Moyer, D.David (author), Niemann Jr. J.B. (author), and School of Natural Resources and Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin, Madison; Department of Landscape Architecture and Institute for Environmental Studeis, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
1991
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 100 Document Number: C08513
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 146 Document Number: C23317
Notes:
Survey Research Center, University of Kentucky. 1 page., Response to a statewide survey question about whether or not respondents favor spending public dollars to keep farmland in agricultural use.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 146 Document Number: C23316
Notes:
Survey Research Center, University of Kentucky. 1 page., Response to a statewide survey question about whether or not development should be directed to land which is not well suited for agriculture.
Online from publication. 16 pages., "History and the growing power of right-wing extremism point to a volatile future for the West during the Biden presidency."
Arnott, David (author), Chadwick, David R. (author), Wynne-Jones, Sophie (author), and Jones, David L. (author)
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2019-10-18
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 206 Document Number: D12810
Notes:
8pgs, On the 23rd June 2016, the UK referendum on European Union (EU) membership resulted in a vote to leave the EU. This departure, should it occur, would see the implementation of a new agricultural policy within the UK which will most likely see the removal of direct financial support to farmers. In this study, we use combined agricultural survey and rural payments data to evaluate the extent of reliance upon Pillar 1 payments, based on a sample of 24,492 (i.e. 70%) of farm holdings in Wales. This approach eliminates some of the variation found in the Farm Business Survey through the delivery of a more comprehensive picture on the numbers and types of farm holding potentially facing economic hardship and the quantities of land and livestock associated with those holdings. We estimate ˜34% of our sampled Welsh farm holdings face serious financial difficulties and show ˜44% of agricultural land on sampled farm holdings in Wales being vulnerable to land use change or abandonment. Based on our results, we consider the potential social and ecological impacts that the removal of direct payments may have on land use in Wales. We also discuss the use of a more balanced approach to land management that could support governmental visions to keep farmers on the land, improve productivity and deliver high quality ‘Public Goods’.
20 Pages, Springer Online, Aspirations to farm ‘better’ may fall short in practice due to constraints outside of farmers’ control. Yet farmers face proliferating pressures to adopt practices that align with various societal visions of better agriculture. What happens when the accumulation of external pressures overwhelms farm management capacity? Or, worse, when different visions of better agriculture pull farmers toward conflicting management paradigms? This article addresses these questions by comparing the institutional manifestations of two distinct societal obligations placed on California fruit and vegetable farmers: to practice sustainable agriculture and to ensure food safety. Drawing on the concept of constrained choice, I define and utilize a framework for comparison comprising five types of institutions that shape farm management decisions: rules and standards, market and supply chain forces, legal liability, social networks and norms, and scientific knowledge and available technologies. Several insights emerge. One, farmers are expected to meet multiple societal obligations concurrently; when facing a “right-versus-right” choice, farmers are likely to favor the more feasible course within structural constraints. Second, many institutions are designed to pursue narrow or siloed objectives; policy interventions that aim to shift farming practice should thus anticipate and address potential conflicts among institutions with diverging aspirations. Third, farms operating at different scales may face distinct institutional drivers in some cases, but not others, due to differential preferences for universal versus place-specific policies. These insights suggest that policy interventions should engage not just farmers, but also the intersecting institutions that drive or constrain their farm management choices. As my framework demonstrates, complementing the concept of constrained choice with insights from institutional theory can more precisely reveal the dimensions and mechanisms that bound farmer agency and shape farm management paradigms. Improved understanding of these structures, I suggest, may lead to novel opportunities to transform agriculture through institutional designs that empower, rather than constrain, farmer choice.
