Preferences for crop production practices among conventional and alternative farmers

1988 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick H. Buttel ◽  
Gilbert W. Gillespie

One of the major gaps in the empirical literature comparing conventional and organic farmers is the degree to which conventional farmers would prefer or can be motivated to use reduced-input practices comparable to those of alternative agriculturalists. This paper presents the results of a 1987 survey of a random sample of New York farm operators and a two-thirds sample of the membership list of the New York State chapter of the Natural Organic Farmers Association (NOFA-NY). The results show that while conventional farmers tend to have a lower preference for reduced-input practices than do alternative agriculturalists (NOFA-NY members), conventional farmers tend to prefer pest- and disease-resistant crop varieties, nonpurchased, on-farmproduced sources of fertility, and nonchemical means of disease control over high-input, chemically-based production practices. The largest differences between conventional and alternative agriculturalists are with respect to preferences for weed control practices. For six of the eight practices assessed, operators of small farms (annual gross sales less than $40,000) were intermediate in their preferences between commercial-scale farmers (gross sales $40,000 or more) and alternative agriculturalists. There was, however, virtually no difference between conventional and organic farmers in their tillage practice preferences; similar percentages of the NOFA members and commercial-scale farmers preferred minimum tillage practices, while the percentage of small farmers preferring to use as few tillage operations as possible was lower than that of both commercialscale and organic farmers. Differences between conventional and organic farmers in their production practice preferences are far smaller than differences in their environmental orientations.

1987 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 107-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian P. Baker ◽  
Douglas B. Smith

AbstractA survey of organic farmers in New York State identified problems in need of university research. Weed management was the most frequently mentioned problem by far, identified as significant by two-thirds of the organic farmers. Only a few other problems were listed as significant, including insufficient time for farm work, lack of markets, low prices, and lack of appropriate tools. These were cited by more than a third of the farmers. Drought, insect management, and a lack of a dependable supply of labor were cited by about one-third of the respondents. The survey also examined organic farmers' information sources. They do not use conventional sources of agricultural information, such as the extension service and conventional agricultural media, as much as books, magazines, and newsletters on organic f arming, other organic f armers, and on-farm experiments. Many respondents noted that local extension agents did not know very much about non-chemical solutions to organic production problems. They considered University Extension to be accessible, but not very useful in solving problems specific to organic farming, and had many suggestions to improve Land Grant research in organic agriculture.


1982 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-139
Author(s):  
Brian W. Gould

This paper examines the economic, environmental and energy use impacts of a corn based ethanol industry on Western New York State. A regional linear programming model is used. Five representative farm groups are used to describe the agricultural sector of the study region. Comparisons are made between a benchmark solution and model formulations that include conservation tillage practices, ethanol induced feed price changes, and the feeding of the feed by-product, DDG.


1975 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-36
Author(s):  
Christopher Wardle ◽  
Richard N. Boisvert

Cochrane has described the shape of modern agriculture as a world with highly productive, commercial farmers at one extreme and the world of poor, low-production farmers at the other. In the highly productive world, technology and farm expansion have resulted in increased yields and production on many farms. In contrast, many low-production farms provide no more than poverty level incomes for the farm operators and their families. Their problems stem largely from the fact that many of these farm operators are old, poorly educated and have limited and poor quality resources. Many have been unable to take advantage of the exploding technology and the scale economies accompanying increases in farm size. A third group, the “transition” group, forms the continuum between the two extremes. Some of its members, like young farmers just getting started, are improving their operations and moving into the “commercial world.” For others, who perhaps lack the financing or managerial capacity to compete in a modern agriculture, the transition is in the opposite direction.


1989 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gilbert W. Gillespie ◽  
Frederick H. Buttel

AbstractThis study seeks to identify the social factors related to opposition to government regulation of agricultural chemicals and pharmaceuticals. Analysis of data from a 1982 survey of farm operators in New York State shows that, in contrast to much of the literature that represents farmers as being almost universally opposed to regulation, farm operators' orientations toward government regulation of these substances vary considerably. Indicators of the class status or position of farm operators were found to be directly related to opposition to regulation. Willingness to assume risk and the importance placed by farm operators on making profit were also directly related to opposition to regulation, while farm men's off-farm work, cynicism toward agribusiness, non-economic orientation toward agriculture, perceptions of potential side effects of agricultural chemicals and drugs, and liberal political attitudes were inversely related to opposition to regulation. The results of a multivariate analysis suggest that farmer opposition to government regulation of agricultural chemicals is primarily due to farmer ideology and has little relationship with whether farmers actually use these chemicals.


Author(s):  
Catherine J. Crowley ◽  
Kristin Guest ◽  
Kenay Sudler

What does it mean to have true cultural competence as an speech-language pathologist (SLP)? In some areas of practice it may be enough to develop a perspective that values the expectations and identity of our clients and see them as partners in the therapeutic process. But when clinicians are asked to distinguish a language difference from a language disorder, cultural sensitivity is not enough. Rather, in these cases, cultural competence requires knowledge and skills in gathering data about a student's cultural and linguistic background and analyzing the student's language samples from that perspective. This article describes one American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA)-accredited graduate program in speech-language pathology and its approach to putting students on the path to becoming culturally competent SLPs, including challenges faced along the way. At Teachers College, Columbia University (TC) the program infuses knowledge of bilingualism and multiculturalism throughout the curriculum and offers bilingual students the opportunity to receive New York State certification as bilingual clinicians. Graduate students must demonstrate a deep understanding of the grammar of Standard American English and other varieties of English particularly those spoken in and around New York City. Two recent graduates of this graduate program contribute their perspectives on continuing to develop cultural competence while working with diverse students in New York City public schools.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document