Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Environmental beliefs and farm practices of New Zealand farmers Contrasting pathways to sustainability

  • Published:
Agriculture and Human Values Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Sustainable farming, and waysto achieve it, are important issues foragricultural policy. New Zealand provides aninteresting case for examining sustainableagriculture options because gene technologieshave not been commercially released and thereis a small but rapidly expanding organicsector. There is no strong governmentsubsidization of agriculture, so while policiesseem to favor both options to some degree,neither has been directly supported. Resultsfrom a survey of 656 farmers are used to revealthe intentions, environmental values, andfarming practices for organic, conventional,and GE intending farmers. The results show thatorganic and conventional farmers are relativelysimilar but contrast to GE intending farmers,especially with respect to perceivedconsequences of each technology. While 75%of farmers have not yet made a commitmentto either technology, one fifth were GEintending and one quarter may become organic.Organic farmers have different attitudes tonature, matched in part by conventionalfarmers. In terms of policy for sustainableagriculture, the results suggest that organicand conventional farmers are incrementallymoving towards agroecological sustainabilitywhile GE intending farmers are committed tointensive production methods of which GEproducts are potentially important. GEintending farmers reject incrementalism infavor of a revolutionary technological fix forsustainability concerns in agriculture.Overall, the results show that there areclearly two different paradigms ofsustainability among farmers. Policies that areseeking to achieve sustainable agriculture needto address the tensions that span the differentparadigms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AFFCO 1 Rural Monitor (2000). AFFCO Ltd., Corporate Office, Hamilton, New Zealand.

  • Allen, J. C. and K. Bernhardt (1995). “Farming practices and adherence to an alternative-conventional agricultural paradigm.” Rural Sociology 60(2): 297–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allison, M. (2001). “New agricultural solutions; a technological approach. Outlook 2001.” Proceedings of the National Outlook Conference, Canberra, 27 February-1 March (Volume 2: Agriculture and Regional Australia). Canberra: Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altieri, M. (1995). Agroecology: The Science of Sustainable Agriculture. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). “The theory of planned behaviour.” Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes 50: 179–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beus, C. E. and R. E. Dunlap (1990). “Conventional versus alternative agriculture: The paradigmatic roots of the debate.” Rural Sociology 55(4): 590–616.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beus, C. E. and R. E. Dunlap (1991). “Measuring adherence to alternative vs. conventional agricultural paradigms: A proposed scale.” Rural Sociology 56(3): 432–460.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonny, S. (1994). “The prospects for creating a model for sustainable development in agriculture - the case of France.” Courrier de l'Environment de l'INRA 23: 5–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunner, T., K. Nowack, L. Tamm, B. Tappeser, C. Eckelhamp, B. Webber, and F. Koechlin (2000). “Future model for Switzerland - agriculture without generic engineering?” In T. Alfondi and W. Lockeritz (eds.), IFOAM 2000: The World Grows Organic. Proceedings of the 13th International IFOAM Scientific Conference, Basel, Switzerland (pp. 590–593). Zurich, Switzerland: Hochschulverlag ETH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burdick, B. (1997). “The future viability of rural areas in north and south.” Entwicklunf + Landlicher - Raum 31(4): 11–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, H. and J. Fairweather (1998). The Development of Organic Horticultural Exports in New Zealand. Agribusiness and Economics Research Unit, Research Report No. 238. Canterbury, New Zealand: Lincoln University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, C. R., J. H. Vandermeer, and P. Rosset (1990). Agroecology. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • CEC (2000). Economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Crops in the Agri-Food Sector - a First Review. Commission of the European Community. Retrieved from http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/agriculture/publi/index_en.htm in May 2003.

  • Comer, S., E. Ekanum, M. Safdar, S. Singh, and F. Tegegne. (1999).“Sustainable and conventional farmers: A comparison of socio-economic characteristics, attitude, and beliefs.” Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 15(1): 29–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, A. J., R. Fairweather, and H. R. Campbell (2000). New Zealand Farmer and Grower Intentions to Use Genetic Engineering Technology and Organic Farming Methods. AERU Research Report No, 243. Canterbury, New Zealand: Lincoln University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egri, C. P. (1999). “Attitudes, background and information preferences for canadian organic farmers: Implications for organic farming advocacy and extension.” Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 13(3): 45–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, M.W. (1996). Agricide: The Hidden Farm and Food Crisis That Affects Us All. Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, R. (2001). “Support for the royal commission.” Food Technology in New Zealand 36: 3–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamble, J., S. Muggleston, D. Hedderly, T. Parminter, and N. Richardson-Harman (2000). Genetic Engineering: The Public's Point of View. Auckland: Mount Albert Research Centre. Horticulture and Food Research Institute of New Zealand Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gliessman, S. R. (2001). Agroecosystem Sustainability: Developing Practical Strategies, Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthman, J. (2000). “Raising organic: An agro-ecological assessment of grower practices in California.” Agriculture and Human Values, 17: 257–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubbel, B., R. Welsh, J. Kohn, J. Gowdy, and J. van der Straaten (2001). Sustainability in Action: Sectoral and Regional Case Studies. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, L. E. (1997). Ecology in Agriculture. San Diego, California: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, B. R. (2001). Gene Technologies and Food Safety. New Zealand Institute of Agricultural Science and New Zealand Society of Horticultural Science Gene Technologies Workshop. Canterbury, New Zealand: Lincoln University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Legg, W. and G. Viatte (2001). “Farming systems for sustainable agriculture.” OECD Observer 226-227: 21–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madden, J. P. and Chaplowe S. G. (eds.) (1997). For all Generations: Making World Agriculture More Sustainable. Glendale, California: OM Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pretty, J. (1997). “The sustainable intensification of agriculture: Making the most of the land.” Land Chatham 1(1): 45–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollan, M. (2001). The Botany of Desire: A Plant's-Eye View of the World. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puntasen, A. and P. Preedasak (1998). “Agriculture in Thailand at the crossroads.” ASEAN Economic Bulletin 15(1): 90–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rickson, R. E., P. Saffinga, and R. Sanders (1999). “Farm work satisfaction and acceptance of sustainability goals by Australian organic and conventional farmers.” Rural Sociology 64(20): 266–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röling, N. (1998). Facilitating Sustainable Agriculture: Participatory Learning and Adaptive Management in Times of Environmental Uncertainty. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, C. and S. Cagatay (2001). Economic Analysis of Issues Surrounding Commercial Release of GM Food Products in New Zealand. Commerce Division Discussion Papers, No: 94. Canterbury, New Zealand: Lincoln University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tivy, J. (1990). Agricultural Ecology. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, T. (1998). Adoption of Sustainable Agriculture Technologies: Economic and Non-economic Determinants. Briefings Global Environmental Change Programme, Economic and Social Research Council, Report No. 22. Swindon, UK.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John R. Fairweather.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fairweather, J.R., Campbell, H.R. Environmental beliefs and farm practices of New Zealand farmers Contrasting pathways to sustainability. Agriculture and Human Values 20, 287–300 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026148613240

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026148613240

Navigation