Norwegian farmers' perspectives on agriculture and agricultural payments: Between productivism and cultural landscapes

Land Use Policy

Volumn 42, Issue , 2015, Pages 83-92

  Kvakkestad, Valborg ^a   Rørstad, Per Kristian ^b   Vatn, Arild ^b  

^a NORWEGIAN INSTITUTE OF BIOECONOMY RESEARCH   (Norway)

^b NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF LIFE SCIENCES   (Norway)

Author keywords

Agricultural policy; Attitudes; Farmers; Multifunctional agriculture; Policy instruments; Q methodology

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURAL POLICY; AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION; ATTITUDINAL SURVEY; CULTURAL HERITAGE; CULTURAL LANDSCAPE; FARMERS KNOWLEDGE; FOOD PRODUCTION; INCOME DISTRIBUTION; LAND USE; FARMERS ATTITUDE; FARMING SYSTEM; SURVEY METHOD;

NORWAY;

EID: 84905252508     PISSN: 02648377     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.07.009     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Addams H., Proops J.L.R. Social Discourse and Environmental Policy: An Application of Q Methodology 2000, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
2. Almås R. Norges Landbrukshistorie IV 1920-2000. Frå bondesamfunn til bioindustri 2002, Samlaget, Oslo.
3. Austin E.J., Deary I.J., Gibson G.J., McGregor M.J., Dent J.B. Attitudes and values of Scottish farmers: "Yeoman" and "entrepreneur" as factors, not distinct types. Rural Sociol. 1996, 61:464-474.
4. Barry J., Proops J. Seeking sustainability discourses with q methodology. Ecol. Econ. 1999, 28:337-345.
5. Battershill M.R.J., Gilg A.W. Socio-economic constraints and environmentally friendly farming in the southwest of England. J. Rural Stud. 1997, 13:213-228.
6. Bergevoet R.H.M., Ondersteijn C.J.M., Saatkamp H.W., van Woerkum C.M.J., Huirne R.B.M. Entrepreneurial behaviour of Dutch dairy farmers under a milk quota system: goals, objectives and attitudes. Agric. Syst. 2004, 80:1-21.
7. Bjørkhaug H., Richards C.A. Multifunctional agriculture in policy and practice? A comparative analysis of Norway and Australia. J. Rural Stud. 2008, 24:98-111.
8. Breen J.P., Hennessy T.C., Thorne F.S. The effect of decoupling on the decision to produce: an Irish case study. Food Policy 2005, 30:129-144.
9. Brodt S., Klonsky K., Tourte L. Farmer goals and management styles: implications for advancing biologically based agriculture. Agric. Syst. 2006, 89:90-105.
10. Brodt S., Klonsky K., Tourte L., Duncan R., Hendricks L., Ohmart C., Verdegaal P. Influence of farm management style on adoption of biologically integrated farming practices in California. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 2004, 19:237-247.
11. Brown S.R. Political Subjectivity: Applications of q Methodology in Political Science 1980, Yale University Press, New Haven.
12. Buckley C. Implementation of the EU nitrates directive in the republic of Ireland-a view from the farm. Ecol. Econ. 2012, 78:29-36.
13. Bumbudsanpharoke W., Moran D., Hall C. Exploring perspectives of environmental best management practices in Thai agriculture: an application of q-methodology. Environ. Conserv. 2009, 36:225-234.
14. Burton R.J.F., Wilson G.A. Injecting social psychology theory into conceptualisations of agricultural agency: towards a post-productivist farmer self-identity?. J. Rural Stud. 2006, 22:95-115.
15. Daugstad K., Ronningen K., Skar B. Agriculture as an upholder of cultural heritage? Conceptualizations and value judgements - a Norwegian perspective in international context. J. Rural Stud. 2006, 22:67-81.
16. Davies B.B., Hodge I.D. Farmers' preferences for new environmental policy instruments: determining the acceptability of cross compliance for biodiversity benefits. J. Agric. Econ. 2006, 57:393-414.
17. Davies B.B., Hodge I.D. Exploring environmental perspectives in lowland agriculture: a q methodology study in East Anglia, UK. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 61:323-333.
18. Deci E.L. Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1971, 18:105L 15.
19. Defrancesco E., Gatto P., Runge F., Trestini S. Factors affecting farmers? Participation in agri-environmental measures: a northern Italian perspective. J. Agric. Econ. 2008, 59:114-131.
20. DeVries B. Multifunctional Agriculture in the International Context: A Review 2000, The Land Stewardship Project, Available at: http://www.landstewardshipproject.org/mba/-MFAReview.pdf.
21. Eden S., Donaldson A., Walker G. Structuring subjectivities? Using q methodology in human geography. Area 2005, 37:413-422.
22. Fairweather J.R., Klonsky K. Response to Vanclay et al. on farming styles: Q methodology for identifying styles and its relevance to extension. Sociol. Rural. 2009, 49:189-198.
23. Frey B.S. Not Just for the Money. An Economic Theory of Personal Motivation 1997, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham.
24. Garforth C., Rehman T. Review of Literature on Measuring Farmers' Values, Goals and Objectives. Project Report No. 2 in the Research to Understand and Model the Behaviour and Motivations of Farmers in Responding to Policy Changes (England) 2005, School of Agriculture, Policy and Development, The University of Reading, Reading, UK.
25. Gasson R., Crow G., Errington A., Hutson J., Marsden T., Winter D.M. The farm as a family business - a review. J. Agric. Econ. 1988, 39:1-41.
26. Gilg A. Perceptions about land use. Land Use Policy 2009, 26:76-82.
27. Gorton M., Douarin E., Davidova S., Latruffe L. Attitudes to agricultural policy and farming futures in the context of the 2003 cap reform: a comparison of farmers in selected established and new member states. J. Rural Stud. 2008, 24:322-336.
28. Greiner R., Gregg D. Farmers' intrinsic motivations, barriers to the adoption of conservation practices and effectiveness of policy instruments: empirical evidence from northern Australia. Land Use Policy 2011, 28:257-265.
29. Haglerød A., Haarberg K. Landbrukspolitikk i USA 1930-2000 2000, Norsk institutt for landbruksøkonomisk forskning, Oslo.
30. Hall C. Identifying farmer attitudes towards genetically modified (gm) crops in Scotland: are they pro- or anti-gm?. Geoforum 2008, 39:204-212.
31. Hall C., Wreford A. Adaptation to climate change: the attitudes of stakeholders in the livestock industry. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change 2011, 17:207-222.
32. Hermans F., Kok K., Beers P.J., Veldkamp T. Assessing sustainability perspectives in rural innovation projects using q-methodology. Sociol. Rural. 2012, 52:70-91.
33. Ingersent K.A., Rayner A.J. Agricultural policy in Western Europe and the United States 1999, Edward Elgar Pub, Cheltenham.
34. Jongeneel R.A., Polman N.B.P., Slangen L.H.G. Why are Dutch farmers going multifunctional?. Land Use Policy 2008, 25:81-94.
35. Kristensen E., Enevoldsen C. A mixed methods inquiry: how dairy farmers perceive the value(s) of their involvement in an intensive dairy herd health management program. Acta Vet. Scand. 2008, 50:50.
36. Kristensen E., Jakobsen E.B. Danish dairy farmers' perception of biosecurity. Prev. Vet. Med. 2011, 99:122-129.
37. Logstein B. Trender i norsk landbruk 2012. Frekvensrapport. Rapport nummer 07/12 2012, Norsk senter for bygdeforskning, Trondheim. http://www.bygdeforskning.no/filarkiv/2012/11/29/150b756fdbaff8.pdf.
38. Ministry of Agriculture St. prp. nr. 8 (1992-93): Landbruk i utvikling: Om retningslinjer for landbrukspolitikken og opplegget for jordbruksoppgjørene m.v, Oslo 1992.
39. Ministry of Agriculture St. meld. nr 19 (1999-2000): Om norsk landbruk og matproduksjon, Oslo 1999.
40. Ministry of Agriculture and Food Meld. St. 9 (2011-2012): Landbruks- og matpolitikken. Velkommen til bords, Oslo 2011.
41. Nasjonalparkriket Heidalsguiden 2010 2010, http://heidal.no/dmdocuments/Heidalsguiden_2010.pdf.
42. OECD, 1998. OECD Committee for Agriculture at Ministerial Level, March 1998. http://www.oecd.org/document/34/0.3746.en_2649_33773_31852962_1_1_1_1,00.html.
43. OECD Multifunctionality Towards an Analytical Framework 2001, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France.
44. OECD Producer and Consumer Support Estimates (Database) 2011, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France.
45. OECD Farmer Behaviour, Agricultural Management and Climate Change 2012, OECD Publishing, Paris, France.
46. Peterson J.M., Boisvert R.N., de Gorter H. Environmental policies for a multifunctional agricultural sector in open economies. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 2002, 29:423-443.
47. Previte J., Pini B., Haslam-McKenzie F. Q methodology and rural research. Sociol. Rural. 2007, 47:135-147.
48. Paarlberg P.L., Bredahl M., Lee J.G. Multifunctionality and agricultural trade negotiations. Rev. Agric. Econ. 2002, 24:322-335.
49. Romstad E., Vatn A., Rørstad P.K., Søyland V. Multifunctional Agriculture - Implications for Policy Design. Report No. 21/2000 2000, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Agricultural University of Norway, Ås.
50. Ryan R.L., Erickson D.L., De Young R. Farmers' motivations for adopting conservation practices along riparian zones in a mid-western agricultural watershed. J. Environ. Plan. Manage. 2003, 46:19-37.
51. Rønningen K., Flø B.E., Fjeldavli E. The Legitimacy of a Multifunctional Agriculture 2004, Centre for Rural Research, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim.
52. Rørstad P.K., Vatn A., Kvakkestad V. Why do transaction costs of agricultural policies vary?. Agric. Econ. 2007, 36:1-11.
53. Salamon S. Ethnic-communities and the structure of agriculture. Rural Sociol. 1985, 50:323-340.
54. Siebert R., Toogood M., Knierim A. Factors affecting European farmers' participation in biodiversity policies. Sociol. Rural. 2006, 46:318-340.
55. Tenbrunsel A.E., Messick D.M. Sanctioning systems, decision frames, and cooperation. Adm. Sci. Q. 1999, 44:684-707.
56. Tracy M. Agriculture in Western Europe 1964, Praeger, New York.
57. Urquhart J., Courtney P., Slee B. Private woodland owners' perspectives on multifunctionality in English woodlands. J. Rural Stud. 2012, 28:95-106.
58. Vanslembrouck I., Van Huylenbroeck G., Verbeke W. Determinants of the willingness of Belgian farmers to participate in agri-environmental measures. J. Agric. Econ. 2002, 53:489-511.
59. VanVugt M., VanLange P.A.M., Meertens R.M. Commuting by car or public transportation? A social dilemma analysis of travel mode judgements. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 1996, 26:373-395.
60. Vatn A. Teknologi og politikk: Om framveksten av viktige styringstiltak i norsk jordbruk 1920-1980 1984, Landbruksforlaget, Oslo.
61. Vatn A. Multifunctional agriculture: some consequences for international trade regimes. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 2002, 29:309-327.
62. Vatn A., Kvakkestad V., Rørstad P.K. Policies for Multifunctional Agriculture: The Trade-off Between Transactional Cost and Precision 2002, NLH, Ås.
63. Vik J. Trender i norsk landbruk 2008. Frekvensrapport. Rapport nummer 13/08 2008, Norsk senter for bygdeforskning, Trondheim. http://d3861196.hosted418.moonrocketadmin.net/filarkiv/2009/01/09/14967648a582e4.pdf.
64. Willock J., Deary I.J., Edwards-Jones G., Gibson G.J., McGregor M.J., Sutherland A., Dent J.B., Morgan O., Grieve R. The role of attitudes and objectives in farmer decision making: business and environmentally-oriented behaviour in Scotland. J. Agric. Econ. 1999, 50:286-303.
65. Wilson G.A. From productivism to post-productivism. And back again? Exploring the (un)changed natural and mental landscapes of European agriculture. Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. 2001, 26:77-102.
66. Wilson P., Harper N., Darling R. Explaining variation in farm and farm business performance in respect to farmer behavioural segmentation analysis: implications for land use policies. Land Use Policy 2013, 30:147-156.
67. Zagata L. How organic farmers view their own practice: results from the Czech Republic. Agric. Hum. Values 2010, 27:277-290.