A food-related lifestyle segmentation: understanding consumer interest in farmers markets in the US

Supporting farmers market success is important given the social, economic and health benefits markets offer communities (Morales, 2021; Witzling et al., 2025). Although the number of farmers markets in the United States has grown, markets face challenges related to profitability and consumer retention (Montri et al., 2021; Stephenson et al., 2008; Wilson et al., 2018; Youngs, 2003). Some markets also face challenges related to creating an inclusive atmosphere and offering equitable access across racial and ethnic demographics (Alkon and McCullen, 2011; Rice, 2015; Wetherill and Gray, 2015). Further, markets must keep pace with consumer trends, such as increases in online food shopping (Gill and Thilmany, 2024). Together, these dynamics underscore the need for an updated understanding of current and potential customers.

Previous research finds individuals attend farmers markets to support local farmers, to have an enjoyable experience and to access products perceived to be fresh, healthy, safe or sustainably grown (Byker et al., 2012; Hyland et al., 2024; Szmigin et al., 2003; Witzling et al., 2025). These motivations may not all translate to increased market attendance. For example, Zepeda (2009) found that enjoyment of cooking, frequency of cooking, gender and household composition increased the probability of being a farmers market shopper; preferences for freshness or nutrition did not. Other work finds that markets disproportionately attract individuals who are women, older, White, more educated or more affluent (Byker et al., 2012; Maró et al., 2023; Witzling et al., 2025). Concerningly, research has identified underrepresentation of African American and Latino shoppers at markets relative to surrounding community composition (Alkon and McCullen, 2011; Rice, 2015).

These findings highlight that numerous factors must be considered to understand current and potential farmers market customers. There is a gap, however, in that these factors have not been examined in concert with a lifestyle-based typology. A more holistic understanding of current and potential market customers could help operators and their partners better develop strategies to foster inclusivity, attract new customers and deepen engagement with existing shoppers.

Indeed, the Food-Related Lifestyle (FRL) framework offers a promising lens for this type of approach. It posits that food-related lifestyles – how individuals consume, prepare and obtain food – bridge concrete behaviors and preferences with abstract values (Grunert, 2020). Survey respondents are segmented (i.e. clustered or grouped) based on responses to FRL segmentation variables reflecting three key behaviors of cooking, eating and shopping. Once identified, researchers interpret and compare the segments using additional profiling variables (Grunert et al., 2001; Grunert, 2020).

Consequently, this study applied the FRL framework to identify consumer segments within a nationally representative U.S. sample and examined differences across segments regarding demographics and an extensive set of farmers market variables. In doing so, this study aimed to generate actionable insights for market operators and partners seeking to more effectively promote their markets. This study extends FRL research by profiling segments with a more comprehensive set of farmers market measures than previously employed, including variables related to motivations, barriers and social norms. Social norms have received limited attention in this arena (Witzling et al., 2019). Specifically, this study focused on perceptions of “descriptive norms,” or norms related to what others do (Cialdini et al., 1990). Social norms have been found to be a significant predictor of behavior in many behavioral contexts (Cialdini et al., 1990; Witzling et al., 2019).

Much FRL work has focused on consumers in Europe, where the FRL framework was developed (Grunert, 2020). Across studies, researchers commonly identify some or all of five core segments (“Adventurous,” “Careless,” “Conservative,” “Rational” and “Uninvolved”) that differ in their level of food involvement, orientation toward novelty versus tradition, enjoyment of food and emphasis on ethics or sustainability (Brunsø et al., 2021; Grunert et al., 2001; Grunert, 2020; Wycherley et al., 2008).

