Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 123–143

Farmers’ attitudes about farming and the environment: A survey of conventional and organic farmers

  • Shannon Sullivan
  • Elizabeth Mccann
  • Raymond De Young
  • Donna Erickson
Article

Abstract

Farmers have been characterized as people whose ties to the land have given them a deep awareness of natural cycles, appreciation for natural beauty and sense of responsibility as stewards. At the same time, their relationship to the land has been characterized as more utilitarian than that of others who are less directly dependent on its bounty. This paper explores this tension by comparing the attitudes and beliefs of a group of conventional farmers to those of a group of organic farmers. It was found that while both groups reject the idea that a farmer’s role is to conquer nature, organic farmers were significantly more supportive of the notion that humans should live in harmony with nature. Organic farmers also reported a greater awareness of and appreciation for nature in their relationship with the land. Both groups view independence as a main benefit of farming and a lack of financial reward as its main drawback. Overall, conventional farmers report more stress in their lives although they also view themselves in a caretaker role for the land more than do the organic farmers. In contrast, organic farmers report more satisfaction with their lives, a greater concern for living ethically, and a stronger perception of community. Finally, both groups are willing to have their rights limited (organic farmers somewhat more so) but they do not trust the government to do so.

Keywords

environmental attitudes organic farming environmental ethics 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, Molly. 1990. Farming with Reduced Synthetic Chemicals in North Carolina.American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 5(2): 60–68.Google Scholar
  2. Arcury, Thomas A., Timothy P. Johnson, and Susan J. Scollay. 1986. Ecological Worldview and Environmental Knowledge: The “New Environmental Paradigm.”Journal of Environmental Education 17: 35–40.Google Scholar
  3. Beus, Curtis E., and Riley E. Dunlap. 1990. Conventional Versus Alternative Agriculture: The Paradigmatic Roots of the Debate.Rural Sociology 55(4): 590–616.Google Scholar
  4. ——. 1991. Measuring Adherence to Alternative Vs. Conventional Agricultural Paradigms: A Proposed Scale.Rural Sociology 56(3): 432–460.Google Scholar
  5. Bultena, Gordon, Eric Hoiberg, Don Albrecht, and Peter Nowak. 1982. Land Use Planning: A Study of Farm and City Perspectives.Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 37(6): 341–344.Google Scholar
  6. Bultena, Gordon, Peter Nowak, Eric Hoiberg, and Don Albrecht. 1981. Farmers’ Attitudes toward Land Use Planning.Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 36(1): 37–41.Google Scholar
  7. Buttel, Frederick H., and William L. Flinn. 1974. The Structure of Support for the Environmental Movement, 1968–1970.Rural Sociology 39: 56–69.Google Scholar
  8. ——. 1978 Economic Growth Versus the Environment: Survey Evidence.Social Science Quarterly 57(September): 410–420.Google Scholar
  9. Buttel, Frederick H., and Gilbert W. Gillespie, Jr. 1988. Preferences for rop Production Practices among Conventional and Alternative Farmers.Journal of Alternative Agriculture 3: 11–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Buttel, Frederick H., Gilbert W. Gillespie, Jr., Oscar W. Larson III, and Craig K. Harris. 1981. The Social Bases of Agrarian Environmentalism: A Comparative Analysis of New York and Michigan Farm Operators.Rural Sociology 46(3): 391–410.Google Scholar
  11. Callicott, J. Baird. 1987. The Scientific Substance of the Land Ethic. InAldo Leopold: The Man and His Legacy, edited by Thomas Tanner, pp. 87–106. Ankeny, IA: IA: Soil Conservation Society of America.Google Scholar
  12. Carr, Susan, and Joyce Tait. 1991. Differences in the Attitudes of Farmers and Conservationists and their Implications.Journal of Environmental Management 32: 281–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Constance, Douglass H., Jere L. Gilles, and William D. Heffernan. 1990. Agrarian Policies and Agricultural Systems in the United States. InAgrarian Policies and Agricultural Systems, edited by Alessandro Bonanno, pp. 9–75. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  14. Crevecoeur, J. Hector St. John. 1904 [1784].Letters from an American Farmer. New York: Fox, Duffield & Company.Google Scholar
