Similarly, I live in VT and have small food producers and farmers all around me. These products are also available in grocery stores, but when you can qualitatively observe the differences between the land and growing practices of GMO farmers and organic farmers, the choices are not presented in such a flat way as when lined up on a shelf.

I doubt the general public is qualified to decide which practices are better than others. For example, I grew up on a farm, but I couldn't tell you if free-range eggs are safer or healthier than eggs from caged birds. Nor could I tell you if chemical-free produce is safer than organic. Nor could I tell you if antibiotic-free meat is safer or healthier than "regular" meat. I can tell you what I've heard from my pro-GMO family and my anti-GMO friends, but without diving deeply into the studies and counter studies, it would be hard to draw an informed conclusion.

Isn't there a moral aspect of this? Shouldn't you treat the animal you are "consuming" as good as possible?

Probably, but even here I doubt the public is qualified to make this call. The canonical example is a sow pen which has just enough room for a sow to lay down while she nurses her piglets; this is actually better for the animals because it prevents the sow (~800 lbs) from crushing her piglets (~5 lbs); however, laypeople see an animal rights violation.

Sure. But remember the main topic here is plants, and there are no moral considerations there.

What, you don't think plants have feelings?

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/sep/12/peter-wo...

I can imagine you have more sympathy for animals than plants since they are more like us, but I suspect bias if you use that as a basis for morality.

> free-range eggs are safer or healthier than eggs from caged birds.

This makes absolutely no sense. "free-range" is a question about chicken health, not egg safety.

Please note that I never made that claim; I simply observed it.

> I do not pay a premium compared to traditional supermarket products

Is this comparing with organic products, or also non-organic? What is a "prosumer" in the food/grocery sense? I'm not familiar with the term in that context.

It is hard to compare, since the distinct food item does not have a price. You pay the farmer collective a slice of their yearly budget in terms of money or work and get a slice of the yearly production. Furthermore the CSA produces food / varieties that are not even available or comparable in terms of quality in the supermarket. But one member weighted the outcome of one years production and compared it to typical supermarket prices of similar products and found out that the CSA was actually cheaper.

The community is sharing their money or work to keep the agriculture running. They are actively engaged in their food production and therefore prosumers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community-supported_agricultur...

So "prosumer" is a portmanteau of "producer" and "consumer"? Just want to clarify because in most/many contexts, it's "professional" and "consumer".

Sounds like price comparison is an open question, unless there are more definitive/rigorous comparisons out there. At the very least, it sounds like there's a tradeoff between quality and selection (when you walk into a supermarket you can choose to buy whatever you want, whereas a CSA is limited to what's currently being harvested at a particular farm).

I'd certainly be open to making this tradeoff for some of my food, though when I've had CSA deliveries redirected to me by neighbors on vacation, I found that much of the food (even oranges, which I think of as moderately durable) went bad within just a few days.

"whereas a CSA is limited to what's currently being harvested at a particular farm"

That turned out to be an big advantage of the CSA for me. It is very satisfactory to be in natures rhythm, be engaged in the growing of things I eat and therefore in the growing of myself. I learned a lot of new products and recipes I even did not know exists.

A CSA isn't necessarily a co-op or farming collective or anything like that, though--it's a way to increase the small farmer's revenue, thereby enabling more expensive means of production / better quality / different goals, by cutting out the middlemen--isn't that so?

I don't see how you could avoid paying a premium since, by definition, the organic growers are less efficient.

You bypass most of the usual supply chain by buying from local farmers directly.

See http://www.localharvest.org/csa/ for an in-depth explanation of the concept.

It isn't necessarly the case : permaculture has very high yields and low costs compared to oil-based agriculture.