Food hubs
Evidence Ratings
Scientifically Supported: Strategies with this rating are most likely to make a difference. These strategies have been tested in many robust studies with consistently positive results.
Some Evidence: Strategies with this rating are likely to work, but further research is needed to confirm effects. These strategies have been tested more than once and results trend positive overall.
Expert Opinion: Strategies with this rating are recommended by credible, impartial experts but have limited research documenting effects; further research, often with stronger designs, is needed to confirm effects.
Insufficient Evidence: Strategies with this rating have limited research documenting effects. These strategies need further research, often with stronger designs, to confirm effects.
Mixed Evidence: Strategies with this rating have been tested more than once and results are inconsistent or trend negative; further research is needed to confirm effects.
Evidence of Ineffectiveness: Strategies with this rating are not good investments. These strategies have been tested in many robust studies with consistently negative and sometimes harmful results. Learn more about our methods
Strategies with this rating are recommended by credible, impartial experts but have limited research documenting effects; further research, often with stronger designs, is needed to confirm effects.
Disparity Ratings
Potential to decrease disparities: Strategies with this rating have the potential to decrease or eliminate disparities between subgroups. Rating is suggested by evidence, expert opinion or strategy design.
Potential for mixed impact on disparities: Strategies with this rating could increase and decrease disparities between subgroups. Rating is suggested by evidence or expert opinion.
Potential to increase disparities: Strategies with this rating have the potential to increase or exacerbate disparities between subgroups. Rating is suggested by evidence, expert opinion or strategy design.
Inconclusive impact on disparities: Strategies with this rating do not have enough evidence to assess potential impact on disparities.
Strategies with this rating do not have enough evidence to assess potential impact on disparities.
Evidence Ratings
Scientifically Supported: Strategies with this rating are most likely to make a difference. These strategies have been tested in many robust studies with consistently positive results.
Some Evidence: Strategies with this rating are likely to work, but further research is needed to confirm effects. These strategies have been tested more than once and results trend positive overall.
Expert Opinion: Strategies with this rating are recommended by credible, impartial experts but have limited research documenting effects; further research, often with stronger designs, is needed to confirm effects.
Insufficient Evidence: Strategies with this rating have limited research documenting effects. These strategies need further research, often with stronger designs, to confirm effects.
Mixed Evidence: Strategies with this rating have been tested more than once and results are inconsistent or trend negative; further research is needed to confirm effects.
Evidence of Ineffectiveness: Strategies with this rating are not good investments. These strategies have been tested in many robust studies with consistently negative and sometimes harmful results. Learn more about our methods
Strategies with this rating are recommended by credible, impartial experts but have limited research documenting effects; further research, often with stronger designs, is needed to confirm effects.
Disparity Ratings
Potential to decrease disparities: Strategies with this rating have the potential to decrease or eliminate disparities between subgroups. Rating is suggested by evidence, expert opinion or strategy design.
Potential for mixed impact on disparities: Strategies with this rating could increase and decrease disparities between subgroups. Rating is suggested by evidence or expert opinion.
Potential to increase disparities: Strategies with this rating have the potential to increase or exacerbate disparities between subgroups. Rating is suggested by evidence, expert opinion or strategy design.
Inconclusive impact on disparities: Strategies with this rating do not have enough evidence to assess potential impact on disparities.
Strategies with this rating do not have enough evidence to assess potential impact on disparities.
Community conditions, also known as the social determinants of health, shape the health of individuals and communities. Quality education, jobs that pay a living wage and a clean environment are among the conditions that impact our health. Modifying these social, economic and environmental conditions can influence how long and how well people live.
Learn more about community conditions by viewing our model of health.
Food hubs are businesses or other organizations that aggregate, distribute, and market local and regional food products, usually fresh fruits and vegetables, but also sometimes meat, dairy, grains, prepared foods, or other items. There are many different types of food hubs including retail-driven, non-profit-driven, producer-driven, and consumer-driven models1, 2. Food hubs often combine focus on increasing market access and fair prices for small and medium-scale farmers, and offer access to marketing and sales services, value-added processing, advertising, delivery trucks, and liability insurance3, 4. Many food hubs also incorporate efforts to address social, economic, and ecological issues as part of their operation, for example, increasing the availability of healthy, culturally relevant food, providing good jobs, keeping money circulating locally, and promoting sustainable, environmentally friendly production practices5.