  15. Cronbach, L.J. 1951. Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests.Psychometrika 16: 297–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Crosson, Pierre. 1982. Diverging Interests in Soil Conservation and Water Quality: Society vs. the Farmer. InPerceptions, Attitudes and Risk: Overlooked Variables in Formulating Public Policy on Soil Conservation and Water Quality. Washington, DC: Economic Research Service. (February).Google Scholar
  17. Esseks, J. Dixon, Steven E. Kraft, and Lucy K. Vinis. 1990.Agriculture and the Environment: A Study of Farmers’ Practices and Perceptions. Washington, DC: The American Farmland Trust.Google Scholar
  18. Flader, Susan. 1987. Aldo Leopold and the evolution of a land ethic. InAldo Leopold: The Man and His Legacy, edited by Thomas Tanner, pp. 3–24. Ankeny, IA: Soil Conservation Society of America.Google Scholar
  19. Hall, Trish. 1992. In 90’s Cuisine, the Farmer is the Star.The New York Times. (July 8), p. C1.Google Scholar
  20. Hargrove, C. Eugene, and J. Baird Callicott. 1990. Leopold’s “Means and Ends in Wildlife Management”: A Brief Commentary.Environmental Ethics 12: 333–337.Google Scholar
  21. Harris, Craig K., Sharon E. Powers, and Frederick H. Buttel. 1980. Myth and Reality in Organic Farming: A Profile of Conventional and Organic Farmers in Michigan.Newsline 8: 33–43.Google Scholar
  22. Hendee, John C. 1969. Rural-Urban Differences Reflected in Outdoor Recreation Participation.Journal of Leisure Research 1(Autumn): 333–341.Google Scholar
  23. Leopold, Aldo. 1949.A Sand County Almanac. New York: Oxford University Press, 1949; reprint ed., New York: Robert Finch, 1987.Google Scholar
  24. Little, Charles E. 1985. In a Landscape of Hope.Wilderness (Spring): 21–30.Google Scholar
  25. Meine, Curt. 1987. The Farmer as Conservationist: Leopold on Agriculture. InAldo Leopold: The Man and His Legacy, edited by Thomas Tanner, pp. 39–52. Ankeny, IA: Soil Conservation Society of America.Google Scholar
  26. Molnar, Joseph J., and Patricia A. Duffy. 1987. Urban and Suburban Residents’ Perceptions of Farmers and Agriculture. InSustaining Agriculture Near Cities, edited by W. Lockeretz, pp. 119–131. Boston: Soil and Water Conservation Society of America.Google Scholar
  27. Napier, Ted L., and D. Lynn Forster. 1982. Farmer Attitude and Behavior Associated with Soil Erosion Control. InSoil Conservation Policies, Institutions and Incentives, edited by H.G. Halcrow, E.O. Heady and M.L. Cotner. Ankeny, IA: Soil Conservation Society of America.Google Scholar
  28. Nash, Roderick. 1982.Wilderness and the American Mind. Binghamton, NY: Vail-Ballou Press.Google Scholar
  29. ——. 1987. Aldo Leopold and the Limits of American Liberalism. InAldo Leoplld: The Man and His Legacy, edited by Thomas Tanner, pp. 53–86. Ankeny, IA: Soil Conservation Society of America.Google Scholar
  30. Patton, M.Q. 1990.Qualitative Evaluation and research Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  31. Peterson, Tarla Rai. 1991. Telling the Farmers’ Story: Competing Responses to Soil Conservation Rhetoric.Quarterly Journal of Speech 77: 289–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Piasecki, Bruce. 1982. Pastoral Ideals and Environmental Problems: An Interview with Leo Marx.The Amicus Journal (Fall): 56–61.Google Scholar
  33. Stegner, Wallace. 1985. Living on Our Principal.Wilderness (Spring): 15–20.Google Scholar
  34. Tremblay, Kenneth R., and Riley E. Dunlap. 1978. Rural-urban Residence and Concern with Environmental Quality: A Replication and Extension.Rural Sociology 43(3): 474–491.Google Scholar
  35. Van Liere, Kent D., and Riley E. Dunlap. 1981. Environmental Concern: Does it Make a Difference How it’s Measured?Environment and Behavior 13(6): 651–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Westmacott, Richard. 1983. The Conservation of Farmed Landscapes: Attitudes and Problems in the United States and Britain.Landscape Design (August): 11–14.Google Scholar
  37. Wojcik, Jan. 1989.The Arguments of Agriculture: A Casebook in Contemporary Agricultural Controversy. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shannon Sullivan
    • 1
  • Elizabeth Mccann
    • 2
  • Raymond De Young
    • 3
  • Donna Erickson
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Natural Resources and EnvironmentUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.College of Natural ResourcesUniversity of Wisconsin Stevens PointStevens PointUSA
  3. 3.School of Natural Resources and EnvironmentUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations