Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
goals between the two groups. Organic farmers were much more satisfied
and found their workmore interesting and challenging than did the conven-
tional farmers. In addition, organic farmers weremore likely to say that farm
life was good for them and their families. They also felt that they had control
over how they grew their crops and livestock and that theywereworkingwith
nature. They recognized that agriculture could cause ecological problems,
and they strived to use natural fertilizers and to stay in harmony with the
environment. Overall, these organic farmers were highly satisfied with their
work and felt confident in their knowledge and environmental competence
(Rickson et al. 1999).
Interviews were conducted with both conventional and organic farmers
in New Zealand to investigate how they chose their mode of production
(Fairweather 1999). He developed a“decision tree”or list of yes/no questions
to sort farmers into the conventional versus organic category. He found that
there were a variety of reasons why farmers become interested in organic
methods, such as an organic philosophy or concern about agrichemicals.
Others were mostly interested in the higher prices they could earn with or-
ganic price premiums. Some were motivated by issues within conventional
agriculture: perhaps they had problems when farming conventionally or
they were concerned about soil quality. Others were happy with conven-
tional farming and didn't see the need for organic methods and thus did
not “go organic.”
Organic farming in Austria was studied by surveying 383 conventional
farmers about what they perceive as barriers to trying organic methods
(Schneeberger et al. 2002). Here, conventional farmers believed the risk was
too great; the perceived production challenges (weeds and pests, additional
labor, decreased yields) and perceived drop in income were themain barriers
to transitioning to organic. In addition, these farmers noted that they would
be dependent on government subsidies, which they wished to avoid. Of
course, this is particular to the European context, because no such subsidies
exist to encourage American organic production!
In a comparative study of twenty-seven organic and thirty-one con-
ventional farmers in Colorado, I focused on behavioral characteristics that
were distinct between the two groups (Duram 1997). Using a mail survey
and in-depth personal interviews, I defined a range of behavior from com-
posite proactive to reactive farmers, which can be displayed as a spectrumof
agroecological behavior. Thus proactive farmers, who tended to be organic
producers, were more likely to find their own markets, have on-farm diver-
sity, accept risk, trust personal experience, know ecology terms, harmonize
with nature, seek new methods, feel in control of their farm, and be active
[65],
(26)
Lines: 267 to 273
———
0.0pt PgVar
———
Normal Page
PgEnds: T
E
X
[65],
(26)