Although only select European FRL studies have incorporated farmers market variables, and typically with a narrow set of measures, some high-level patterns can be identified. First, highly food-involved segments (e.g. Adventurous) report greater use of farmers markets (Brunsø et al., 2021; Wycherley et al., 2008). This finding aligns with other work showing farmers market shopping to be associated with enjoyment of cooking (Byker et al., 2012; Zepeda, 2009). Second, interest in farmers markets is not confined to highly food-involved segments (Brunsø et al., 2021; Wycherley et al., 2008). For example, a “Careless” segment was characterized by a convenience orientation, more spontaneous involvement with food, and younger age, with above-average use of farmers markets in a sample from Great Britain (Wycherley et al., 2008). Similarly, a study found “Open-Minded” Gen Z consumers in Germany used markets more, but also relied more on ready-to-eat food (Ruppenthal and Rückert-John, 2025). Lastly, studies consistently find that Uninvolved consumers – with the lowest interest in food – show the least interest in farmers markets (Brunsø et al., 2021; Wycherley et al., 2008).

U.S. studies have built on European-centered work, with some similar patterns emerging. There is a consistent finding that at least one segment is characterized by frequent cooking and food shopping, and this segment shows strong interest in attending farmers markets (Chen and House, 2022; Nie and Zepeda, 2011; Witzling and Shaw, 2019). These segments show a strong interest in nutrition and also sometimes hold stronger environmental values (Chen and House, 2022; Nie and Zepeda, 2011; Witzling and Shaw, 2019).

Similar to European studies, U.S. studies find interest in farmers markets extends beyond the most food-involved consumers. Examples include “Traditional” and Rational segments, as well as “Moderately Involved” and “Nutrition-Focused” segments (Chen and House, 2022; Witzling and Shaw, 2019). However, as with European work, farmers markets were not the central theme of such studies, and consequently, they did not describe relationships between segments and farmers markets with depth.

The survey was administered by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) in August 2023. The study protocol received Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval from the University of Wisconsin–Madison (IRB No. 2023-0759-CP00). Participants were drawn from NORC’s AmeriSpeak Panel with 5,141 participants in the final sample and a completion rate of 21%. NORC achieved demographic benchmarks through an oversampling strategy, resulting in a sample largely reflective of the U.S. population.

The segmenting variables (Table 1) draw on Witzling and Shaw (2019), a study that used FRL variables in a U.S. context. We focused on three key food-related behaviors of cooking, eating, and obtaining (i.e. shopping or growing) food. Across the behaviors, questions touched on four motivation-focused dimensions: enjoyment, involvement, novelty and principles. The conceptualization of the involvement, novelty and principles dimensions were adapted from Brunsø et al. (2021). Political ideology was included as a segmenting variable following Witzling and Shaw (2019). This item was on a 5-point scale (1 = Very liberal, 5 = Very conservative). This item was not on the questionnaire, as it was available for analysis from NORC, which retains some panelist background information. The segmentation variables were single items, consistent with guidance that reducing variables prior to cluster analysis can mask variables important for identifying distinct segments (Dolnicar et al., 2018; Sarstedt and Mooi, 2019).

Multi-item scales were used for motivations, barriers and social norms with reliability coefficients reported in Table 2. Some single-item measures were used due to their conceptual distinctiveness.

Demographic measures included age, education, gender, household income, household size and race/ethnicity categories of Asian, Black, Hispanic, multiracial, other and White. As NORC retains panelist information, data for these items were obtained from NORC, rather than through the questionnaire.

The segmentation variables were used to cluster the respondents with the k-means clustering method in SPSS (IBM SPSS Statistics Version 29.0.2.0), an approach used in consumer marketing (Dolnicar et al., 2018; Diyabi et al., 2025). As only individuals who answered all segmentation items were included in the cluster analysis, 4,610 cases remained.

K-means requires the predetermination of the number of clusters. The choice of cluster number should be informed by multiple diagnostic techniques as well as theory and interpretability (Everitt et al., 2011; Sarstedt and Mooi, 2019). An elbow plot indicated a pronounced decline at two clusters, likely reflecting a coarse split between respondents who are generally more involved with food, and those less involved. The curve did not flatten thereafter, indicating no clear optimal solution beyond the initial split. A dendrogram suggested that between four and six clusters could yield a meaningful structure. As prior FRL research commonly identifies five to six segments, these solutions were validated using a train-test validation approach with k-nearest neighbors, where 70% of respondents were assigned to the training set, and their cluster labels were used to classify the remaining 30%. The five-cluster solution produced a smaller centroid distance (0.72) than the six-cluster solution (1.30), but the six-cluster solution differentiated an additional interpretable segment. Therefore, the six-cluster solution was retained.

We then examined differences between segments with multiple one-way ANOVA tests. Cases were excluded by analysis. A Bonferroni correction to p-values was applied and Tukey post hoc analyses were conducted. For categorical demographic data, chi-square tests were used.

Next, we ran a regression model with the overall farmers market interest variable as the dependent variable. Only individuals with data for all items (the FRL variables plus all profiling variables) were included for this analysis, resulting in 4,277 cases. Block 1 included the demographic variables, Block 2 included the FRL segments and Block 3 included the farmers market variables related to motivations, barriers and social norms.

Six segments were identified and named based on defining features. These are presented in order of greatest to least farmers market interest: “Highly Engaged” (n = 815), “Health-Focused” (n = 834), “Emerging Interest” (n = 861), “Convenience” (n = 743), “Practical” (n = 793) and “Uninvolved” (n = 564). Means and standard deviations for select segmenting variables are displayed in Table 3. At the aggregate level, the sample reported levels of preparing fresh food (M = 3.40, SD = 1.11) slightly above the scale midpoint, corresponding to “A few times a week.” Similarly, enjoyment of cooking (M = 3.47, SD = 1.06) averaged slightly above the scale midpoint, closest to “Somewhat.”

Overall interest in farmers markets (Table 4) was slightly below the scale midpoint (M = 2.86, SD = 0.94). The strongest motivations for shopping at farmers markets were supporting local farmers (M = 3.69, SD = 1.13) and to obtain healthy or fresh food (M = 3.65, SD = 1.00), closest to “Quite a bit,” followed by doing something fun (M = 3.45, SD = 1.14), closest to “Somewhat.” The greatest barrier was forgetting about markets (M = 2.80, SD = 1.31), closest to “Somewhat.” Although there were significant differences, all but the Uninvolved groups averaged closest to “Somewhat” for social norms (M = 2.79, SD = 0.83).

The sample included 51.10% women and 48.90% men. The sample was 64.73% White, 17.05% Hispanic, 11.13% Black, 3.25% Asian and 2.80% multiracial. Additionally, 1.04% selected “other.” The average age was approximately 50 (M = 49.75, SD = 17.30) years old. Household income averaged closest to “$50,000–$59,999” (M = 10.41, SD = 4.37). Education averaged closest to “Some college/associate degree” (M = 3.25, SD = 1.10). Significant differences across segments were found for age, gender, education, income and four of the race/ethnicity categories (White, Hispanic, Black and multiracial). These results are discussed in the segment descriptions. The household size sample average was three people (M = 2.77, SD = 1.50). Although some groups differed significantly, all groups still averaged closest to three people.

Highly Engaged. Highly Engaged consumers have strong involvement with food, enjoy cooking and are the most motivated to participate in farmers markets. This segment prepared fresh food the most often (M = 4.03, SD = 0.94), closest to “About once a day.” This value demonstrated a meaningful difference relative to the sample average of “A few times a week.” The Highly Engaged segment enjoyed cooking (M = 4.31, SD = 0.84) significantly more than any other segment, closest to “Quite a bit,” and greater than the sample average of “Somewhat.” This segment placed greater importance on nearly all food qualities, relative to other segments, reflecting broad and strong food-related preferences. For example, they had the highest means for taking ethical considerations into account with food purchases (M = 3.81, SD 1.01), closest to “Quite a bit.” In contrast, other groups averaged closest to “Somewhat” or “Very little” on that item. They also had the highest mean for the variable related to supporting small farms or businesses (M = 3.90, SD = 0.99). This pattern indicates that ethical and social considerations are more central to their food purchasing decisions.

They had the highest overall interest in farmers markets (M = 3.63, SD = 0.82). A closer examination of attendance (as part of the multi-item interest measure) found that 19.39% “Never” or “Rarely” attended, 39.51% “Sometimes” attended, and 41.10% “Frequently” or “Very Frequently” attended. Their motivations for attending farmers markets averaged higher than all other segments. Their top motivations were to obtain healthy and fresh food, to support local farmers, and to do something fun. These all averaged “Quite a bit.” The environmental motivation (M = 3.68, SD = 1.06) also averaged “Quite a bit,” whereas the community motivation averaged closest to “Somewhat” (M = 3.43, SD = 1.13). Like other segments, their greatest barrier was forgetting about markets (M = 2.58, SD = 1.39), closest to “Somewhat.” However, this barrier averaged relatively less for this segment compared to others. Demographically, this segment had a higher proportion of women (64.63%). Racially and ethnically, they were more diverse with more Hispanic (26.75%), Black (19.75%) and multiracial (3.93%) respondents. They had significantly lower average household income than other segments, averaging closest to “$40,000 to $49,999” (M = 9.33, SD = 4.64).

Health-Focused consumers prioritize healthy food and cooking, avoid convenience foods and show interest in farmers markets. Specifically, this segment reported active involvement in cooking, preparing fresh food (M = 3.59, SD = 1.01) closest to “About once a day.” They enjoyed cooking (M = 3.40, SD = 0.90) closest to “Somewhat,” significantly less than the Highly Engaged or Emerging Interest segments, which averaged closest to “Quite a bit.” They reported that food being nutritious (M = 4.28, SD = 0.67) or fresh (M = 4.39, SD = 0.65) impacted their purchasing decisions “Quite a bit,” at levels second only to the Highly Engaged. Notably, they reported avoiding genetically modified organisms (GMOs) closest to “Quite a bit” (M = 3.95, SD = 0.92), at a level similar to the Highly Engaged and higher than all other segments. This segment had the lowest means for purchasing take-out food (M = 1.75, SD = 0.71), corresponding to “A few times a month.” Although significantly lower than other segments, other segments still averaged closest to the same response choice. Similarly, the Health-Focused segment averaged significantly lower for preparing convenience food (M = 1.94, SD = 0.91) compared to other segments.

The Health-Focused segment was the second most interested overall (M = 3.13, SD = 0.81) in farmers markets. Among the Health-Focused, 29.26% “Never” or “Rarely” attended, 45.92% “Sometimes” attended, and 24.82% “Frequently” or “Very Frequently” attended. Like the Highly Engaged segment, their top motivations were to obtain healthy and fresh food, to support local farmers and to do something fun. Generally, their motivations averaged second-highest compared to the other segments, trailing the Highly Engaged segment. The exception was doing something fun, where the Emerging Interest segment (M = 3.74, SD = 1.03) was relatively more motivated compared to the Health-Focused segment (M = 3.51, SD = 1.08). Further, this segment reported reduced barriers, relative to other segments. Demographically, this segment had a higher proportion of women (58.38%), a greater share of White respondents (70.02%) and was older (M = 56.99, SD = 15.82). They averaged significantly higher on the education item (M = 3.43, SD = 1.11), though still closest to “Some college/associates degree.”

Emerging Interest consumers combine a convenience-orientation with curiosity about food. They show interest in farmers markets, though not to the degree of Highly Engaged and Health-Focused consumers. This segment prepared fresh food (M = 3.64, SD = 0.97) significantly less frequently than the Highly Engaged segment, but still averaged closest to “About once a day.” They reported preparing convenience food (M = 2.46, SD = 0.96) and purchasing take-out food (M = 2.18, SD = 0.77) significantly more than several other segments, indicating relatively greater (though still moderate) reliance on convenience items. They stood out in expressing interest in learning about cooking (M = 4.03, SD = 0.83), second only to the Highly Engaged segment, averaging closest to “Quite interested.” They also reported enjoying trying new kinds of food (M = 4.03, SD = 0.86), second only to the Highly Engaged segment. Their average was nearly a half point higher than the Health-Focused (M = 3.52, SD = 0.83) segment on that item.

They had the third-highest overall interest in farmers markets (M = 2.93, SD = 0.82), less than half a point below the Health-Focused segment. Among them, 42.03% “Never” or “Rarely” attended, 41.21% “Sometimes” attended, and 16.76% “Frequently” or “Very Frequently” attended. Their top motivations were supporting local farmers, doing something fun, and obtaining healthy and fresh food. Generally, this segment averaged less than the Highly Engaged or Health-Focused segments on the motivation items. The exception was doing something fun, as they averaged significantly higher than the Health-Focused segment. They reported being relatively more challenged by forgetting (M = 2.91, SD = 1.33), their top barrier, than the Highly Engaged or Health-Focused segments. They were relatively more challenged by lack of awareness (M = 2.42, SD = 1.38) and inconvenience (M = 2.17, SD = 0.88) compared to the Health-Focused segment. These averages still corresponded to “Very little,” suggesting that these barriers may be minor in practical terms. This segment stood out with near gender balance (51.77% women), a greater proportion of multiracial respondents (4.41%), and being younger on average compared to other segments (M = 44.09, SD = 16.37).

Convenience-oriented consumers rely relatively more on take-out and convenience foods. This segment prepared fresh food less frequently than all other segments (M = 2.68, SD = 0.96), except the Uninvolved, with an average corresponding to “A few times a week.” This segment reported enjoyment of cooking (M = 2.84, SD = 0.83) significantly less than most segments, closest to “Somewhat.” They had a significantly higher mean for purchasing take-out food (M = 2.48, SD = 0.87) and preparing convenience food (M = 2.65, SD = 0.97). With convenience food, their average corresponded to “A few times a week,” whereas all other segments averaged “A few times a month.”

They showed less interest in farmers markets (M = 2.72, SD = 0.71) than the Highly Engaged, Health-Focused, or Emerging Interest segments. In this segment, 43.20% “Never” or “Rarely” attended, 45.36% “Sometimes” attended, and 11.44% “Frequently” or “Very Frequently” attended. Although they rated motivations significantly lower than three other segments, their averages were generally higher than those of the Practical and Uninvolved segments. Like other segments, their greatest barrier was forgetting about markets (M = 2.98, SD = 1.14). They averaged the highest on several barriers, such as inconvenience (M = 2.31, SD = 0.88) and poor product perceptions (M = 2.15, SD = 0.74). They included disproportionately fewer women (40.96%). They were more racially and ethnically diverse, with higher proportions of Hispanic (22.75%) and Black (13.19%) respondents.

Practical consumers do more planning with food shopping and preparation. They reported making a list before shopping (M = 4.27, SD = 0.88) more often than for all other segments and planning meals ahead of time (M = 3.69, SD = 0.87) at levels similar to the Highly Engaged segment, and greater than all other segments. They showed less interest in farmers markets, greater than only the Uninvolved segment (M = 2.51, SD = 0.83). Among them, 53.72% “Never” or “Rarely” attended, 34.93% “Sometimes” attended and 11.35% “Frequently” or “Very Frequently” attended. The Practical segment was fairly gender-balanced (52.78% women). They were disproportionately White (76.42%), had a significantly higher average household income than other segments (M = 11.43, SD = 4.17), closest to “$60,000 to $74,999,” and averaged significantly higher with education (M = 3.51, SD = 1.05), closest to “Bachelor’s degree.”

Uninvolved consumers show minimal interest in food-related activities. This segment reported the lowest means for enjoyment of cooking or interest in learning about cooking. They expressed the least interest in farmers markets (M = 1.94, SD = 0.76). Among them, 75.80%, “Never” or “Rarely” attended, 20.64% “Sometimes” attended, and 3.56% “Frequently” or “Very Frequently” attended. No motivations for attending markets were above the scale midpoint for this segment. Demographically, they included disproportionately fewer women (30.76%) and were disproportionately White (75.71%).

The regression results are displayed in Table 5. In the final model, all segments had significantly higher interest compared to the Uninvolved segment, the reference category, with the strongest effects for the Highly Engaged (β = 0.30, p < 0.001), Health-Focused (β = 0.21, p < 0.001) and Emerging Interest (β = 0.20, p < 0.001) segments. Direct demographic predictors were education (β = −0.04, p = 0.002), which was negatively associated with farmers market interest, and being female (β = 0.02, p = 0.04), which was positively associated with farmers market interest.

Direct motivational predictors included obtaining healthy and fresh food (β = 0.18, p < 0.001), doing something fun (β = 0.10, p < 0.001), supporting local farmers (β = 0.09, p < 0.001) and community (β = 0.04, p = 0.007). The barriers of forgetting about farmers markets (β = −0.14, p < 0.001) and lack of awareness (β = −0.11, p < 0.001) were negatively associated with interest. Perceived lack of inclusivity was positively associated with interest (β = 0.12, p < 0.001). Social norms had a strong direct effect (β = 0.24, p < 0.001).

The study employed a large-scale data set and a comprehensive set of farmers market profiling variables to better understand patterns in how different consumer segments perceive and participate in farmers markets. The study represents the most extensive application of the FRL framework to understanding farmers market attendance and perceptions to date.

Three segments (Highly Engaged, Health-Focused, and Emerging Interest) showed the strongest interest in farmers markets. The regression model found those segments to be more strongly associated with the overall farmers market interest dependent variable (a combination of interest, attendance and purchasing measures), even when controlling for demographics, motivations, barriers and social norms. The Highly Engaged segment, most similar to the “Adventurous,” “Foodies” or “Passionately Involved” segments identified in prior FRL work, demonstrated robust interest in farmers markets. This segment was the most racially diverse, providing evidence that the demographics of farmers market customers may be shifting. The Health-Focused segment aligns with previously identified segments focused on health or nutrition (Camanzi et al., 2024; Chen and House, 2022). We built on this prior work by also demonstrating that the Health-Focused segment places value on non-health-related motivations (e.g. supporting local farmers) and shows a relatively greater aversion to take-out food. As this group was more educated and predominantly White, they may face fewer challenges related to food access, likely contributing to their lower reported barriers to attending farmers markets.

The Emerging Interest segment represents a novel contribution of this study. This younger segment may have been identified due to the use of a large, representative U.S. sample. Their relatively greater preference for convenience is consistent with research suggesting that Millennials depend more heavily on prepared foods than other age groups (Kuhns and Saksena, 2017). They also resemble the Open-Minded Gen Z consumer segment in Germany identified by Ruppenthal and Rückert-John (2025). At the same time, our findings extend this prior work by describing a segment in the United States that blends an orientation toward convenience with an interest in learning more about food, trying new kinds of food and farmers markets. This profile contrasts with segments that are highly involved with food but avoid convenience food, or segments that prioritize convenience while showing lower food involvement. The Emerging Interest segment appears to represent younger consumers who are seeking new food experiences and may be poised to attend farmers markets more often.

Through examining FRL segments in concert with motivations, barriers, and social norms in our model, we found that motivations were generally stronger predictors than barriers. Further, we found that not all motivations were equally impactful. Motivations related to obtaining healthy and fresh food, supporting local farmers and doing something fun were most strongly associated with farmers market interest. Community motivations were significant, but the association was weaker, while environmental motivations were not significant. Although some individuals associate farmers markets with environmental benefits, such motivations appear not to be primary drivers for market interest in the United States.

One barrier that warrants more examination is the lack of inclusivity. Surprisingly, our model found perceptions of lack of inclusivity to be positively associated with market interest. Findings from our FRL segment comparison may help explain this. The Highly Engaged segment showed the most interest in farmers markets and was also the segment with the greatest racial and ethnic diversity. Consequently, it may be that Highly Engaged consumers are more attuned to issues of racial or cultural representation when they visit markets and may become more aware of issues of exclusion the more they attend. These findings underscore the importance of work to foster inclusivity, which some market leaders are actively engaged in. For example, at the Freedom Farmers’ Market in Oakland, California, Black farmers and customers are central, and market goals include community empowerment, cultural celebration and cultural preservation (Meyers, 2015).

Further, social norms emerged as one of the strongest predictors of farmers market interest in the model, highlighting the importance of social context in shaping market participation. As the FRL segment comparison revealed, social norms were relatively stronger in segments that attended more often, it may be that individuals in such segments attend with friends or family. Therefore, their perceptions of stronger social norms are an accurate reflection of their reality. At the same time, though statistically significant, the differences in social norm strength between segments were modest. This would suggest that other factors likely also impact normative perceptions. For example, contextual factors such as the visibility or prevalence of markets in communities, or market outreach, could exert influence on such perceptions.

Demographically, only being female and having less formal education remained direct predictors of farmers market interest in the regression model, countering trends found in some prior work. Such findings were likely uncovered due to FRL segments being controlled for in the model.

For those promoting farmers markets, an emphasis on messaging related to healthy and fresh food, supporting local farmers, and fun would likely resonate with all consumer segments. As the top barrier across segments was forgetting about farmers markets, strategies to remind customers about markets are key. Posting regularly to social media channels and making use of features with reminders, such as with “Facebook Events,” are worthwhile strategies to explore (Witzling et al., 2025). Marketing materials could also promote normative cues by depicting markets as lively (but not over-crowded), with images of shoppers socializing. Quotes from local shoppers might also help convey that visiting the market is common.

Further, given their overall enthusiasm for farmers markets, market operators might offer the Highly Engaged segment opportunities for deeper involvement, such as encouraging them to post about the market on social media or taking on volunteer roles. Visual marketing materials, such as social media content featuring attendees, should reflect the diversity of this segment. Further, as this segment had the lowest average household income of the segments, communicating about ways to make markets more financially accessible may be important. This could include emphasizing the acceptance of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits or matching programs at markets, if available.

For the Health-Focused segment, operators might encourage attendees to post on social media about their purchases and nutritious meals made with fresh products. Market operators might also emphasize the nutrition profiles of seasonally available products in their social media posts. Partnering with organizations focused on health may further reinforce the link between markets and health while offering cross-promotional opportunities.

For the Emerging Interest segment, sharing photographs or short videos on social media of events, music or other activities could highlight the social atmosphere of markets. Other strategies could include cooking demonstrations or food samples to address this segment’s interest in learning and trying new food. If available, promoting meal kits or food available for on-site consumption may play into their preference for convenience.

One limitation was that the questionnaire did not address confidence in cooking skills, which may be important to better understand the Emerging Interest segment. Another limitation was that although the sample was largely representative of U.S. demographics, there was some underrepresentation among those in the youngest age categories, those with less education and Asian individuals.

Additionally, the study did not account for geographic context within the U.S. or prevalence of farmers markets, which could plausibly impact social norms. Future work might build on these findings by studying individuals’ perceptions and behaviors related to farmers markets in areas with higher versus lower densities of farmers markets to better isolate the impact of social norms. Such work could be conducted within the United States or extended to cross-cultural contexts. We also recommend collaborations between researchers and farmers market operators to explore the implementation of segment-specific strategies, including testing the effectiveness of targeted messaging on social media (e.g. Hershberger et al., 2024; Witzling et al., 2023).

Building on prior FRL work, this study provided a comprehensive U.S.-based examination of FRL segmentation in the context of farmers markets. Findings demonstrate that FRL segmentation explained farmers market interest, even when controlling for demographics, motivations, barriers and social norms. The segmentation approach helped further distinguish consumers with the greatest potential for market engagement. This strategy offers a useful lens for understanding farmers market participation in a changing consumer landscape.