Progress 07/01/05 to 06/30/08
Outputs
OUTPUTS: We randomly surveyed 3,000 Missouri farmers in early 2006 from the population of all Missouri farmers with sales in excess of $10,000 per year (41 percent of all Missouri farms are within this category). Our survey was stratified by farms sales to facilitate comparisons across groups. We mailed a "heads-up" postcard, which was followed by the survey, with a second mailing to non-respondents a few weeks later. Of the 3,000 surveys we mailed, 2941 surveys were deliverable and 692 returned, resulting in an effective response rate of 23.5 percent. Results of our analyses were presented at academic conferences and in peer-reviewed and other publications. PARTICIPANTS: The PI (Harvey James) developed the survey and conducted the empirical analyses of findings. He also was the primary architect of papers produced from the project. The co-I (Mary Hendrickson) assisted in the development of the survey and research hypotheses and contributed to co-authored publications. Sarika Cardoso, a PhD candidate in the department of agricultural economics at the University of Missouri, participated as a co-author of one publication. The Assessment Resource Center at the University of Missouri help prepare the survey for mailing and administered the mailing and compilation of surveys into a workable Excel file that was used to conduct the empirical analyses. TARGET AUDIENCES: Target audiences include academic scholars (via peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations), policy-makers and agricultural producers (via extension reports). PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.
Impacts
The results of our study reveal important attitudes of farmers, especially regarding ethics and other social issues. We found, for instance, that there is a relatively strong consensus among farmers that situations resulting in harm are more unacceptable than those that are wrong because they are defined so by law or contract or because they are socially inappropriate. We found evidence that perceived economic pressures are correlated with a greater willingness of farmers to tolerate unethical conduct and that the more common a respondent believes an action is in his community, the more accommodating he is of it. We also did not find evidence to support the hypothesis that "farmers of the middle" have more noteworthy attitudes regarding agricultural issues and ethics than small and large-scale producers. However, we found some differences between middle-scale and other farmers, such that middle-scale farmers feel they have less control over their lives, are more concerned with their finances, are more likely to consider that farm structure and economic conditions are the most important issues in agriculture, in contrast to concerns about biotechnologies, food safety and security, globalization or government policies. They also tend to be relatively more pessimistic about their individual circumstances and about the conditions of farmers generally. And, interestingly, they tend to be more tolerant of unethical practices, particularly violating licensing agreements, unsafely using of pesticides, and hiring of illegal aliens.
Publications
- Sarika Cardoso and Harvey James, 'Ethical Frameworks and Farmer Participation in Controversial Farming Practices,' working paper, University of Missouri, Department of Agricultural Economics, 2009.
- Harvey James and Mary Hendrickson, 'Perceived Economic Pressures and Farmer Ethics,' Agricultural Economics, 38(3), 2008, 349-361.
- Harvey James and Mary Hendrickson, 'Are Farmers of the Middle Distinctively Good Stewards Evidence from the Missouri Farm Poll, 2006,' working paper, University of Missouri, Department of Agricultural Economics (currently under review at a peer-reviewed publication), 2009.
|
Progress 07/01/06 to 06/30/07
Outputs
Agricultural industrialization is causing a dualistic system where small farms focus on producing differential products catering directly to consumer markets, while large farms focus on the global commodity markets. Farmers in the middle are being squeezed by shrinking market opportunities. This is a concern if, as some commentators assume, farmers-of-the-middle have strong incentives to practice good stewardship and make ethical decisions that protext wildlife habitat, maintain environmental quality, and improve civic life. However, limited data exists to support such arguments. Furthermore, agricultural industrialization is characterized by downward pressure on prices resulting from increased productivity. All farmers face pressures to decrease costs of production by adopting new technologies or organizational structures and by increasing farm size, or to increase revenues. These pressures might induce farmers to seek unethical short cuts. However, limited data
exists indicating the specific margins at which farmers might take unethical short cuts and what effect unethical behavior will have on rural agriculture. We surveyed 3000 randomly sampled Missouri farmers in early 2006 in order to accomplish the following objectives: (1) identify what farmers think about business ethics, environmental stewardship, and treatment of animals; (2) ascertain the effects of economic conditions and technology adoption on farmer ethics; (3) determine whether farmer ethics varies according to farm and farmer characteristics, such as farm size; (4) assess the impact of farmer ethics on rural development and agricultural production; and (5) educate farmers on emerging ethical problems, their implications, and potential solutions. We find that "farmers of the middle" are distinct from small and large producers, but not in terms of their orientation towards social and environmental stewardship. Rather, our data suggests that many farmers, particularly those who
are "in the middle," feel considerable pressures wrought by the changing structure of industrial agriculture. These pressures affect what they value and how they see the world, particularly in the context of social and ethical concerns.
Impacts
It is expected that this research will result in a reevaluation of why farmers-of-the-middle -- or any particular class of farmers -- are important from a social perspective. The idea that certain types of farmers have more socially-desirable attitudes regarding business ethics, environmental stewardship and animal welfare is likely a myth. If perpetuated, it could lead to inappropriately justified policies. All farmers have important contributions to make. Why certain farmers ought to be given preferential treatment based on the presumption that they have noteworthy attitudes or proclivities is not fully supported by this research. This research also shows that farmers face pressure not unlike those felt by many in the business community. Indeed, farming is increasingly being viewed as a business. As such, many of the pressures business men and women feel are also felt by farmers of all classes and sizes. This research suggests that applications of business ethics
education and policies might be important within all parts of the agrifood sector, not just at the level of the agribusiness.
Publications
- H. James and M. Hendrickson, Economic pressures and the ethical attitudes of farmers, University of Missouri Department of Agircultural Economics working paper, Jun 2007.
- M. Hendrickson and H. James, On the Distinctiveness of Farmers of the Middle: A Report from the Missouri Farm Poll, 2006, University of Missouri Department of Agircultural Economics working paper, Jun 2007.
|
Progress 07/01/05 to 06/30/06
Outputs
Agricultural industrialization is causing a dualistic system where small farms focus on producing differentiated products catering directly to consumer markets, while large farms focus on the global commodity markets. Farmers in the middle are being squeezed by shrinking market opportunities. This is a concern if, as some commentators assume, farmers-of-the-middle have strong incentives to practice good stewardship and make ethical decisions that protect wildlife habitat, maintain environmental quality, and improve civic life. However, limited data exists to support such arguments. Furthermore, agricultural industrialization is characterized by downward pressure on prices resulting from increased productivity. All farmers face pressures to decrease costs of production by adopting new technologies or organizational structures and by increasing farm size, or to increase revenues. These pressures might induce farmers to seek unethical short cuts. However, limited data
exists indicating the specific margins at which farmers might take unethical short cuts and what effect unethical behavior will have on rural agriculture. We surveyed 3000 randomly sampled Missouri farmers in early 2006 in order to (a) identify what farmers think about business ethics, environmental stewardship, and treatment of animals; (b) ascertain the effects of economic conditions and technology adoption on farmer ethics; and (c) determine whether farmer ethics varies according to farm and farmer characteristics, such as farm size. We find there are differences in the attitudes of small, middle-sized, and large-scale farmers consistent with our expectations that attitudes would be affected by farm size, farmer characteristics and other factors. For example, based on initial descriptive statistics, we can conclude that in some respects farmers-of-the-middle are different from other farmers. However, we cannot conclude that they have particularly strong, unique or noteworthy
attitudes or inclinations with respect to environmental, social or animal stewardship. If anything we suspect there is a relative degree of anxiety among farmers of the middle, most likely resulting from structural and economic conditions in agriculture.
Impacts
It is expected that this research will result in a reevaluation of why farmers-of-the-middle -- or any particular class of farmers -- are important from a social perspective. The idea that certain types of farmers have more socially-desirable attitudes regarding business ethics, environmental stewardship and animal welfare is likely a myth. If perpetuated, it could lead to inappropriately justified policies. All farmers have important contributions to make. Why certain farmers ought to be given preferential treatment based on the presumption that they have noteworthy attitudes or proclivities is not fully supported by this research. This research also shows that farmers face pressure not unlike those felt by many in the business community. Indeed, farming is increasingly being viewed as a business. As such, many of the pressures business men and women feel are also felt by farmers of all classes and sizes. This research suggests that applications of business ethics
education and policies might be important within all parts of the agrifood sector, not just at the level of the agribusiness.
Publications
- H. James and M. Hendrickson, "On the Distinctiveness of Farmers of the Middle: A Preliminary Report on the Missouri Farm Poll, 2006," presentation at the Agriculture, Food and Human Values Society meetings, Boston, MA, June 2006.
|
|