What could this strategy improve?
Expected Benefits
Our evidence rating is based on the likelihood of achieving these outcomes:
Strengthened local & regional food systems
Increased access to healthy food
Potential Benefits
Our evidence rating is not based on these outcomes, but these benefits may also be possible:
Improved local economy
Reduced emissions
Increased fruit and vegetable consumption
Improved diet quality
What does the research say about effectiveness?
Food hubs are a suggested strategy to improve local and regional food systems, facilitate fruit and vegetable purchases by schools, hospitals, and small stores, and increase access to fresh fruits, vegetables, and other healthy foods in communities with low incomes6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Food hubs are also a suggested strategy to improve rural economies and increase the economic viability of small- to mid-size farms3, 7, 9. However, additional evidence is needed to confirm effects.
Food hubs are associated with increased sales opportunities for farmers, increased access to fresh fruits and vegetables for consumers, and increased use of local foods by schools, businesses, and restaurants10, 11. According to farmer surveys in rural Vermont, food hubs provide a small but important sales opportunity for producers12. By providing a single reliable point of purchase for high quality produce, food hubs can lower the cost of fresh fruits and vegetables for consumers and institutions such as schools, hospitals, and convenience stores6. Food hubs provide a valuable link between local food production and mainstream markets and offer an alternative to the industrial food system for consumers5.
Environmental benefits. Food hubs may increase access to fresh produce and seasonal, locally grown foods, which may reduce emissions from fossil fuels used to produce, process, preserve, store, and transport food, often via energy-intensive cold chains13, 14, 15, 16. An analysis of U.S. urban and metro area food hubs suggests that sourcing food locally reduces reliance on long-distance food transportation and cold chains and reduces food waste and loss, including nutrient loss during long transit13. About one-third of the world’s food supply is wasted every year, which accounts for 8% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions17, 18. Specialty crops in the U.S., which include fruit, vegetables, and tree nuts for human consumption, comprise only three percent of cropland in the U.S., with most U.S.-grown vegetables coming from California and Arizona13. Growing and sourcing food locally can help de-centralize the food system and protect supply and access for more people during disruptions and climate change-related events like drought and water shortages, especially since drought and water shortages frequently affect California and Arizona13. Food hub participation may also reduce the energy intensity of an individual’s diet if more plant-based foods are consumed in place of animal products14.
Some food hubs aim to increase environmentally healthy food production and landscape conservation, which could reduce pesticide exposure at farm sites and through food consumption, improve soil health in rural and food-production areas, reduce water overconsumption, and reduce food waste by encouraging methods like composting13. A study of U.S. food hubs finds that some offer training and technical assistance to farmers but few hubs publicly report their impacts on producers’ water management and use13.
Food hub design. How food hubs measure success varies, though food hubs that scale up distribution from direct marketing efforts appear to be more successful than those that scale down from mainstream distribution, and those that prioritize social and environmental goals appear more effective than those that focus primarily on economic goals19. Food hubs that educate and build strong relationships between their consumers, producers, and staff, and use market analysis, business planning, and business best practices appear to have more sustainable program models and business structures than food hubs that do not20, 21.
Case studies suggest successful food hubs have a strong business plan, a solid financial foundation including capital and infrastructure, a skilled and knowledgeable staff, an awareness of their niche in the local food system, partnerships throughout the food system, an understanding of the market and their customers, and a reliable, consistent supply of quality products22. An Oakland-based evaluation of a food hub expansion suggests local residents contribute to determining food hub goals, choosing metrics of success, and running produce stands; though in this case, food hub expansion did not increase revenue enough to offset the increased financial costs23. Nearly all farmers and food hubs participating in North Carolina’s FarmsShare program report increased revenue and more products sold at fair market value. Most also reported decreased food waste, improved food safety practices, and high satisfaction with program participation; however, all stakeholders reported the need for more funding for food purchases and infrastructure like cold storage24. A further evaluation finds farmers and food hubs reported hiring additional staff and offering benefits like retirement and higher wages to current staff25.
Interviews exploring consumer preferences for potential food hubs suggest participants look for availability of whole foods, especially fruits and vegetables; quality, cleanliness, and affordability; programming that builds community; as well as accommodations and cultural accessibility. Food hubs planning to serve communities with low incomes and limited access to fresh produce need to understand potential customer preferences for produce, affordability, and shopping environment to be successful26.
