</td><td>99</td><td>29</td></tr><tr><td>$100k-$150k</td><td>113</td><td>33</td></tr><tr><td>Over $150k</td><td>38</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Marital status</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Single</td><td>75</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td>Married</td><td>209</td><td>61</td></tr><tr><td>In a domestic partnership</td><td>24</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>Divorced</td><td>21</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Widowed</td><td>14</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Employment status</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Employed full-time</td><td>195</td><td>57</td></tr><tr><td>Employed part-time</td><td>41</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td>Unemployed</td><td>17</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Student</td><td>38</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>Retired</td><td>27</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td>Self-employed</td><td>10</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Homemaker</td><td>14</td><td>4</td></tr></tbody></table>

<footnote n="5">⁵ According to the Will County census data, the median age in the county is 39.2 years old. A majority, comprising 62% of the total population, falls within the age range of 18 to 64 years, while 23.4% are under 18 years old, and 14.7% are 65 years and older. The median household income is $96,668, with 29% of households earning between $50,000 and $100,000, 35% earning between $100,000 and $200,000, and 14% earning over $200,000 annually. Additionally, 46% of individuals are single, while 54% are married. Furthermore, 36.3% of residents hold a bachelor's degree or higher.</footnote>
472 **5. Data analysis procedure**

473 The data analysis procedure relies on Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). This approach helps
474 investigate the statistical relationship between variables (i.e., local patriotism, environmental concerns,
475 social concerns, perceived similarity, and attitudes) that could explain respondents' preferences for
476 local food, as described in the previous section. SEM is theoretically based on mathematical statistics.
477 It can describe and measure complex causality correlations and has been proven advantageous in
478 analyzing attitudes (Campbell, 2013), preferences (Skallerud & Wien, 2019), and behavioral
479 (Feldmann & Hamm, 2015) components of local food consumption.

480 Following Anderson & Gerbing (1988), a two-step approach was adopted for the data analysis. The
481 first step is to evaluate and analyze the measurements through exploratory factor analysis, which helps
482 validate the selected scale by testing how well the measures of the constructs translate our
483 understanding of their nature and their use (i.e., construct validity and reliability). To this end, the non-
484 parametric indicator Cronbach's alpha was estimated and analyzed; if this indicator was in the desired
485 range (>0.7), the corresponding items were included in the structural model.

486 SEM was performed as a second analytical step to test the suggested model explaining preferences for
487 local food. To this end, we used the Maximum Likelihood method of the STATA version 16 command
488 language and the STATA builder to generate the path analysis and the model parameters. The
489 structural model results were examined to analyze the measures' internal consistency and enhance the
490 model fit. The Satorra-Bentler Estimator was mainly applied to address any potential non-normality of
491 the measures. In particular, the goodness of fit was tested via the Root Mean Square Error of
492 Approximation (RMSEA), the Comparative (CFI), the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), and the
493 Standardized root mean squared residual (SRMR). Finally, a multigroup analysis was conducted to
494 assess the moderating effect of demographic variables (age and gender).

495 **6. Results**

496 **6.1. Exploratory factor analysis**

497 The exploratory factor analysis measured the model's reliability and validity by examining the
498 assumption that there is a relationship between the items used in the questionnaire that helps explain
499 food citizens' preferences for local foods. The significant value of the Barlett test ( X²= 4051.31, p-
500 value = 0.000) indicates sufficient correlations between the studied variables. The Kaiser Meyer
501 Auckland measure of sampling adequacy (KMO = 0.906 > 0.50) is also significant, confirming
502 significant intercorrelations among the data and, therefore, the relevance of conducting the factor
503 analysis.

504 The items' reliability and validity were verified using Cronbach's alpha and Dillon-Goldstein's rho,
505 which resulted in values higher than 0.7 and 0.8, respectively (Table 2). The average variance
506 extracted (AVE) showed good values for most constructs, exceeding the 60% limit. Items with a factor
507 loading below 60% were deleted, which was the case for the [PS3] perceived similarity item. Besides,
508 the factor analysis indicated the relevance of including [SC1] item in the local patriotism scale rather
509 than in the social concern scale as initially specified.

510
<table><caption>**Table 2** – Psychometric properties of the measurement scales</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th></th><th>Factor loading</th><th>Cronbach's alpha</th><th>Rho [PCA]</th><th>AVE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="3">Social concerns</td><td>SC2</td><td>0.913</td><td>0,899</td><td>0,928</td><td>0,763</td></tr><tr><td>SC3</td><td>0.901</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>SC4</td><td>0.895</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Attitudes</td><td>AT1</td><td>0.862</td><td>0,915</td><td>0,94</td><td>0,796</td></tr><tr><td>AT2</td><td>0.909</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>AT3</td><td>0.888</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>AT4</td><td>0.907</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Local Patriotism</td><td>LP1</td><td>0.934</td><td>0,897</td><td>0,929</td><td>0,761</td></tr><tr><td>LP2</td><td>0.950</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>LP3</td><td>0.902</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>SC1</td><td>0.897</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Perceived similarity</td><td>PS1</td><td>0.821</td><td>0,88</td><td>0,826</td><td>0,701</td></tr><tr><td>PS2</td><td>0.896</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>PS3</td><td>0.892</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Environmental concerns</td><td>EC1</td><td>0.897</td><td>0,883</td><td>0,945</td><td>0,893</td></tr><tr><td>EC2</td><td>0.898</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>EC3</td><td>0.847</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

Following Bagozzi (1994) recommendations, a Multi-trait-Multimethod Matrix method was used to confirm measurement convergent and discriminant validity. The correlation matrix (Table 3) shows that every item has a higher correlation coefficient (>0.8) in relation to the latent variable it measures, confirming the satisfactory convergent validity of the measurements. Finally, the construct squared correlation matrix indicated that the inter-construct correlations are smaller than their mean commonalities, thereby supporting the measurements' discriminant validity. In other words, the measurements are unaffected by systemic errors, which means we accurately measured distinct constructs without significant overlap. The matrix also showed that the proposed constructs have satisfactory reliability and are unaffected by random errors.

<table><caption>**Table 3**- Squared correlation matrix of the constructs of the structural model</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>AT</th><th>LP</th><th>EC</th><th>SC</th><th>PS</th><th>PR</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Attitudes</td><td><strong>0,854*</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Local patriotism</td><td>0,195</td><td><strong>0,865*</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Environmental concerns</td><td>0,345</td><td>0,365</td><td><strong>0,892*</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Social Concerns</td><td>0,397</td><td>0,398</td><td>0,247</td><td><strong>0,896*</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Perceived similarity</td><td>0,008</td><td>0,246</td><td>0,071</td><td>0,157</td><td><strong>0,812*</strong></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Preferences for local food</td><td>0,328</td><td>0,487</td><td>0,458</td><td>0,398</td><td>0,178</td><td><strong>0,901*</strong></td></tr></tbody></table>

*Mean commonalities

## 6.2. The structural analysis and model testing

The structural model, including the 17 variables, resulted in an acceptable fit ($X^2$ = 145.89 with df = 189 p = .00 [$X^2$/df = 0.77], RMSEA = 0.053, IFI = 0.98, NNFI = 0.96 with CFI = 0.96. Table 4 shows the standardized estimates for the different paths of the model and the corresponding critical ratio.

The results indicated that the variables environmental concerns (EC) (B = 0.298 t=5.312) and social concerns (SC) (B=0.271, t=5.011) made a significant contribution to food citizens' attitudes towards
532 buying and eating local food. As predicted, the coefficient path from attitudes to preferences for local food is significant.

