In this first Studio of 2026, we learned from the experiences of researchers and practitioners in developing and implementing data collection methods at farmers markets. We reflected with them on the suitability, feasibility, and flexibility of applying these tools in current times and across the diverse contexts in which they are needed.

Moreover, the session highlighted the critical importance of collecting data and co-producing evidence on the scale and impact of farmers markets. Such evidence supports advocacy efforts and enhances other initiatives, such as communications, that underscore the multiple roles markets play in their local communities.

Recognizing the diversity of contexts as a challenge, this session primarily aimed to provide a platform for discussion and exchange, opening avenues for future dialogue and the identification of specific lines for capacity-building activities. Participants were invited to share their thoughts in advance, responding to questions such as:

• What are you hoping to learn from this session?
• What is the most pressing or frequent question you encounter that requires data collection and evaluation at your market?
• How have you addressed that question? Did you implement any actions that involved data collection or evaluation?

During the presentations, several key points emerged:

• Data collection and evaluation methodologies must be sensitive to context.
• Tools and methods do not need to be complex but must be feasible for each market team to implement.
• Partnerships, such as with academic institutions, can support the design and implementation of these methodologies.
• Generating evidence of markets’ contributions is crucial for policymakers, who may lack databases or internal capacity to produce this knowledge independently.
• Efforts in this area may require prior work to standardize values and measures, as well as to identify incentives for market participants to provide information.

Discussions among participants, complemented by the pre-session input, revealed the following key insights:

• Effective methodologies recognize each market’s unique context, the diverse actors involved, and their respective interests in market information (e.g., farmers’ trust in administration, customer loyalty linked to price and quality).
• Methodologies should address specific needs and demands, acknowledging the value of data in informing decisions and actions. These needs may arise from regulatory requirements, customer requests for quality validation, or internal planning and revenue assessment.
• Markets may prioritize certain types of data, and successful implementation requires providing incentives for participants to engage with data collection; without such incentives, efforts risk being ineffective.
• Data collection and evaluation should be integral to market operations and internal decision-making. Even basic data, such as operator numbers or market turnover, can build an internal database with significant implications for advocacy at local and broader levels.

Additionally, participants highlighted the distinction between quality monitoring and compliance with certifications, which involve different requirements and actors. However, this distinction depends on context—for example, markets established through agroecological associations or those acting as verifiers for participatory guarantee systems (common in Latin America), where certification compliance may overlap with market evaluation.

A valuable suggestion was to identify practical tools, methods, and processes from global experiences that market teams can feasibly implement. There was also interest in sharing these tools among members and potentially building a WorldFMC internal database. While promising, such an initiative should be carefully evaluated to ensure that methods remain context-sensitive and aligned with the previously identified learnings. This approach could inform future capacity-building initiatives.