Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Ethical Frameworks and Farmer Participation in Controversial Farming Practices

  • Articles
  • Published:
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There are a number of agricultural farming practices that are controversial. These may include using chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides, and planting genetically modified crops, as well as the decision to dehorn cattle rather than raise polled cattle breeds. We use data from a survey of Missouri crop and livestock producers to determine whether a farmer’s ethical framework affects his or her decision to engage in these practices. We find that a plurality of farmers prefer an agricultural policy that reflects principles based on rights rather than principles of utilitarianism or justice. Furthermore, after controlling for personal and farm characteristics, we find a positive correlation between farmers preferring a rights-based policy and a farmer’s use of chemical farm inputs and polled rather than horned cattle. We also find that a combination of ethical framework and farm and farmer characteristics correlate with decisions to use farm chemicals, while only farm and farmer characteristics affect the decision to plant GM crops and only a farmer’s ethical framework affects the decision to use polled cattle.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. As one commentator observed, “it is important also to remember that a farmer is a businessman” (Edwards 1991, p. 75).

  2. A notable disinclination to use polled breeds has been found amongst Hereford cattle breeders. Horns have come to be an advertisement for the breed, used to represent both tradition and the selection of specific Hereford traits. For some, switching to polled Herefords would mean not only renouncing the investment placed in years of breeding specific lines, but also result in losing clients for whom this tradition takes precedence over the inconvenience and welfare concerns of dehorning (see Stookey 2000).

  3. These findings are consistent with more recent research that often finds relatively little difference in demographic characteristics of farmers using pesticides and farmer adopting pesticide-free production practices (e.g., Nazarko et al. 2004).

  4. Other potential models of ethical decision-making widely used in the literature include Jones’s (1991) issue contingent model and Ajzen’s (1991) theory of planned behavior. These models have advantages over Trevino’s (1986) person situation model in that they incorporate more specific details of the decision-making context. For example, Jones’s model takes into consideration characteristics of the ethical issue in question, particularly the moral intensity of the problem. Ajzen’s model includes considerations of the decision-maker's perception of the social norms relating to the issue as well as his or her ability to control or perform an intended behavior. Their disadvantage is that operationalizing these additional factors can be difficult, especially in survey research. For this reason we utilize the simple model proposed by Trevino, especially given the fact that so little research has been conducted modeling the ethics of farmers and farmer behavior.

  5. Most studies utilizing Trevino’s (1986) person situation model consider the effects of personal, situational and moral development on decisions or intentions to engage in unethical behavior. However, like our interest in ethically controversial issues rather than practices that are inherently wrong, researchers have used Trevino’s model to examine these types of problems. For example, Chiu (2003) used the Trevino model within a conceptual framework to examine factors affecting whistleblowing intention.

  6. Note that these categories are not exclusive, since some crop farmers raise livestock. Less than five percent of the data has missing observations. Analysis revealed no meaningful difference between observations containing complete and missing data.

  7. For crop farmers, this means we include a dummy variable equal to 1 if the farmer also raised livestock or had farm animals (such as hogs, cattle or poultry). For beef cattle and dairy farmers, this means we include a dummy variable equal to 1 if the farmer also grew crops.

  8. Slope is calculated by multiplying the estimated coefficient by the average density, as given in the table. For example, with an estimated coefficient of 0.383 for the “rights” variable and the average density of 0.363, the estimated slope is about 14 percent (= 0.383 × 0.363).

  9. For a sampling of business ethics textbooks, Ferrell et al. (2011) have a chapter on teleology (e.g., utilitarianism), deontology (e.g., Kantianism), relativism, virtue ethics, and justice. Shaw (2007) has a chapter on normative theories of ethics, including utilitarianism and Kant’s ethics. DeGeorge (2009) has chapters on with titles “Utility and Utilitarianism” and “Moral Duty, Rights, and Justice.”

  10. To give just one example of a concern about intensive synthetic fertilizer use, consider the presence of a “dead zone” in the Gulf of Mexico. Nitrogen in fertilizer from farms in the central United States drains into the Mississippi and speeds the growth of algae and other water plants, depleting oxygen in the river water. When the water reaches the Gulf of Mexico, it is nearly devoid of oxygen, thus driving out or killing ocean life in the affected areas. The dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico is currently the size of the state of Massachusetts (Walsh, 2008).

  11. As an illustration, Goodhue et al. (2010) show that when econometric models are appropriately specified, there is clear evidence that educational programs rather than mandates designed to reduce farmer use of harmful chemicals are effective in doing so.

  12. This is suggested by the negative coefficient for the “ethical judgment” variable for the fertilizer models (column 2 of Table 4).

  13. McCann et al (1997, p. 753) observe that while “most farmers from both groups were concerned about the use of agricultural chemicals, a considerable number of conventional farmers indicated that agricultural pollution was not a problem. In response to the question, these farmers spoke of the pollution associated with industrial and residential areas and golf courses as their main concerns.”

References

  • Abaidoo, S., & Dickinson, H. (2002). Alternative and conventional agricultural paradigms: Evidence from farming in southwest Saskatchewan. Rural Sociology, 67(1), 114–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashkanasy, N. M., Windsor, C. A., & Trevino, L. K. (2006). Bad apples in bad barrels revisited: Cognitive moral development, just world beliefs, rewards, and ethical decision-making. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16(4), 449–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barboza, D. (2000). Gene-altered corn changes dynamics of grain industry. New York Times, 11 December. http://www.nytimes.com/2000/12/11/business/gene-altered-corn-changes-dynamics-of-grain-industry.html?scp=3&sq=barboza%20starlink%20corn&st=cse. Accessed September 15, 2010.

  • Bartlett, D. (2003). Management and business ethics: A critique and integration of ethical decision-making models. British Journal of Management, 14, 223–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borlaug, N. E. (2000). Ending world hunger: The promise of biotechnology and the threat of antiscience zealotry. Plant Physiology, 124, 487–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brady, F. N. (1985). A Janus-headed model of ethical theory: Looking two ways at business/society models. Academy of Management Review, 10(3), 568–576.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brady, F. N., & Wheeler, G. E. (1996). An empirical study of ethical predispositions. Journal of Business Ethics, 15(9), 927–940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, R. K. (2003). Ethical judgment and whistleblowing intention: Examining the moderating role of locus of control. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(1–2), 65–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, B. R. (2009). The once and future georgic: agricultural practice, environmental knowledge, and the place for an ethic of experience. Agriculture and Human Values, 26(3), 153–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. R., Pant, L. W., & Sharp, D. J. (2001). An examination of differences in ethical decision-making between Canadian business students and accounting professionals. Journal of Business Ethics, 30, 319–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cottone, R. R., & Claus, R. E. (2000). Ethical decision-making models: A review of the literature. Journal of Counseling and Development, 78(3), 275–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeConinck, J. B., & Lewis, W. F. (1997). The influence of deontological and teleological considerations and ethical climate on sales managers’ intentions to reward or punish sales force behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 497–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeGeorge, R. T. (2009). Business ethics (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, S. (1991). Farming’s rewards at risk. In C. V. Blatz (Ed.), Ethics and agriculture: An anthology on current issues in world context (pp. 75–83). Moscow, ID: University of Idaho Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falconer, K. (2000). Farm-level constraints on agri-environmental scheme participation: A transactional perspective. Journal of Rural Studies, 16, 379–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez-Cornejo, J., & McBride, W. D. (2002). Adoption of bioengineered crops, Agricultural Economic Report No. 810, Washington, DC: Economic Research Service, US Department of Agriculture. Available at http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/AER810/. Accessed 1 Sept 2010.

  • Ferrell, O. C., Fraedrich, J., & Ferrell, L. (2011). Business ethics: Ethical decision making and cases (8th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fritzsche, D. J., & Becker, H. (1984). Linking management behavior to ethical philosophy—An empirical investigation. Academy of Management Journal, 27(1), 166–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodhue, R. E., Klonsky, K., & Mohapatra, S. (2010). Can an education program be a substitute for a regulatory program that bans pesticides? Evidence from a panel selection model. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 92(4), 956–971.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. D., Morelli, S. A., Lowenberg, K., Nystrom, L. E., & Cohen, J. D. (2008). Cognitive load selectively interferes with utilitarian moral judgment. Cognition, 107(3), 1144–1154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grob, A. (1995). A structural model of environmental attitudes and behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15(3), 209–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108(4), 814–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, J. (2006). The roles of attitudes, beliefs and risk perception as determinants of sustainable behavior: A framework for government action and further research. In C. G. Soares, & E. Zio (Eds.), Safety and reliability for managing risk: Proceedings of the European safety and reliability conference (ESREL 2006), Estoril, Portugal, 18–22 Sept 2006 (Vol. 2, pp. 1299–1306), London, UK: Taylor and Francis.

  • Hunt, S. D., & Vitell, S. J. (1986). A general theory of ethics. Journal of Macromarketing, 6, 5–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, S. D., & Vitell, S. J. (2005). Personal moral codes and the Hunt–Vitell theory of ethics: Why do people’s ethical judgments differ? In R. A. Peterson & O. C. Ferrell (Eds.), Business ethics: New challenges for business schools and corporate leaders (pp. 18–37). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, H. S., Jr. (2003). On finding solutions to ethical problems in agriculture. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 16, 439–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, H. S., Jr., & Hendrickson, M. K. (2008). Perceived economic pressures and farmer ethics. Agricultural Economics, 38(3), 349–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision-making in organizations: An issue-contingent model. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 366–395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development. San Francisco, CA: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kondoh, K., & Jussaume, R. A. (2006). Contextualizing farmers’ attitudes towards genetically modified crops. Agriculture and Human Values, 23(3), 341–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lahdesmaki, M. (2005). Ethical discourse of small nature-based entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Ethics, 61, 55–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loevinger, J. (1979). Construct validity of the sentence completion test of ego development. Applied Psychological Measurement, 3(3), 281–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCann, E., Sullivan, S., Erickson, D., & De Young, R. (1997). Environmental awareness, economic orientation, and farming practices: A comparison of organic and conventional farmers. Environmental Management, 21(5), 747–758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morton, L. W., & Weng, C. Y. (2009). Getting to better water quality outcomes: The promise and challenge of the citizen effect. Agriculture and Human Values, 26(1–2), 83–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nazarko, O. M., Van Acker, R. C., Entz, M. H., Schoofs, A., & Martens, G. (2004). Pesticide free production: Characteristics of farms and farmers participating in a pesticide use reduction pilot project in Manitoba, Canada. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 19, 4–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pannell, D. J., & Zilberman, D. (2001). Economic and sociological factors affecting growers’ decision making on herbicide resistance. In S. B. Powles & D. L. Shaner (Eds.), Herbicide resistance and world grains (pp. 251–278). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pretty, J., Vorley, W., & Keeney, D. (1998). Pesticides in world agriculture: Causes, consequences and alternative courses. In W. Vorley & D. Keeney (Eds.), Bugs in the system: Redesigning the pesticide system for sustainable agriculture (pp. 17–49). London, UK: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rappaport, A., & Himschoot, R. A. (1994). Ethics perceptions of American farmers: An empirical analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 13(1), 795–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raynolds, L. T. (2000). Re-embedding global agriculture: The international organic and fair trade movements. Agriculture and Human Values, 17(3), 297–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rest, J. R. (1979). Development in judging moral issues. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rest, J. R. (1986). Moral development: Advances in research and theory. New York, NY: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rollins, B. E. (1995). Farm animal welfare: Social, bioethical, and research issues. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoon, B., & Te Grotenhuis, R. (2000). Values of farmers, sustainability and agricultural policy. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 12, 17–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, W. H. (2007). Business ethics (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (1994). Ethics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiertz, J. H. J. (2009). Nitrogen, sustainable agriculture and food security: A review. Sustainable Agriculture, part, 6, 635–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stookey, J. (2000). Horned vs. polled. Beef Magazine, 1 April. http://beefmagazine.com/mag/beef_horned_vs_polled/. Accessed September 1, 2010.

  • Stookey, J. (n.d.). Dehorning beef cattle via genetics is welfare friendly. http://www.usask.ca/wcvm/herdmed/applied-ethology/articles/dehorn.html. Accessed March 22, 2005.

  • Stuart, D. (2009). Constrained choice and ethical dilemmas in land management: Environmental quality and food safety in California agriculture. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 22(1), 53–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, P. B. (2007). Food biotechnology in ethical perspective (2nd ed.). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trevino, L. K. (1986). Ethical decision-making in organizations: A person-situation interactionist model. Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 601–617.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trevino, L. K., & Youngblood, S. A. (1990). Bad apples in bad barrels: A causal analysis of ethical decision-making behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(4), 378–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urban, M. A. (2005). Values and ethical beliefs regarding agricultural drainage in central Illinois, USA. Society & Natural Resources, 18(2), 173–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vorley, W., & Keeney, D. (1998). The greening of industry versus greenwash: Introducing a case study. In W. Vorley & D. Keeney (Eds.), Bugs in the system: Redesigning the pesticide system for sustainable agriculture (pp. 1–16). London, UK: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, B. (2008). The Gulf’s growing ‘dead zone’. Time, 17 June. http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1815305,00.html. Accessed September 2, 2010.

  • Wilson, D., Urban, M., Graves, M., & Morrison, D. (2003). Beyond the economic: Farmer practices and identities in central Illinois, USA. The Great Lakes Geographer, 10(1), 21–33.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We appreciate helpful comments from Paul Thompson and an anonymous reviewer. This research was supported in part by the National Research Initiative of the Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service, USDA, grant number 2005-35618-15672.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA

    Sarika P. Cardoso & Harvey S. James Jr.

Authors
  1. Sarika P. Cardoso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Harvey S. James Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarika P. Cardoso.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cardoso, S.P., James Jr., H.S. Ethical Frameworks and Farmer Participation in Controversial Farming Practices. J Agric Environ Ethics 25, 377–404 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-011-9306-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-011-9306-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation