21 pages., New trends in food consumption are shaping consumers’ preferences and buying behavior. Non-traditional food retailing and short supply chains (SSCs) are offering bundles of attributes that fit the needs of larger consumers’ segments. Several studies have analyzed factors affecting the choice of traditional and non-traditional food retailing. Very few, however, are those studies that analyze the predictive role of human values and attitudes on the choice of traditional and non-traditional food retailing and supply chains. Usually, due to the low percentage of consumers involved in SSC, analyses of consumer behavior have been conducted using convenience samples. This study, based on online questionnaires submitted to a representative sample composed by 1009 German consumers, tests the hypothesis that the frequency of purchases at farmers’ markets is related to human values: attitude toward the industrialized food market and attitude toward the environment. The econometric approach here implemented computes the model on average and in the tails of the dependent variable, frequency of purchases at farmers’ market, thus investigating the model in a representative sample even where the percentage of non-traditional food retailing consumers is low, as occurs in the tails for low/high frequency of purchases. The questionnaire included the Schwartz value survey, attitudes toward environment and attitude toward industrialized food market, and self-reported estimates of the frequency of buying at farmers’ market. Results suggest that the frequency of buying at farmers’ markets is hierarchically related to attitudes and values. The frequency of purchases at farmers’ markets is negatively related to industrialized food attitudes and positively related to pro-environment attitudes. Attitudes are in turn affected by values: self-transcendence has a positive impact on pro-environment attitude and the reverse is true for conservation. Furthermore, these relationships are not constant in the sample: they change according to the selected frequency of purchases.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 203 Document Number: D12188
Notes:
Online via AgriMarketing Update. 2 pages., Summary of results from a Farm Journal Pulse Poll asking farmers what farm technology they wish to invest in first if they were to win the lottery. The top choice was variable-rate application technology with 31% of the responses (out of a total of 577 farmers). Four other technologies ranked lower.
Online via AgriMarketing Weekly. 3 pages., Based on findings of the Ag Economy Barometer poll by Purdue University. Responses by farmers indicating they expect the market share of plant-based alternatives to beef, pork, and chicken will grow rapidly. Most said they would not grow crops for processing into a meat alternative, even if offered a contract.
6 pages., Gene editing (GE) and gene modification (GM) technologies demonstrate noticeable differences. GE technologies introduce changes in DNA, which are intrinsic to the species, while GM technologies incorporate changes from foreign species. The potential benefits of GE have been highlighted in a number of recent scientific studies, pointing to the opportunities that are opening up in addressing the food availability problems as a result of the growing world population. However, the implementation of GE technology in food production would rely on public awareness, acceptance, and attitudes toward genetically modified and genetically edited food products. Based on the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), we surveyed Lithuanian consumers, farmers, and producers for their awareness, attitudes, and behavioural intentions towards GM and GE food. The 251 consumers, 50 farmers, and 56 food producers participated in the survey. Consistent across all samples (consumers, farmers, and producers, respectively), GM technology-related products’ self-assed awareness was significantly higher than the level of self-assed awareness of GE products. Awareness of GEO in all samples is relatively low. The level of support for GMO and GEO is also low in all groups of respondents. All groups – consumers, farmers, and producers – are less negative about food produced from GE than from GM raw materials. There was a statistically significantly higher overall likelihood for future use of GEO than the GMO. Producers would be less likely than consumers and farmers to use GMOs in the future. The same inclinations are observed with regard to GEO, with statistically significant differences in the sample of consumers, farmers, and producers.
21 pages, Online via UI Library electronic subscription, Research identifies farmer doubts about fertilizer quality and reveals that farmer beliefs are inconsistent with reality. However, many fertilizers have degraded appearance.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 202 Document Number: D12077
Notes:
Online via AgriMarketing Weekly. 2 pages., Summary of findings from a poll conducted recently by the American Farm Bureau Federation. "The results of a new poll clearly demonstrate that the COVID-19 pandemic is having broad-ranging impacts among rural adults and farmers/farmworkers." Findings also identified main obstacles to seeking help or treatment for mental health condition, the most trusted sources for information about mental health, impressions of the importance of mental health in rural communities and the importance of reducing stigma surrounding mental health.
6 pages., Evidence overwhelmingly supports the view that we need to drastically reduce our consumption of animal products for reasons related to the environment and public health, while moral concerns about the treatment of animals in agriculture are becoming ever more common. As governments increasingly recognize the need to change our food production and alternative protein products become more appealing to consumers, agriculture finds itself in a unique period of transition. How do farmers respond to the changing atmosphere? We present secondary analyses of qualitative and quantitative data to highlight some of the uncertainty and ambivalence about meat production felt throughout the farming community. Survey data from France and Germany reveals that in both countries, those who work in the meat industry have significantly higher rates of meat avoidance than those who do not work in the industry. While non-meat-industry workers are more likely to cite concerns for animals or the environment, meat industry workers more often cite concerns about the healthiness or safety of the products. Concurrently, interviews with people who raise animals for a living suggest that moral concerns among farmers are growing but largely remain hidden; talking about them openly was felt as a form of betrayal. We discuss these findings in the context of the ongoing agricultural transition, observe how tension has manifested as polarization among Dutch farmers, and offer some thoughts about the role of farmers in a new world of alternative proteins.
Online from publication 8 pages., Article highlights findings of a Farm Futures post-election survey among U.S. farmers. They show that nearly 90 percent of farmers believe taxes will go up under the Biden administration, 71% believe WOTUS will be overturned, and 22% believe markets will stabilize with a new trade strategy. "And four of every five farmers believe there will be less government ad hoc funds going to agriculture."