534 The local patriotism (LP) variable demonstrated, however, mixed effects. While it made no significant contribution to the attitude variable (B = 0.066, t=0.712), it had a positive and significant relationship with preferences for local food. The data supported H4 and rejected H3. Similarly, the perceived similarity (PS) variable seemed to contribute more significantly to food preferences (B=0.394, t=1.004) than the attitude variable. Table 7 summarizes the results from testing the hypotheses.

539 The model explains 42% of the variance in attitudes toward buying and eating local food and 38% in preferences for buying and eating local food. Therefore, its predictive power is deemed satisfactory. In summary, the data supported the hypothesis of a positive relationship between attitudes and preferences for buying and eating local food among populations of food citizens in Will County. 541 542 543 While local patriotism significantly contributed to respondents' preferences for local food, 544 environmental concerns contributed most to expressing attitudes toward local food rather than 545 preferences.

<table><caption>546 Table 4– Standardized estimates</caption><thead><tr><th>The mediating and dependent variable</th><th>Independent Variables</th><th>Standard Path (mean score)</th><th>Standard Error</th><th>Critical Ratio</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="2">Attitudes</td><td>Social Concerns</td><td>0.271</td><td>1.11</td><td>0.92</td></tr><tr><td>Environmental concerns</td><td>0.298</td><td>1.03</td><td>0.71</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Preferences for local food</td><td>Local patriotism</td><td>0.394</td><td>1.81</td><td>0.87</td></tr><tr><td>Perceived similarity</td><td>0.116</td><td>0.89</td><td>0.83</td></tr><tr><td>Attitudes</td><td>0.287</td><td>0.02</td><td>0.91</td></tr></tbody></table>

547 Regarding the moderating role of gender, a multigroup analysis of the causal model was conducted. 548 Table 5 shows the main differences between men and women in preferences for local food. For 549 women, both attitudes and local patriotism influenced preferences with a greater significance of 550 attitudes. On the other hand, attitudes had less influence on preference for local food in men than in 551 women. Besides, local patriotism was dominant in influencing men's preferences for local Food 552 (B=0.316, t= 2.207). The perceived similarity coefficient also suggested that men display more 553 commonality with local farmers than women. 554

<table><caption>555 Table 5 – Moderating effect of gender on the relationship of the causal model</caption><thead><tr><th>Dependent variable</th><th>Independent variable</th><th>Standardized Path coefficient</th><th>Standard Error</th><th>t</th><th>Pr > t(5% risk of error)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="3">Male</td><td>Attitudes</td><td>0.212</td><td>0.076</td><td>2.815</td><td>0.015</td></tr><tr><td>Perceived similarity</td><td>0.158</td><td>0.007</td><td>2.817</td><td>0.006</td></tr><tr><td>Local patriotism</td><td>0.316</td><td>0.099</td><td>2.207</td><td>0.000</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Female</td><td>Attitudes</td><td>0.528</td><td>0.095</td><td>5.575</td><td>0.000</td></tr><tr><td>Perceived similarity</td><td>0.079</td><td>0.011</td><td>0.711</td><td>0.479</td></tr><tr><td>Local patriotism</td><td>0.224</td><td>0.082</td><td>4.158</td><td>0.078</td></tr></tbody></table>

556 Regarding the moderating role of age, the empirical model results indicated that local patriotism 557 contributed mainly to the age groups 25-40 and above 40-year-old respondents (Table 6). As the path 558 coefficients indicated, the significance of local patriotism seems to increase with age. Besides, while 559 attitudes seemed to influence 25-year-olds and younger and 25-40-year-old groups significantly, 560 perceived similarity reached its most significant coefficient in the group aged 40 and above. These 561 results partially supported the hypothesis H8. 562
<table><caption>Table 6 - Moderating effect of age on the relationship of the causal model</caption><thead><tr><th>Dependent variable</th><th>Independent variable</th><th>Standardized Path coefficient</th><th>Standard Error</th><th>t</th><th>Pr > t(5% risk of error)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="3">25-year-old and younger</td><td>Attitudes</td><td>0.238</td><td>0.097</td><td>3287</td><td>0.000</td></tr><tr><td>Perceived similarity</td><td>0.036</td><td>0.123</td><td>1096</td><td>0.275</td></tr><tr><td>Local patriotism</td><td>0.056</td><td>0.101</td><td>1517</td><td>0.135</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">25 to 40-year-old</td><td>Attitudes</td><td>0.352</td><td>0.094</td><td>3759</td><td>0.007</td></tr><tr><td>Perceived similarity</td><td>0.147</td><td>0.118</td><td>1849</td><td>0.069</td></tr><tr><td>Local patriotism</td><td>0.303</td><td>0.106</td><td>2897</td><td>0.006</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">40-year-old and above</td><td>Attitudes</td><td>0.167</td><td>0.177</td><td>0.958</td><td>0.345</td></tr><tr><td>Perceived similarity</td><td>0.289</td><td>0.123</td><td>1298</td><td>0.021</td></tr><tr><td>Local patriotism</td><td>0.425</td><td>0.112</td><td>3873</td><td>0.000</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>Table 7-Hypothesis test results</caption><thead><tr><th colspan="2">Hypothesis</th><th>Results</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>H1</td><td>Positive attitudes towards local food result in positive preferences for local food.</td><td>Validated</td></tr><tr><td>H2</td><td>Social concern results in a positive attitude towards local food.</td><td>Validated</td></tr><tr><td>H3</td><td>Local patriotism translates into a positive attitude towards local food.</td><td>Rejected</td></tr><tr><td>H4</td><td>Local patriotism translates into a positive impact on preferences for local food.</td><td>Validated</td></tr><tr><td>H5</td><td>Perceived similarity leads to positive attitudes towards local food.</td><td>Rejected</td></tr><tr><td>H6</td><td>Perceived similarity translates into a positive impact on preference for local foods.</td><td>Validated</td></tr><tr><td>H7</td><td>Environmental concerns translate into a positive attitude towards local food.</td><td>Validated</td></tr><tr><td>H8</td><td>Age and gender moderate the effects of attitudes, local patriotism, and perceived similarity on preferences for local food.</td><td>Validated</td></tr></tbody></table>

Discussion

To the best of our knowledge, this research is the first empirical study that investigates food citizens' food preferences and consumption habits. Most of the existing literature on food citizenship is qualitative in nature, which highlights the need for empirical studies that explore innovative and specific ways to understand the behavior of food citizens. This research uses a quantitative approach to test a model incorporating socio-psychological traits as drivers of preference for local food. These traits include local patriotism, perceived similarity with local farmers, social concern for the community's well-being, and environmental concerns. Our findings demonstrate that all of these traits, while varying in the strength of their impact on outcomes, are significant predictors of food citizens' preferences for local food. Furthermore, demographic factors such as gender and age have a moderating effect in varying degrees of explaining preferences and attitudes towards local food.

Our results support previous findings that have reframed consumers' interest and attitudes in local food to include (i) fair pay and treatment of workers involved in the production of food, (ii) environmental sustainability, and (iii) the health of both consumers and producers (Birch et al., 2018; Kim & Huang,
2021; Megicks et al., 2012). Not surprisingly, food citizens' attitudes towards local food significantly influence their preferences. This finding aligns with prior studies that have used attitude theories to explain purchasing behavior related to local food (Kumar & Smith, 2017). Nonetheless, our research departs from prior studies in the way these attitudes are expressed among populations of food citizens, especially those living in areas characterized by a blend of rural and urban environments. These regions straddle the divide between rural and urban areas, presenting unique challenges for sustainable and local farming practices. Our findings shed light on the distributive and reciprocity norms that may prevail within communities residing in these areas, influencing people's attitudes and molding their preference for locally sourced food. Remarkably, while attitudes towards local food do not serve as mediators, our study reveals that local patriotism significantly shapes the preferences of food citizens for locally produced food. Essentially, even if food citizens perceive locally sourced food as being of lower quality and/or higher price than other categories of food grown outside Will County, they still prefer it. These findings align with studies investigating the link between ethnocentrism and the consumption behavior of regional food products (Oleniuch & Cichocka, 2015). According to Fernández-Ferrín & Bande-Vilela (2013), preferences for regionally or locally produced food stems from a sociological definition of ethnocentrism based on social groups. The authors argue that variations within national economies are more closely associated with subregional ethnocentrism towards a specific region than the entire country.

Interestingly, the results also support the idea that local patriotism can be intertwined with a sense of place identity, as discussed in the literature on environmental psychology (Hummon, 1992). This concept explores how spatial and social surroundings influence individuals' behavior and emphasizes that people develop strong connections with the places where they live, work, and engage in leisure activities. Lewicka (2013) argues that, in addition to place dependence, the sense of place identity suggests that people develop social bonding (link to specific individuals, sense of shared history, and interest) and nature bonding (cognitive, emotional, and historical ties to the non-human environment) that significantly shape their behavior. Furthermore, abundant research indicates a positive correlation between local identity and individuals' inclination to support their local communities actively. This support is often manifested through close and constructive partnerships with local stakeholders, as Johnson & Rickard (2022) demonstrated. Our findings contribute to the current literature by highlighting that local patriotism can be viewed as an amalgamation of both a sense of place identity and what authors have identified as regional ethnocentrism, which sheds light on its direct influence on food citizens' preferences, regardless of their attitudes toward local food.

In this paper, it is suggested that social concerns are closely related to community concerns. This means that individuals who feel a sense of care and support toward local farmers are likelier to exhibit pro-social behavior. According to Baldassarri & Grossman (2013), group attachment plays a critical role in shaping our willingness to help others, and helping behavior increases as the social distance between the helper and the receiver of help decreases. In the context of this study, this implies that food citizens who feel a closer connection to local farmers are more likely to have positive attitudes towards local food and be more willing to support them. This finding is consistent with Skallerud and Wien (2019) conclusion, underscoring a positive relationship between social concern and the preference for local food as a manifestation of helping others. Furthermore, this finding aligns with the outcomes of research conducted by Turunen et al. (2023), highlighting the collective nature of food citizenship, which involves "doing, learning, caring, and taking responsibility together." Becoming a food citizen is an experience that occurs in the company of others and requires a shared ambition for change. In line with the Baradian perspective, food citizenship involves developing an awareness of the power dynamics that shape our understanding of the world and engaging in responsible interactions with others (Barad, 2007).

Our results highlight that the perceived similarity of food citizens with farmers positively influences preferences for local food. Additionally, in our sample, 45% of respondents shop at farmers' markets at
least once a week, and 39% are CSA members. As these individuals engage more with nearby farmers, they develop a deeper understanding of their communities' agricultural and food production circumstances and challenges. This understanding can impact their self-identity and sense of connection to local farmers, ultimately influencing their preferences for locally sourced food. According to our research results, we can conclude that food citizens have a "relational reflexivity" with local farmers, which aligns with what O'Kane (2016) has previously identified. However, our findings differ from those of other studies that suggest no correlation between perceived similarity and preferences of local food shoppers. To explain this discrepancy, Skallerud and Wien (2019) suggest that it may be due to limited interaction between the general population of consumers and local food producers. This is particularly true for those who primarily purchase from local supermarkets instead of farmers' markets.

Our results confirmed a significant difference between males and females in the relationship between local patriotism and preference for local food. For food citizens in our sample, local patriotism appears more significant for men. This finding differs from those obtained by Beardsworth et al. (2002), who observed that women tend to make virtuous food choices in general populations of consumers, while men typically make more robust choices. This suggests that women's food choices are characterized by caring, sensitivity, and awareness, and they place greater emphasis on factors such as health, safety, nutritional value, and ethics (Chen et al., 2014). Our findings align with previous research, providing robust evidence of consistent behavior changes throughout adulthood, suggesting a noteworthy trend where older adults exhibit more pro-social behavior than their younger counterparts (Lay & Hoppmann, 2015).

A significant portion of our survey participants were highly educated. Specifically, 67% held at least a bachelor's degree, and 75% reported an annual income of $50,000 or more. These demographics align with Bourdieu's concept of "distinction" (Bourdieu, 1987), which elucidates how individuals and social groups delineate themselves and establish their standing within a social hierarchy. According to Bourdieu, distinctions manifest differently across social classes. In affluent circles, emphasis is placed on refined manners and delicacies over quantity, whereas working-class communities often prioritize hearty portions and robust flavors as key to satisfaction and identity. This notion also resonates with the research of Paddock (2015), who explored alternative food consumption patterns through the lens of distinction. Our findings corroborate this perspective, indicating that distinction permeates our case study. We observe that within the realm of food citizenship, local food serves dual purposes: it serves as a status marker for some while facilitating broad participation in cultural consumption. Bourdieu's framework (1987) underscores the influence of factors such as social class, education, and cultural capital on cultural tastes and practices. Based on our findings, we can conclude that cultural capital, which includes knowledge and habits developed through engagement in alternative foodscapes - food citizenship- plays a substantial role in determining food preferences and consumption habits. Furthermore, sociopsychological characteristics such as local patriotism, social concerns, and the sense of similarity with local farmers can also be considered as forms of cultural capital that influence individuals' food choices and behaviors. Therefore, our results contribute implicitly to the current debate on the definition of cultural capital and its significance in community development practices and research. According to Hale et al.'s (2023) comprehensive review of cultural capital in US community development research, cultural capital encompasses creative industries and amenities, distinct social groups, values, attitudes, norms, beliefs, place-based characteristics, and an exercise of power. Our results indicate that for food citizens, local food plays a critical role in constructing cultural identities in semi-rural counties such as Will County and their communities, in addition to serving as an arena where social structures, ideological systems, and power relations (local patriotism, ethnocentrism) are continuously negotiated.

## Conclusion and implications
679

Food citizenship encompasses three essential elements: a sense of belonging, active participation, and the right to access healthy and fresh food. Although this paper did not delve into the right's component, it sheds light on food citizens' behaviors by comprehending the factors that drive their preferences for local food. Based on the results, it appears that prioritizing community welfare can have a significant impact on food citizens' preferences for locally sourced food. This has important implications both in theory and in practice.

680

681

682

683

684

685

## Theoretical implications

686

687

688

689

690

691

692

693

694

695

696

697

698

699

700

The literature discussing alternative food networks (AFNs) raises important questions about the potential role of individual consumer behavior in driving the transition toward more sustainable food systems (Goodman, 2003). Additionally, it explores whether AFNs can serve as catalysts for the expression of food citizenship, leading to politics aimed at constructing a more democratic and just food consumption model (Allen et al., 2003). In this research, we adopt a theoretical standpoint and a quantitative approach that advocates for a broader understanding of food citizens' attitudes and preferences toward the local food system, extending beyond purely economic drivers that portray individuals as rational actors solely driven by self-interest in market transactions. While conventional economic perspectives emphasize individual motivations within market dynamics, particularly in the realm of food consumption, we argue that food citizens exhibit critical consumption behavior that emerges as responses to the prevailing neoliberal political framework. This framework which often encourages individuals to adopt market-oriented behaviors, sometimes neglecting broader societal and environmental considerations. Critics of AFNs perceive them as defensive enclaves perpetuating non-egalitarian values and hindering diverse viewpoints and participatory discourse (Goodman et al., 2012).

701

702

703

704

705

706

707

708

709

710

711

Our tested theoretical model contributes to the early conceptualization of ecological citizenship and sustainable consumption by Seyfang (2006, 2009), who proposed a multidimensional framework including localization, reducing the ecological footprint of food, building new infrastructure for food provisioning, community building, and collective action. However, his model proves useful only for exploring new food practices and consumption in contexts where promoting environmental sustainability and reinforcing local economies are just some of the more complex processes of changing market structures and infrastructure through re-embedding food in social relations (Hinrichs, 2000) and local communities (DeLind, 2011). In this research, we argue that individuals actively engaged in alternative foodscapes, whom we recognize as food citizens, drive their consumption behavior and preferences through local patriotism, similarity with farmers, environmental concerns, and social factors.

712

713

714

715

716

717

718

719

720

721

722

723

724

725

726

727

Our research shows that in some geographical regions, such as semi-rural counties where unsustainable agricultural practices have historically been prevalent, there is a growing trend towards more sustainable and eco-friendly food production methods. Environmental and social concerns primarily drive this shift. However, people's preference for locally sourced food is most prominently attributed to a sense of local pride and connection with nearby farmers. Numerous studies have explored the reasons behind the general public's preference for locally sourced food, dividing them into two categories: altruistic (such as ethical self-identity and environmental concerns) and egoistic (such as health and personal well-being) (Birch et al., 2018). However, despite the longstanding concept of food citizenship, it has not been fully defined or studied (Lozano-Cabedo & Gómez-Benito, 2017). We used SEM to analyze the behavior of food citizens, which involves complex social scientific theories and intricate patterns of relationships between various constructs, hypotheses, or groups. This approach enabled us to model and test complex relationship patterns and multiple hypotheses simultaneously, which has been instrumental in expanding our understanding and improving the conceptualization of local food preferences among food citizens. Our findings are consistent with previous research suggesting that food citizenship involves a fusion of individual responsibility and social commitment towards the local community, leading to a highly condensed
728
729
730

social reality as described by Bindi & Belliggiano (2023). This includes a sense of meaningful participation in sustainable food production and values such as localism and transparency (Sonnino, 2016).

731
732
733
734
735
736
737

Our research supports the idea that local patriotism, commitment to the community, and prioritizing the common good over self-interest are at the core of food citizenship and contribute to a better understanding of how local patriotism, sense of place, and perceived similarity all shape food citizens' behaviors. This finding supports DeLind's (2002) early conceptualization that food citizenship encompasses individuals making sacrifices and prioritizing the common good over their own self-interests. Overall, our research highlights the importance of food citizenship as a complex social fact that combines individual responsibility and social commitment to one's local community.

738
739
740
741
742

## Managerial implication

In discussions on food policies, the concept of food citizenship often lacks clarity, either being undefined or narrowly focused on individual knowledge enhancement or consumer choices. Our findings emphasize that genuine food citizenship goes beyond these aspects, carrying significant implications for local food producers, advocates, and policymakers.

743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770

The rise of local food consumption as one of the fastest-growing trends in the United States presents an opportunity to enhance sustainability and equity within the food system (Kelmenson, 2022). However, despite their efforts, local farmers still operate within a dominant food regime characterized by productivity, industrialization, and neoliberal policies, posing increasing constraints on their viability (Carlisle et al., 2019). Indeed, Illinois, as part of the Midwest Corn Belt, plays a significant role in soybean and corn production, showcasing the region's agricultural prominence (Green et al., 2018) with an agricultural landscape characterized by divisions between large-scale farmers, industrialists, and smaller farmers, with implications for rural labor and poverty (Montenegro de Wit et al., 2021). The Midwest also strongly depends on a deeply culturally and economically ingrained industrial agricultural model. The narrative that "industrial agriculture is patriotic" and essential for "feeding the world" is deeply entrenched, and those who question it are often dismissed as either fringe ideologists or elitists who disdain traditional values (Montenegro de Wit et al., 2021). Challenging these narratives meets resistance from the predominant institutions that have historically fostered an environment conducive to authoritarian populism in rural Midwest communities (Limeberry & Fox, 2021). This underscores the region's stronghold of conservative ideals and the enduring influence of industrial agriculture in shaping its political landscape. Nevertheless, farmers across the region have frequently contested dominant trends. They have sought to regain control over land, communities, and institutions by forging cross-sector alliances and combined grassroots protest tactics and left-populist ideologies to link these movements across time and move toward transformative social and political change. Indeed, Illinois and Minnesota are the exceptions in all Midwestern states that supported Donald Trump in recent elections. Similar to trends observed across Illinois, Will County has experienced a notable surge in interest surrounding local food production and consumption. Residents increasingly recognize the myriad benefits of supporting local farmers and producers, including access to fresher and more nutritious produce, reduced environmental impact due to shorter transportation distances, and bolstering the local economy. This heightened awareness has manifested in establishing various local food initiatives within Will County, such as farmers' markets, community-supported agriculture (CSA) programs, and farm-to-table dining experiences, aligning with similar statewide efforts.

771
772
773
774

Our research sheds light on some distinctive characteristics shaping the evolution of the farming landscape towards increased alternative and local production in Will County. This unique setting presents both opportunities and challenges for the local food movement, particularly considering the demographics of suburban residents. Their engagement in alternative food production and networks—
775
776

food citizenship—may lead to different preferences and consumer behaviors compared to urban populations, necessitating a tailored approach to marketing and promoting local food products.

777
778
779
780
781
782
783

Understanding the behavior and preferences of food citizens is paramount for transcending traditional producer-consumer limitations and fostering the development of new economic spaces (Carlisle et al., 2019). It presents an opportunity to cultivate genuine relationships with local farmers, foster community engagement, and reshape the agrifood system to be more sustainable and equitable. By embracing the principles of food citizenship and leveraging the unique dynamics of Will County's suburban landscape, stakeholders can work towards building a more resilient and community-driven local food system.

784
785
786
787

Recognizing the strong connection between food citizens' preference for local food and their identification with local farmers, it is advisable for communication strategies to emphasize emotionally resonant content highlighting the challenges faced by local farmers (Naasz & Thilmany, 2018).

788
789
790
791
792
793

Our findings reveal a robust correlation between local patriotism and the preference for locally sourced food among men aged 40 and above. Within this demographic, community attachment, identity, and social interaction with local farmers significantly influence their food preferences. However, it's imperative to approach these findings with a nuanced understanding, considering previous research highlighting associations between local food nostalgia and elements of white nationalist ideologies, necessitating careful interpretation (Babb et al., 2023).

794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801

While the Midwest is often depicted as a stronghold of right-wing sentiment, it also boasts a rich tradition of rural organizing, which gave rise to transformative political movements known as “*Heartland politics*” (Masuda & Garvin, 2008). These dynamics underscore the region's unique amalgamation of conservatism, rural-urban divides, and economic concerns, with agriculture playing a central role in shaping political attitudes and priorities. It is worth noting that socially conservative norms and alliances have played a pivotal role in organizing authoritarian populist hegemony in the Midwest (Scoones et al., 2018), while rurality serves as a fluid construct of identity and nationhood, subject to political manipulation (Limeberry & Fox, 2021).

802
803
804
805
806
807
808

Our findings put forth a discernible trend in environmental concerns: younger individuals exhibit a greater sensitivity to environmental issues regarding local food, although these concerns may not directly dictate their preferences. Emphasizing the active contribution of local food producers to the economy, biodiversity, and environment can bolster consumer awareness and garner support for alternative and local food initiatives (Naasz & Thilmany, 2018). This intricate interplay of factors highlights the complex nature of local food preferences within the context of broader socio-political and environmental dynamics in the Midwest, particularly collar counties-specific cases.

809
810
811
812
813
814

While our study provides valuable insights into the factors influencing local food preferences among populations of food citizens, it is limited by its sample size, focusing on residents of a single county. Comparative studies across diverse populations are essential as citizen engagement in food-related behaviors gains momentum nationwide. Ultimately, the promise of a new food system lies in empowering individuals to become active and responsible food citizens, driving transformative change.

815
<table><thead><tr><th></th><th>Mean (SD)</th><th>Std.reg Weights</th><th>Square multiple corr.</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="4"><strong>[AT] Attitudes toward local food</strong></td></tr><tr><td>[AT1] I feel satisfaction when I buy and eat local Food from Will County</td><td>6.1 (1.3)</td><td>0.98</td><td>0.81</td></tr><tr><td>[AT2] Buying and eating food grown in Will County gives me a pleasant feeling</td><td>5.9 (1.2)</td><td>0.84</td><td>0.78</td></tr><tr><td>[AT3] Local Food tastes better</td><td>5.6 (1.8)</td><td>0.8</td><td>0.71</td></tr><tr><td>[AT4] Local Food is fresh</td><td>5.9 (1.2)</td><td>0.91</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><td colspan="4"><strong>[LP] Local patriotism</strong></td></tr><tr><td>[LP1] I consider buying and eating food produced in Will County as an act of patriotism</td><td>5.8 (1.3)</td><td>0.84</td><td>0.78</td></tr><tr><td>[LP2] We should buy from our local farmers instead of larger conventional farms with too much money and power.</td><td>5.9 (1.4)</td><td>0.98</td><td>0.71</td></tr><tr><td>[LP3] It is important to support our local economy in Will County by embracing the practice of purchasing locally sourced food.</td><td>5.5 (1.3)</td><td>0.87</td><td>0.87</td></tr><tr><td>[LP4] Embracing the practice of purchasing locally sourced food is crucial in supporting our local community in Will County.</td><td>5.9 (1.7)</td><td>0.84</td><td>0.7</td></tr><tr><td colspan="4"><strong>[S.C.] Social concerns</strong></td></tr><tr><td>[SC1] Because I live in Will County, I feel I must buy and eat local food</td><td>5.7 (1.2)</td><td>0.88</td><td>0.78</td></tr><tr><td>[SC2] I feel that I should try to support Will County local farmers in front of big national producers and imported food challenges.</td><td>5.8 (1.9)</td><td>0.87</td><td>0.77</td></tr><tr><td>[SC3] I feel I should buy and eat local food to support our local communities in Will County</td><td>6.1 (1.7)</td><td>0.91</td><td>0.81</td></tr><tr><td>[SC4] I should buy from Will county's local farmers to enable them to stay in the business of farming.</td><td>6.9 (1.1)</td><td>0.86</td><td>0.71</td></tr><tr><td colspan="4"><strong>[P.S.] Perceived similarity</strong></td></tr><tr><td>[PS1] Local farmers in Will County are not different from the other county residents.</td><td>5.9 (1.9)</td><td>0.8</td><td>0.72</td></tr><tr><td>[PS2] As an individual, I don't perceive much difference between myself and a local farmer who produces the food we consume.</td><td>5.7 (1.3)</td><td>0.79</td><td>0.71</td></tr><tr><td>[PS3] I see little distinction between myself and a nearby farmer.</td><td>5.1 (1.7)</td><td>0.78</td><td>0.7</td></tr><tr><td colspan="4"><strong>[E.C] Environmental concerns</strong></td></tr><tr><td>[EC1] Locally sourced food is better for the environment.</td><td>5.9 (1.5)</td><td>0.97</td><td>0.87</td></tr><tr><td>[EC2] By consuming locally sourced food we help reduce our carbon footprint</td><td>5.1 (1.7)</td><td>0.94</td><td>0.84</td></tr><tr><td>[EC3] By consuming locally sourced food, we help sustain biodiversity.</td><td>5.8 (1.3)</td><td>0.91</td><td>0.81</td></tr><tr><td colspan="4"><strong>[P.R.] Preferences for local food</strong></td></tr><tr><td>[PR1] If I were given a choice to buy convention or local food, I would buy local food.</td><td>6.9 (1.9)</td><td>0.89</td><td>0.79</td></tr><tr><td>[PR2] I love buying and eating local food</td><td>6.4 (2.1)</td><td>0.99</td><td>0.89</td></tr><tr><td>[PR3] I prefer local food even if it costs more than other types of food</td><td>6.1 (2.2)</td><td>0.92</td><td>0.81</td></tr></tbody></table>
820 References

821 Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). *Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour*.

822 http://www.citeulike.org/group/38/article/235626

823 Akbarov, S. (2022). Consumer ethnocentrism and purchasing behavior: moderating effect of

824 demographics. *Journal of Islamic Marketing*, 13(4), 898–932. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-02-

825 2020-0047

826 Allen, P., FitzSimmons, M., Goodman, M., & Warner, K. (2003). Shifting plates in the agrifood

827 landscape: The tectonics of alternative agrifood initiatives in California. *Journal of Rural*

828 *Studies*, 19(1), 61–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(02)00047-5

829 Alsughayir, A. (2013). Consumer Ethnocentrism: A Literature Review. *International Journal of*

830 *Business and Management Innovation ISSN*, 2(January 2013), 50–54. www.ijbmi.org

831 Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modelling in practice—a review and

832 recommended two-step approach. *Psychological Bulletin*, 103(3), 411–423.

833 https://doi.org/10.1504/EJIM.2021.114662

834 Bagozzi, R. P. (1994). *Principles of Marketing Research*. Blackwell Business.

835 Baldassarri, D., & Abascal, M. (2020). Diversity and prosocial behavior. *Science*, 369(6508), 1183–

836 1187. https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.ABB2432

837 Baldassarri, D., & Grossman, G. (2013). The Effect of Group Attachment and Social Position on

838 Prosocial Behavior. Evidence from Lab-in-the-Field Experiments. *PLoS ONE*, 8(3).

839 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058750

840 Barad, K. (2007). *Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and*

841 *meaning*. duke university Press.

842 Beardsworth, A., Bryman, A., Keil, T., Goode, J., Haslam, C., & Lancashire, E. (2002). Women, men

843 and food: The significance of gender for nutritional attitudes and choices. *British Food Journal*,

844 104(7), 470–491. https://doi.org/10.1108/00070700210418767

845 Bellows, A. C., Alcaraz V., G., & Hallman, W. K. (2010). Gender and food, a study of attitudes in the

846 USA towards organic, local, U.S. grown, and GM-free foods. *Appetite*, 55(3), 540–550.

847 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2010.09.002

848 Ben-Othmen, M. A., Cardoze, V., Hani, J., & Sauvee, L. (2023). *Chapter 2 - Community-based urban*

849 agriculture for food justice: a review (P. B. T.-U. and R. A. Droege (ed.); pp. 11–40). Academic

850 Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-820286-9.00008-X

851 Ben-Othmen, M. A., & Kavouras, J. H. (2022). Developing a community-based local food system in

852 Will County, Illinois: Insights from stakeholders’ viewpoints. *Journal of Agriculture, Food*

853 *Systems, and Community Development*, 11(2), 263–283.

854 Ben-Othmen, M. A., & Kavouras, J. H. (2024). Exploring the nexus of food citizenship and local food

855 consumption in America’s rural-urban blend: Insights from Will County (Illinois). *Journal of*

856 *Rural Studies*, 109, 103323. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2024.103323

857 Bimbo, F., Russo, C., Di Fonzo, A., & Nardone, G. (2021). Consumers’ environmental responsibility

858 and their purchase of local food: evidence from a large-scale survey. *British Food Journal*,

859 123(5), 1853–1874. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-05-2020-0398

860 Bindi, L., & Belliggiano, A. (2023). A Highly Condensed Social Fact: Food Citizenship, Individual

861 Responsibility, and Social Commitment. *Sustainability (Switzerland)*, 15(8), 1–22.

862 https://doi.org/10.3390/su15086881

863 Birch, D., Memery, J., & De Silva Kanakaratne, M. (2018). The mindful consumer: Balancing egoistic
864 and altruistic motivations to purchase local food. *Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services*,
865 40(October 2017), 221–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.10.013

866 Bourdieu, P. (1987). What makes a social class? On the theoretical and practical existence of groups.
867 *Berkeley Journal of Sociology*, 32, 1–17.

868 Bródy, L. S., & de Wilde, M. (2020). Cultivating food or cultivating citizens? On the governance and
869 potential of community gardens in Amsterdam. *Local Environment*, 25(3), 243–257.
870 https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2020.1730776

871 Brune, S., Knollenberg, W., Barbieri, C., & Stevenson, K. (2023). Towards a unified definition of
872 local food. *Journal of Rural Studies*, 103(September), 103135.
873 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2023.103135

874 Bui, S., Cardona, A., Lamine, C., & Cerf, M. (2016). Sustainability transitions: Insights on processes
875 of niche-regime interaction and regime reconfiguration in agri-food systems. *Journal of Rural
876 Studies*, 48, 92–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.10.003

877 Byker, C., Shanks, J., Misyak, S., & Serrano, E. (2012). Characterizing Farmers’ Market Shoppers: A
878 Literature Review. *Journal of Hunger & Environmental Nutrition*, 7(1), 38–52.
879 https://doi.org/10.1080/19320248.2012.650074

880 Campbell, J. M. (2013). Muy local: Differentiating Hispanic and Caucasian shoppers of locally
881 produced foods in US grocery. *Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services*, 20(3), 325–333.
882 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2013.01.009

883 Carlisle, L., de Wit, M. M., DeLonge, M. S., Calo, A., Getz, C., Ory, J., Munden-Dixon, K., Galt, R.,
884 Melone, B., Knox, R., Iles, A., & Press, D. (2019). Securing the future of US agriculture: The
885 case for investing in new entry sustainable farmers. *Elementa*, 7(1).
886 https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.356

887 Carolan, M. (2017). More-than-Active Food Citizens: A Longitudinal and Comparative Study of
888 Alternative and Conventional Eaters. *Rural Sociology*, 82(2), 197–225.
889 https://doi.org/10.1111/ruso.12120

890 Carzedda, M., Marangon, F., Nassivera, F., & Troiano, S. (2018). Consumer satisfaction in Alternative
891 Food Networks (AFNs): Evidence from Northern Italy. *Journal of Rural Studies*, 64(October),
892 73–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.10.003

893 Chen, J., Lobo, A., & Rajendran, N. (2014). Drivers of organic food purchase intentions in mainland
894 China – evaluating potential customers’ attitudes, demographics and segmentation. *International
895 Journal of Consumer Studies*, 38(4), 346–356. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12095

896 Chen, M.-F. (2020). Selecting environmental psychology theories to predict people’s consumption
897 intention of locally produced organic foods. *International Journal of Consumer Studies*, 44(5),
898 455–468. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12578

899 Coelho de Souza, J., da Silva Pugas, A., Rover, O. J., & Nodari, E. S. (2023). Social innovation
900 networks and agrifood citizenship. The case of Florianópolis Area, Santa Catarina / Brazil.
901 *Journal of Rural Studies*, 99(March 2021), 223–232.
902 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.09.002

903 Cumbers, A., Shaw, D., Crossan, J., & McMaster, R. (2018). The Work of Community Gardens:
904 Reclaiming Place for Community in the City. *Work, Employment and Society*, 32(1), 133–149.
905 https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017017695042

906 de Bakker, E., & Dagevos, H. (2012). Reducing Meat Consumption in Today’s Consumer Society:
907 Questioning the Citizen-Consumer Gap. *Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics*,
908 25(6), 877–894. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-011-9345-z
909 DeLind, L. B. (2002). Place, work, and civic agriculture: Common fields for cultivation. *Agriculture and Human Values*, 19(3), 217–224. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019994728252

911 DeLind, L. B. (2011). Are local food and the local food movement taking us where we want to go? Or are we hitching our wagons to the wrong stars? *Agriculture and Human Values*, 28(2), 273–283.
913 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-010-9263-0

914 Dubuisson-Quellier, S., Lamine, C., & Le Velly, R. (2011). Citizenship and consumption: Mobilisation in alternative food systems in France. *Sociologia Ruralis*, 51(3), 304–323.
915
916 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9523.2011.00540.x

917 Durham, C., & Roheim, C. (2009). Ranking of reasons for choosing local foods. *Journal of Food Distribution Research*, XL(1).

919 Feldmann, C., & Hamm, U. (2015). Consumers’ perceptions and preferences for local food: A review. *Food Quality and Preference*, 40(PA), 152–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.09.014

921 Fernández-Ferrín, P., & Bande-Vilela, B. (2013). Regional ethnocentrism: Antecedents, consequences, and moderating effects. *Food Quality and Preference*, 30(2), 299–308.
923 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.06.011

924 Fernández-Ferrín, P., Bande, B., Martín-Consuegra, D., Díaz, E., & Kastenholz, E. (2020). Sub-national consumer ethnocentrism and the importance of the origin of food products: an exploratory analysis. *British Food Journal*, 122(3), 995–1010. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-09-2019-0746

928 Fonte, M. (2013). Food consumption as social practice: Solidarity Purchasing Groups in Rome, Italy. *Journal of Rural Studies*, 32(October 2013), 230–239.
929
930 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2013.07.003

931 Goldsmith, R., & Reinecke Flynn, L. (1992). Identifying Innovators in Consumer Product Markets. *European Journal of Marketing*, 26(12), 42–55. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090569210022498

933 Gómez-Benito, C., & Lozano, C. (2014). Constructing food citizenship: Theoretical premises and social practices. *Italian Sociological Review*, 4(2), 135–156. https://doi.org/10.13136/isr.v4i2.79

935 Goodman, D. (2003). The quality ‘turn’ and alternative food practices: reflections and agenda. *Journal of Rural Studies*, 19(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0743-0167(02)00043-8

937 Goodman, D., DuPuis, E. M., & Goodman, M. K. (2012). *Alternative food networks: Knowledge, practice, and politics*. Routledge.

939 Goodwin, C. (1996). Communality as a Dimension of Service Relationships. *Journal of Consumer Psychology*, 5(4), 387–415. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp0504_04

941 Granzin, K. L., & Olsen, J. E. (1998). Americans’ Choice of Domestic over Foreign Products: A Matter of Helping Behavior? *Journal of Business Research*, 43(1), 39–54.
943 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(97)00101-X

944 Granzin, K. L., & Painter, J. J. (2000). Non-Demographic versus Demographic Determinants of “Buy Domestic” Activities in Two Nations. *Journal of Global Marketing*, 13(4), 73–92.
946 https://doi.org/10.1300/J042v13n04_05

947 Green, T. R., Kipka, H., David, O., & McMaster, G. S. (2018). Where is the USA Corn Belt, and how is it changing? *Science of the Total Environment*, 618, 1613–1618.

949 Grunert, K. G., Hieke, S., & Wills, J. (2014). Sustainability labels on food products: Consumer motivation, understanding and use. *Food Policy*, 44, 177–189.
951 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2013.12.001

952 Hale, J., Irish, A., Carolan, M., Clark, J. K., Inwood, S., Jablonski, B. B. R., & Johnson, T. (2023). A
953 systematic review of cultural capital in U.S. community development research. *Journal of Rural Studies*, 103 (September), 103113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2023.103113

955 Hassanein, N. (2003). Practicing food democracy: A pragmatic politics of transformation. *Journal of Rural Studies*, 19(1), 77–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(02)00041-4

957 Hatanaka, M. (2020). Beyond consuming ethically? Food citizens, governance, and sustainability. *Journal of Rural Studies*, 77(May), 55–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.04.006

959 Hedberg, R. C., & Zimmerer, K. S. (2020). What's the market got to do with it? Social-ecological embeddedness and environmental practices in a local food system initiative. *Geoforum*, 110, 35–45. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.01.022

962 Hinrichs, C. C. (2000). Embeddedness and local food systems: Notes on two types of direct agricultural market. *Journal of Rural Studies*, 16(3), 295–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(99)00063-7

965 Hoagland, H. E. (1912). The movement of rural population in Illinois. *Journal of Political Economy*, 20(9), 913–927.

967 Hultine, S. A., Cooperband, L. R., Curry, M. P., & Gasteyer, S. (2007). Linking small farms to rural communities with local food: A case study of the local food project in Fairbury, Illinois. *Community Development*, 38(3), 61–76.

970 Hummon, D. M. (1992). *Community Attachment BT - Place Attachment* (I. Altman & S. M. Low (eds.); pp. 253–278). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-8753-4_12

972 Iweala, S., Spiller, A., & Meyerding, S. (2019). Buy good, feel good? The influence of the warm glow of giving on the evaluation of food items with ethical claims in the U.K. and Germany. *Journal of Cleaner Production*, 215, 315–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.266

975 Jablonski, B. B. R., Carolan, M., Hale, J., McFadden, D. T., Love, E., Christensen, L., Covey, T., Bellow, L., Cleary, R., David, O., Jablonski, K. E., Jones, A. S., Meiman, P., Quinn, J., Ryan, E. P., Schipanski, M., Summers, H., & Uchanski, M. (2019). Connecting urban food plans to the countryside: Leveraging Denver's Food Vision to explore meaningful rural-urban linkages. *Sustainability (Switzerland)*, 11(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/su11072022

980 Jacobsen, E., & Dulsrud, A. (2007). Will Consumers Save The World? The Framing of Political Consumerism. *Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics*, 20(5), 469–482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-007-9043-z

983 Johnston, J. (2008). The citizen-consumer hybrid: Ideological tensions and the case of Whole Foods Market. *Theory and Society*, 37(3), 229–270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-007-9058-5

985 Kaika, A., & Racelis, A. (2021). Civic agriculture in review: Then, now, and future directions. *Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development*, 10(2), 551–572. https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2021.102.030

988 Kemp, K., Insch, A., Holdsworth, D. K., & Knight, J. G. (2010). Food miles: Do UK consumers actually care? *Food Policy*, 35(6), 504–513. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2010.05.011

991 Kim, S. H., & Huang, R. (2021). Understanding local food consumption from an ideological perspective: Locavorism, authenticity, pride, and willingness to visit. *Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services*, 58(May 2020), 102330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102330

994 Kingsley, J., Foenander, E., & Bailey, A. (2019). “You feel like you’re part of something bigger”: exploring motivations for community garden participation in Melbourne, Australia. *BMC Public Health*, 19(1), 745. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7108-3

997 Kirwan, J., Ilbery, B., Maye, D., & Carey, J. (2013). Grassroots social innovations and food
998 localisation: An investigation of the Local Food programme in England. *Global Environmental Change*, 23(5), 830–837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.12.004

1000 Knight, A. J. (2013). Evaluating local food programs: The case of Select Nova Scotia. *Evaluation and Program Planning*, 36(1), 29–39.
1001
1002 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2012.05.003

1003 Kumar, A., & Smith, S. (2017). Understanding Local Food Consumers: Theory of Planned Behavior
1004 and Understanding Local Food Consumers: Theory of Planned Behavior and Segmentation
1005 Approach. *Journal of Food Products Marketing*, 00(00), 1–20.
1006 https://doi.org/10.1080/10454446.2017.1266553

1007 Lang, T. (1999). Food policy for the 21st century: Can it be both radical and reasonable. *For Hunger-Proof Cities: Sustainable Urban Food Systems*, 216–224.

1009 Lay, J. C., & Hoppmann, C. A. (2015). *Altruism and Prosocial Behavior BT - Encyclopedia of Geropsychology* (N. A. Pachana (ed.); pp. 1–9). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-080-3_69-1

1012 Lewicka, M. (2013). Localism and Activity as two dimensions of people-place bonding: The role of cultural capital. *Journal of Environmental Psychology*, 36, 43–53.
1013
1014 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.07.002

1015 Limeberry, V., & Fox, J. (2021). Co-opting the rural: Regionalization as narrative in international populist authoritarian movement organizing in the United States and France. *Journal of Rural Studies*, 82(May 2019), 570–585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.08.033

1018 Low, S. A., Adalja, A., Beaulieu, E., Key, N., Martinez, S., Melton, A., Perez, A., Ralston, K., Stewart, H., Suttles, S., & Vogel, S. (2015). *Trends in US Local and Regional Food Systems: Report to Congress*. Administrative Publication #068. 068, 92.

1021 Lozano-Cabedo, C., & Gómez-Benito, C. (2017). A Theoretical Model of Food Citizenship for the Analysis of Social Praxis. *Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics*, 30(1), 1–22.
1022
1023 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-016-9649-0

1024 Lyson, T. A. (2005). Civic Agriculture and Community Problem Solving. *Culture & Agriculture*, 27(2), 92–98. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1525/cag.2005.27.2.92

1026 Manganelli, A. (2020). Realising local food policies: a comparison between Toronto and the Brussels-Capital Region's stories through the lenses of reflexivity and co-learning. *Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning*, 22(3), 366–380.
1027
1028
1029 https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2020.1740657

1030 Manyukhina, Y. (2017). Consumer Food Ethics: Considerations of Vulnerability, Suffering, and Harm. *Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics*, 30(4), 595–614.
1031
1032 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-017-9689-0

1033 Masuda, J. R., & Garvin, T. (2008). Whose Heartland?: The politics of place in a rural–urban interface. *Journal of Rural Studies*, 24(1), 112–123.
1034
1035 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.08.003

1036 Megicks, P., Memery, J., & Angell, R. J. (2012). Understanding local food shopping: Unpacking the ethical dimension. *Journal of Marketing Management*, 28(3–4), 264–289.
1037
1038 https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2012.658838

1039 Meyerding, S. G. H., Trajer, N., & Lehberger, M. (2019). What is local food? The case of consumer preferences for local food labeling of tomatoes in Germany. *Journal of Cleaner Production*, 207, 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.224

1042 Micheletti, M. (2003). *Shopping with and for Virtues BT - Political Virtue and Shopping: Individuals,*
1043 Consumerism, and Collective Action (M. Micheletti (ed.); pp. 149–168). Palgrave Macmillan
1044 US. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781403973764_5

1045 Montenegro de Wit, M., Roman-Alcalá, A., Liebman, A., & Chrisman, S. (2021). Agrarian origins of authoritarian populism in the United States: What can we learn from 20th-century struggles in California and the Midwest? *Journal of Rural Studies*, 82(December 2019), 518–530.
1048 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.12.003

1049 Naasz, E., & Thilmany, D. (2018). State Branding Programs and Local Food Purchases. *Choices*, 33(3), 1–6.

1051 O’Kane, G. (2016). A moveable feast: Exploring barriers and enablers to food citizenship. *Appetite*, 105, 674–687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.07.002

1053 O’Neill, C., McCarthy, M. B., O’Reilly, S., & Alfnes, F. (2023). Food interests, preferences and behaviours: a profile of the sustainable food consumer. *British Food Journal*, 125(13), 352–374. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-09-2022-0762

1056 Oleniuch, I., & Cichocka, I. (2015a). Regional Food Products and Region-Wise Consumer Ethnocentrism. *Modern Management Review*, XX, 143–153.
1058 https://doi.org/10.7862/rz.2015.mmр.11

1059 Oleniuch, I., & Cichocka, I. (2015b). Regional Food Products and Region-Wise Consumer Ethnocentrism. *Modern Management Review*, January 2019.
1061 https://doi.org/10.7862/rz.2015.mmр.11

1062 Paddock, J. (2015). Invoking simplicity: “Alternative” food and the reinvention of distinction. *Sociologia Ruralis*, 55(1), 22–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12056

1064 Paddock, J. R. (2017). Changing consumption, changing tastes? Exploring consumer narratives for food secure, sustainable and healthy diets. *Journal of Rural Studies*, 53, 102–110.
1066 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.04.001

1067 Penner., L. A., Dovidio., J. F., Piliavin., J. A., & Schroeder., D. A. (2004). Prosocial Behavior: Multilevel Perspectives. *Annual Review of Psychology*, 56(1), 365–392.
1069 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070141

1070 Poulsen, M. N. (2017). Cultivating citizenship, equity, and social inclusion? Putting civic agriculture into practice through urban farming. *Agriculture and Human Values*, 34(1), 135–148.
1072 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-016-9699-y

1073 Prost, S., Crivellaro, C., Haddon, A., & Comber, R. (2018). Food democracy in the making: Designing with local food networks. *Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings*, 2018-April, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173907

1076 Ran, Y., Nilsson Lewis, A., Dawkins, E., Grah, R., Vanhuyse, F., Engström, E., & Lambe, F. (2022).
1077 Information as an enabler of sustainable food choices: A behavioural approach to understanding
1078 consumer decision-making. *Sustainable Production and Consumption*, 31, 642–656.
1079 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2022.03.026

1080 Richey, S. (2022). The Influence of Local Patriotism on Participation in Local Politics, Civic participation, Trust in Local Government and Collective Action. *American Politics Research*, *September*. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X221125449

1083 Sacchi, G. (2018). The Ethics and Politics of Food Purchasing Choices in Italian Consumers' Collective Action. *Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics*, 31(1), 73–91.
1085 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-018-9710-2

1086 Sage, C. (2003). Social embeddedness and relations of regard:: alternative ‘good food’ networks in south-west Ireland. *Journal of Rural Studies*, 19(1), 47–60.
1088 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(02)00044-X
1089 Sanderson, A., Gomes, M., Mülling, D., & Kumar, V. (2023). The role of the state for managing voluntary food sustainability standards democratically. *Journal of Rural Studies*, 103(September), 103126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2023.103126
1091
1092 Schudson, M. (2007). Citizens, consumers, and the good society. *Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science*, 611(1), 236-249. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716207299195
1093
1094 Scoones, I., Edelman, M., Borras Jr, S. M., Hall, R., Wolford, W., & White, B. (2018). Emancipatory rural politics: confronting authoritarian populism. *The Journal of Peasant Studies*, 45(1), 1-20.
1095
1096 Seyfang, G. (2006). Ecological citizenship and sustainable consumption: Examining local organic food networks. *Journal of Rural Studies*, 22(4), 383-395.
1097
1098 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2006.01.003
1099 Seyfang, G. (2009). The new economics of sustainable consumption. *Minería Transnacional, Narrativas Del Desarrollo y Resistencias Sociales*. Buenos Aires: Biblios.
1100
1101 Skallerud, K., & Wien, A. H. (2019). Preference for local food as a matter of helping behaviour: Insights from Norway. *Journal of Rural Studies*, 67(February), 79-88.
1102
1103 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.02.020
1104 Snyder, M., & Omoto, A. M. (2007). Social action. In *Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles*, 2nd ed. (pp. 940-961). The Guilford Press.
1105
1106 Song, M. R., & Im, M. (2018). Moderating effects of food type and consumers' attitude on the evaluation of food items labeled "additive-free." *Journal of Consumer Behaviour*, 17(1), e1-e12.
1107
1108 https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1671
1109 Sonnino, R. (2016). The new geography of food security: Exploring the potential of urban food strategies. *Geographical Journal*, 182(2), 190-200. https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12129
1110
1111 Steenkamp, J. B. E. M., Ter Hofstede, F., & Wedel, M. (2010). A cross-national investigation into the individual and national cultural antecedents of consumer innovativeness. *Journal of Marketing*, 63(2), 55-69. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251945
1112
1113
1114 Tavernier, J. De. (2012). Food Citizenship: Is There a Duty for Responsible. *Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics*, 895-907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-011-9366-7
1115
1116 Turunen, A., Aro, R., & Huttunen, S. (2023). Intra-Acting Food Citizenship in Community-Supported Agriculture in Finland. *Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics*, 36(3).
1117
1118 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-023-09910-0
1119 USDA Climate Hubs. (2017). Agriculture in the Midwest.
1120 Weber, H., Poeggel, K., Eakin, H., Fischer, D., Lang, D. J., Wehrden, H. Von, & Wiek, A. (2020). What are the ingredients for food systems change towards sustainability? - Insights from the literature. *Environmental Research Letters*, 15(11). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab99fd
1121
1122
1123 Welsh, J., & MacRae, R. (1998). Food Citizenship and Community Food Security: Lessons from Toronto, Canada. *Canadian Journal of Development Studies / Revue Canadienne d'études Du Développement*, 19(4), 237-255. https://doi.org/10.1080/02255189.1998.9669786
1124
1125
1126 Wilkins, J. L. (2005). Eating right here: Moving from consumer to food citizen: 2004 presidential address to the agriculture, food, and human values society, Hyde Park, New York, June 11, 2004.
1127
1128 Agriculture and Human Values, 22(3), 269-273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-005-6042-4
1129 Yoo, B., & Donthu, N. (2005). The Effect of Personal Cultural Orientation on Consumer Ethnocentrism. *Journal of International Consumer Marketing*, 18(1-2), 7-44.
1130
1131 https://doi.org/10.1300/J046v18n01_02
1132 Zhang, T., Chen, J., & Grunert, K. G. (2022). Impact of consumer global-local identity on attitude

1133 towards and intention to buy local foods. *Food Quality and Preference*, *96*, 104428.

1134 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104428

1135