Costs and challenges. The costs of new infrastructure for cold storage, processing, marketing, and distributing, as well as the need to secure a sizeable number of suppliers and buyers, can be challenges to starting a new hub7. Case studies identify six key challenges for operating a food hub, including balancing supply and demand, maintaining standards for product quality and food safety, aggregating produce quantities at competitive prices, monitoring consumer preferences, accessing infrastructure, and maintaining business stability27. Case studies of closed food hubs suggest that issues with internal management and board governance are the most significant factors that influence a food hub’s success or failure22.
How could this strategy advance health equity? This strategy is rated inconclusive impact on disparities.
It is unclear what impact food hubs have on disparities in access and consumption of affordable healthy food. Food hubs have multiple goals that potentially benefit their communities; however, available evidence suggests many food hubs attempt to improve equity in access to healthy foods for communities with low incomes43. Such efforts are especially common among non-profit food hubs43. For food hubs to succeed in these efforts, they require financial stability for the food hub, fair prices for producers, and affordable products for consumers; in the short-term such efforts can be supported through public subsidies43. More research is needed about which food hub components will be most impactful for communities and producers and over what time scale44. Experts suggest that food hubs can be combined with other interventions to ensure root causes of food insecurity and related adverse health outcomes are addressed44.
Food hubs improve the food environment by increasing access to healthy foods, but as a standalone measure they may not improve diet quality, fruit and vegetable intake, or health outcomes among local residents in communities with lower incomes44, 45. An Oakland-based evaluation finds a food hub expansion increased fruit and vegetable purchases among residents in neighborhoods with lower incomes and less access to healthy food23. By expanding an existing food hub with relationships with local retailers, community spaces, and farmers, organizers were able to add and market affordable fresh produce in venues where residents already shop, offer taste tests and cooking demonstrations, and ensure individuals could use SNAP for purchases23. Food hub retailers, like farmers’ markets, can accept Supplemental Nutrition Assistant Program (SNAP) payments to increase residents’ buying power45. One large-scale, multi-level intervention, the North Carolina FarmsShare program, connects farms, food hubs, and community-based organizations to distribute healthy food boxes that include culturally diverse foods to households with lower incomes in nearly 100 counties24. Food box recipients reported high satisfaction with FarmsShare’s use of client-choice models and trusted distribution points or home delivery, as well as with the foods’ nutritional quality and cultural appropriateness, and reported using all or most food items. Recipients reported increasing their fruit and vegetable intake and improved health; both community-based organizations and recipients reported measurable improvement in managing conditions like diabetes and hypertension25. Most food hubs participating in FarmsShare reported that the program helped them partner with more farmers from racial and ethnic minority populations, and some additionally partnered with more first-generation and woman-owned farms24. Food hubs also described benefits from new partnerships with community-based organizations, such as engaging in new food system or food security advocacy work, community outreach, and nutrition education programming24.
Food hubs and alternative food networks do not inherently promote food justice; experts clarify that to do so an intervention must address structural inequality46. Organizing in food justice and food sovereignty commonly has four points of intervention: confronting historical trauma and persistent race, gender, and class inequalities; designing exchange mechanisms that build communal reliance and control; innovation in land and ecology use away from speculative and extractive practices; and labor relations that avoid exploitative and unpaid practices46, 47. In the U.S., more than half of food hubs include promoting racial equity and fair wages in their goals4. Experts suggest that food hubs could better prioritize addressing racial disparities in practice and can look to rural movements for Black farmers and land liberation activism to inform food hub goals and activities, as well as thinking about rural spaces and food justice46.
Food hubs focusing locally and shortening supply chains do not inherently produce a more just local food system46. Individuals and neighborhoods excluded from access to healthy and fresh food, as well as farm producers, may lack capacity for low-paid or volunteer leadership and collaborative work common in food hub organizations, which typically have tight budgets. This can challenge food hubs’ social justice missions and sustainability46. In the U.S., food hubs are often grant-funded and have life spans around seven years46. Policies could more generously support food hubs and sustain them in areas with lower incomes, where purchasing power and revenue generation are limited and not necessarily the primary goals13. Food hubs may strengthen local food systems through multiple pathways, but more research and evaluation are needed across areas such initiatives commonly seek to influence (e.g., economic development and viability; ecological sustainability; access to and demand for healthy local food; personal and community wellbeing; agency and re-localization of power)48.
Evaluation may be a priority for food hubs, to demonstrate implementation successes and impacts, to support food hubs’ viability, and to inform food system policy4. As food hubs are often resource-constrained, experts recommend that food hubs engage clients and stakeholders early in strategic planning, to inform what measures are most relevant to track for longer-term evaluation4. This is suggested to ensure that social and ecological-related components are adequately considered and measured, alongside financial and economic indicators4. Frameworks for advancing food sovereignty, including focus on culturally relevant foods, can inform food hubs’ planning and evaluation49.
What is the relevant historical background?
The twentieth-century conventional agri-food system, in which large private businesses own or control many parts of the food supply chain, requires many negative tradeoffs that are increasingly recognized globally50. Small family farms have little bargaining power in this model, are vulnerable to cost-price squeezes in commodity production, and have experienced declining shares of profits50. This contributes to farm closures, land being abandoned or disused, and populations moving from rural areas, which harms rural communities’ social fabric and reduces services and infrastructure50. Many rural areas lack access to fresh and affordable food, even in areas where farming is an important part of the local economy51. This conventional system has not been successful in meeting the need for healthy, affordable food for a global population while staying within planetary boundaries, meaning the limits which keep Earth as a stable and resilient system to support human life50, 52.
In response, efforts to organize for more sustainable practices have emerged, often emphasizing local, short food supply chains, also referred to as alternative food networks50. Food hubs were introduced by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to aggregate the agricultural product of small farms and to increase economic viability for smaller producers in the food system13. Demand for regional food is linked to consumers’ varied perceptions: that regional food is more affordable; fresher, safer, and/or more nutritious; and that buying regional foods reduces long-distance transportation and fossil fuel use and supports local economies53. Many people also appreciate interacting with local farmers and producers53. Supporting local food production with food hubs and alternative food networks is part of a growing movement to strengthen food systems and reduce food insecurity, which is a multi-dimensional public health issue at the intersection of economic, social, and health factors54.
Equity Considerations
- What, if any, food hub models exist in your community, state, or region?
- What are these food hubs’ goals and how are impacts being measured? What opportunities are available to secure sustained funding and to build capacity for evaluation? Who decides what goals food hubs will pursue and who is in charge of funding and budgets?
- Who are recipients of food hubs’ products and services in your area? For example, do food hubs aim to increase healthy, affordable food access directly among specific populations? Are hubs connected with institutional recipients, such as retailers, school districts, universities, healthcare facilities, and corporate cafeterias?
- What infrastructure needs do new or existing food hubs have? (E.g., expertise, capital, and access to credit to support large-scale processing, aggregation, and distribution?)
- Do local organizations and food policy councils supporting food hubs have the resources they need to help ensure food hubs are sustainable, reaching goals, and evaluated?
Implementation Examples
The Agricultural Resource Library lists 450 food hubs active across the U.S. and territories, with the most in California, Michigan, and North Carolina28. Food hub examples include The Common Market, a nonprofit food distributor with hubs in four regions (Mid-Atlantic, Southeast, Texas, and the Great Lakes) connecting urban communities with local food from sustainable family farms and ranches29. The Common Market Southeast led the Georgia ACRE Collective pilot program to increase the quantity and diversity of local fruits, vegetables, dairy products, meats, poultry, and grains in school meals in Atlanta, including adding foods with cultural relevance for local residents30. The Center for Good Food Purchasing is a nonprofit supporting public institutions in food purchasing systems that advance five values: local economies, health, valued workforce, animal welfare, and environmental sustainability – this includes connecting institutions with food hubs31.
The USDA Local Food Purchase Assistance (LFPA) Cooperative Agreement Program provides funding to most state, territorial, and tribal governments to purchase food produced in state or within 400 miles of the delivery destination, intended for distribution by programs to reduce hunger, and to support local and regional producers and maintain resilient supply chains; LFPA was significantly expanded in 202232. The North Carolina-based FarmsShare received LFPA funding and is a program of the Carolina Farm Stewardship Association33.
The USDA interviewed 11 food hubs across the U.S. to develop a report on lessons learned for operating successful food hubs34. In response to findings that food hubs valued racial equity and diversity but needed guidance on how to operationalize these values, the organization Race Forward published the Racial Equity Implementation Guide for Food Hubs in 201835. Coalitions that focus on food sovereignty include the National Black Food & Justice Alliance36.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) released its new toolkit, Many Hats—A Food Hub Operators Toolkit, and paired podcast, in 202537. It also maintains the Local and Regional Food System Resource Hub, a searchable database for local food hubs, businesses, and producers to share knowledge and resources to address obstacles and find successful marketing and production strategies and innovations for local and regional markets38. USDA’s Rural Business Development Grants offer federal funding for community economic development projects such as food hubs39.
The Healthy Food Access Portal offers guidance and tracks projects in the Healthy Food Financing Initiative (HFFI), which offers public and private funding for projects to increase equitable access to healthy and fresh food40, 41. The portal is run by Philadelphia-based nonprofit Food Trust, which works with stakeholders across the food system, as well as policymakers, on nutrition security initiatives42.
North Carolina’s FarmsShare program is a multi-level intervention across 100 counties that includes food hubs and provides healthy food boxes similar to community-supported agriculture (CSA) shares24. FarmsShare boxes include vegetables, fruit, eggs, meat, herbs, grains, honey, and dairy and intentionally represented culturally diverse foods24. Subsidized tailored nutrition can be part of Food is Medicine approaches which aim to increase nutrition security and reduce diet-related chronic diseases and often engage Registered Dietitian Nutritionists (RDNs)24. Food box recipients can be referred by health care providers, social service agencies, through screenings done by community-based organizations, or by walk-in enrollment25.
Implementation Resources
‡ Resources with a focus on equity.
USDA-FH 2025 Overview - U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service, Extension: Economic Impacts of Local and Regional Food Systems. (n.d.). Many Hats: Introduction. Retrieved September 30, 2026.
USDA-Food system resources - U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS). (n.d.) Local and regional food system resources.
USDA-Barham 2012 - Barham J, Tropp D, Enterline K, Farbman J, Fisk J, Kiraly S. Regional food hub resource guide: Food hub impacts on regional food systems, and the resources available to support their growth and development. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS); 2012.
USDA-Barham 2015 - Barham J, Delgado F. Building a food hub from the ground up: A facility design case study of Tuscarora organic growers. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service. 2015:1-16.
USDA-Matson 2015 - Matson J, Thayer J, Shaw J. Running a food hub: Lessons learned from the field. Aiken, South Carolina. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA); 2015.
CDC DNPAO-Data - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Nutrition Physical Activity and Obesity (DNPAO). Nutrition, physical activity and obesity: Data, trends and maps online tool.
ChangeLab-Food retail - ChangeLab Solutions. Healthy food retail.
ISU-Food and sustainability resources - Iowa State University (ISU), Sustainable Food Processing Alliance. Online resources for food and sustainability.
Footnotes
* Journal subscription may be required for access.
1 USDA-Diamond 2012 - Diamond A, Barham J. Moving food along the value chain: Innovations in regional food distribution. Washington, D.C.: Marketing Services Division, Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA); 2012.
2 Horst 2011 - Horst M, Ringstrom E, Tyman S, Ward MK, Werner V. Toward a more expansive understanding of food hubs. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development. 2011;2(1):209–25.
3 Gaskin 2013 - Gaskin JW, Munden-Dixon K, Furman C, Beechuck M. Is there farmer interest in food hubs in Georgia? A needs assessment survey. Athens: College of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences (CAES), University of Georgia; 2013.
4 Nelson 2020b - Nelson, E., & Landman, K. (2020). Evaluating food hubs: Reporting on a participatory action project. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 10(1), 63-81.
5 Levkoe 2018 - Levkoe C, Hammelman C, Craven L, et al. Building sustainable communities through food hubs: Practitioner and academic perspectives. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development. 2018;8(2):107-122.
6 CDC-State indicator 2018 - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity and Obesity (DNPAO). State indicator report on fruits and vegetables, 2018. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (U.S. DHHS); 2018.
7 Lerman 2012 - Lerman T, Feenstra G, Visher D. A practitioner’s guide to resources and publications on food hubs and values-based supply chains: A literature review. Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program (SARE), Agricultural Sustainability Institute (ASI), University of California, Davis; 2012.
8 Matson 2013 - Matson J, Thayer J. The role of food hubs in food supply chains. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development. 2013;3(4):43–7.
9 Schmit 2013 - Schmit TM, Jablonski BBR, Kay D. Assessing the economic impacts of regional food hubs: The case of regional access. Ithaca: Cornell University; 2013.
10 USDA-Matson 2013 - Matson J, Sullins M, Cook C. The role of food hubs in local food marketing. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Rural Development. 2013;73:1-56.
11 Schmidt 2011 - Schmidt MC, Kolodinsky JM, Desisto TP, Conte FC. Increasing farm income and local food access: A case study of a collaborative aggregation, marketing, and distribution strategy that links farmers to markets. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development. 2011;1(4):157–75.
12 Conner 2018 - Conner DS, Sims K, Berkfield R, Harrington H. Do farmers and other suppliers benefit from sales to food hubs? Evidence from Vermont. Journal of Hunger and Environmental Nutrition. 2018;13(4):507-516.
13 Shariatmadary 2023 - Shariatmadary, H., O’Hara, S., Graham, R., et al. (2023). Are food hubs sustainable? An analysis of social and environmental objectives of U.S. food hubs. Sustainability, 15(3), 2308.
14 Ringling 2020 - Ringling KM, Marquart LF. Intersection of diet, health, and environment: Land grant universities’ role in creating platforms for sustainable food systems. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems. 2020;4(70).
15 Stone 2021 - Stone, T., Thompson, J., Rosentrater, K., & Nair, A. (2021). A life cycle assessment approach for vegetables in large-, mid-, and small-scale food systems in the midwest U.S. Sustainability, 13(20).
16 CCAFS-Campbell 2012 - Campbell B. Is eating local good for the climate? Thinking beyond food miles. Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS), CGIAR Research Programs. 2012.
17 Valeriote 2025 - Valeriote, E. (2025, November 18). With hunger on the rise, urban gleaners seek to strengthen local food security. Civil Eats. Retrieved September 1, 2026.
18 Project Drawdown-Food waste - Project Drawdown. Climate solutions: Reduced food waste.
19 Cleveland 2014 - Cleveland DA, Muller NM, Tranovich AC, Mazaroli DK, Hinson K. Local food hubs for alternative food systems: A case study from Santa Barbara County, California. Journal of Rural Studies. 2014;35:26-36.
20 LeBlanc 2014 - LeBlanc JR, Conner D, McRae G, Darby H. Building resilience in nonprofit food hubs. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development. 2014;4(3):121-135.
21 Severson 2015 - Severson RM, Schmit TM. Building success of food hubs through the cooperative experience: A case study perspective. Ithaca: Charles H. Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Cornell University; 2015.
22 USDA-Feldstein 2017 - Feldstein S, Barham J. Running a food hub: Learning from food hub closures. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA); 2017;4.
23 Kao 2023 - Kao, J., Woodward-Lopez, G., Rangel, M.I., et al. (2023). Lessons learned from a food hub-based retail intervention that expanded reach and sales of fresh fruits and vegetables in low-income, low-access neighborhoods. Journal of Hunger & Environmental Nutrition, 19(6), 1145-1164.
24 Hege 2025 - Hege, A., McCann, M., Walker, D., Edwards, L., McLendon, C., Runkel, S., & McReynolds, R. (2025). North Carolina’s FarmsSHARE: Farmers, food hubs, and community-based organizations sustain healthy food programs. Health Affairs, 44(4), 483-491.
25 Hege 2026 - Hege, A., Schier, H., Grant, J., Walker, D., & McCann, M. (2026). From harvest to health: A systems-based evaluation of FarmsSHARE's impact on nutrition in North Carolina. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, 39 (3), e70286.
26 Clark 2019 - Clark J, Rouse C, Sehgal A, et al. A food hub to address healthy food access gaps: Residents’ preferences. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development. 2019;9(1):59-68.
27 Schmit 2019 - Schmit TM, Severson RM. Building success of food hubs through the cooperative experience - A case study perspective. Journal of Extension. 2019;57(1):1-9.
28 Open Ag Tech-Food Hubs - Open Agriculture Technology. (n.d.). Resources: Food hubs. Retrieved September 30, 2026.
29 Common Market-About - The Common Market. (n.d.). About The Common Market. Retrieved September 30, 2026.
30 GA ACRE-Laninga 2025 - Laninga, D., Hennessee, E., & Hagy, T. (2025). Lessons from the Georgia ACRE Collective’s Local Foods Incentive School Pilot Program. The Georgia ACRE Collective.
31 CGFP-About - Center for Good Food Purchasing. (2026). About. Retrieved October 5, 2026.
32 USDA-LFPA - U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Agricultural Market Service. (n.d.). Local Food Purchase Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program. Retrieved September 30, 2026.
33 CFSA-FarmsShare - Carolina Farm Stewardship Association (CFSA). (n.d.). FarmsShare. Retrieved September 30, 2026.
34 USDA-Matson 2015 - Matson J, Thayer J, Shaw J. Running a food hub: Lessons learned from the field. Aiken, South Carolina. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA); 2015.
35 RF-Jones 2018 - Jones, T., Cooper, D., Noor, S., & Parks, A. (2018). A racial equity implementation guide for food hubs: A framework for translating value into organizational action. Race Forward.
36 NBFJA - National Black Food & Justice Alliance (NBFJA). (n.d.). Retrieved September 30, 2026.
37 USDA-FH 2025 Overview - U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service, Extension: Economic Impacts of Local and Regional Food Systems. (n.d.). Many Hats: Introduction. Retrieved September 30, 2026.
38 USDA-Food system resources - U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS). (n.d.) Local and regional food system resources.
39 USDA-RBD grants - U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Rural business development (RBD) grants.
40 HFAP-HFFI - Healthy Food Access Portal (HFAP). (n.d.). Why healthy food financing matters. Retrieved September 30, 2026.
41 HFFI Impacts 2024 - Healthy Food Access Portal (HFAP). (2024). Special report: HFFI impacts, nationwide success of healthy food financing initiatives. Retrieved September 30, 2026.
42 Food Trust-About - The Food Trust. (n.d.). About. Retrieved September 30, 2026.
43 Hoey 2018 - Hoey L, Fink Shapiro L, Bielaczyc N. “Put on your own mask before helping others”: The capacity of food hubs to build equitable food access. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development. 2018;8(3):41-60.
44 Freedman 2021 - Freedman, D., Bell, B., Clark, J., et al. (2021). Small improvements in an urban food environment resulted in no changes in diet among residents. Journal of Community Health, 46, 1-12.
45 Sharpe 2020 - Sharpe, P., Bell, B., Liese, A., et al. (2020). Effects of a food hub initiative in a disadvantaged community: A quasi-experimental evaluation. Health & Place, 63, 102341.
46 Rignall 2023 - Rignall, K., Tanaka, K., Velandia, M. et al. (2023). The practice of food justice: How food hubs negotiate race and place in the Eastern United States. Culture, Agriculture, Food and Environment, 44(2), 132-142.
47 Cadieux 2015 - Cadieux, K. V. & Slocum, R. (2015). What does it mean to do food justice? Journal of Political Ecology 22(1), 1-26.
48 Wingrove 2026 - Wingrove, K., Love, P., & Bolton, K. (2026). Methods to evaluate community food hubs in high-income countries: a scoping review. Food Security, 18, 1291-1305.
49 Lofton 2023 - Lofton, S., Simonovich, S., Buscemi, J., et al. (2023). Exploring food environment interventions for diet-related outcomes using a food sovereignty framework: A systematic review. Health Promotion International, 38(2), daac164.
50 Berti 2016 - Berti, G. & Mulligan, C. (2016). Competitiveness of small farms and innovative food supply chains: The role of food hubs in creating sustainable regional and local food systems. Sustainability, 8(7), 616.
51 RHIhub-Rural food and hunger - Rural Health Information Hub (RHIhub). Rural hunger and access to healthy food.
52 Richardson 2023 - Richardson K, Steffen W, Lucht W, et al. Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries. Science Advances. 2023;9(37).
53 Mittal 2018 - Mittal, A., Krejci, C., & Craven, T. (2018). Logistics best practices for regional food systems: A review. Sustainability, 10(1), 168.
54 Peterson 2025 - Peterson, H., Baker, L., Yang, C., Ogelsby, M., Campbell, C., Lindsey, A., & Telg, R. (2025). Hunger games: Food access among food insecure households during COVID-19 in the United States. Medical Research Archives, 13(2).
Related What Works for Health Strategies
To see all strategies:
countyhealthrankings.org/whatworks