what ohioans think about food, agriculture, and environmental issues presentation by jeff s. sharp...

What Ohioans Think What Ohioans Think About Food, About Food, Agriculture, and Agriculture, and Environmental IssuesEnvironmental Issues

Presentation by Jeff S. SharpPresentation by Jeff S. SharpRural Sociological SummitRural Sociological SummitColumbus, OhioColumbus, OhioDecember 12, 2002December 12, 2002

Project BackgroundProject Background

Funded by OSU Extension, OARDC Funded by OSU Extension, OARDC and the College of FAESand the College of FAES Focus on social issues in agriculture as they Focus on social issues in agriculture as they

relate to the ecological paradigmrelate to the ecological paradigm

Project TeamProject Team

Study conducted by a team Study conducted by a team associated with Department of HCRD associated with Department of HCRD and OSU Extension.and OSU Extension. Jeff Sharp, Molly Bean Smith, Bill Flinn, Jeff Sharp, Molly Bean Smith, Bill Flinn,

Mark Tucker, Holli Kendall, Linda Lobao, Mark Tucker, Holli Kendall, Linda Lobao, Sherrie Whaley, Greg Davis, Jerry Sherrie Whaley, Greg Davis, Jerry Thomas, Denny HallThomas, Denny Hall

MethodologyMethodology

A stratified sample of 7,976 Ohioans was A stratified sample of 7,976 Ohioans was selectedselected Stratified by 5 extension districts and metro Stratified by 5 extension districts and metro

core county statuscore county status

Dillman’s TDM utilized with 5 contactsDillman’s TDM utilized with 5 contacts Response rate = 56.4%Response rate = 56.4%

Sample vs. State Sample vs. State Population (2000 Census)Population (2000 Census)

Close match: gender, age (over 24), Close match: gender, age (over 24), households w/ kids, employment status households w/ kids, employment status and household incomesand household incomes

LimitationsLimitations sample had lower proportion of renters, sample had lower proportion of renters,

lower # of 18-24 year olds, and lower lower # of 18-24 year olds, and lower proportion of African Americans than proportion of African Americans than expected compared to state population expected compared to state population statisticsstatistics

Outline of PresentationOutline of Presentation

Overview of some general ag-related Overview of some general ag-related findingsfindings

Focus on livestockFocus on livestock Familiarity with the issuesFamiliarity with the issues Level of concern about large-scale livestockLevel of concern about large-scale livestock

Brief review of other topical Brief review of other topical research/findingsresearch/findings

Future plansFuture plans

Links to Farming and Links to Farming and Rural AreasRural Areas

Parents ever owned or operated a Parents ever owned or operated a farm farm

0

10

20

30

40

50

Yes (%) 24 20 39

State Metro Nonmetro

Grandparents ever owned or Grandparents ever owned or operated a farmoperated a farm

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Yes (%) 49 46 63


Number of farmers knownNumber of farmers known

0

20

40

60

State 41 39 20

Metro 46 40 14

Nonmetro 15 36 49

None 1 to 5 6 or more

Take a recreational drive through Take a recreational drive through the countrythe country

60

65

70

75

80

% Frequently or

Occasionally

68 65 75


Travel to a rural area to experience Travel to a rural area to experience or view the natural environmentor view the natural environment

54

56

58

60

62

% Frequently or

Occasionally

58 57 61


Farmers and the Farmers and the EnvironmentEnvironment

Q.Q. Overall, farming positively Overall, farming positively contributes to the quality of contributes to the quality of life in Ohiolife in Ohio

2% Strongly Disagreed or Disagreed2% Strongly Disagreed or Disagreed

6% Undecided6% Undecided

92% Agreed or Strongly Agreed92% Agreed or Strongly Agreed

Q.Q. Ohio’s economy will suffer if Ohio’s economy will suffer if it continues to lose farmersit continues to lose farmers




Q. Ohio’s most productive Q. Ohio’s most productive farmland should be preserved for farmland should be preserved for agriculture. agriculture.




Q. I trust Ohio farmers to protect Q. I trust Ohio farmers to protect the environment. the environment.




Q. Ohio farmers are generally Q. Ohio farmers are generally sensitive to the concerns of sensitive to the concerns of nonfarm neighbors. nonfarm neighbors.




Q. Environmental protection laws Q. Environmental protection laws regulating farming practices are regulating farming practices are too strict. too strict.




Large-scale livestock Large-scale livestock and poultryand poultry

Familiarity with IssuesFamiliarity with Issues

Respondents were asked: Are you Respondents were asked: Are you familiar with the issues associated with familiar with the issues associated with large-scale poultry and livestock large-scale poultry and livestock facilities?facilities?

33 percent of respondents indicated “yes”33 percent of respondents indicated “yes” 66 percent indicated “no”66 percent indicated “no”

Familiarity by genderFamiliarity by gender

0

10

20

30

40

50

Yes (%) 42 27

Men Women

Familiarity by place of residenceFamiliarity by place of residence

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Yes (%) 30 33 46 52

City or

suburb

Small

town

Country

(nonfarm)

Country

(farm)

Familiarity by region of the stateFamiliarity by region of the state

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Yes (%) 43 27 56 34 25

North

west

South

westCentral

South

east

North

east

Concern about livestockConcern about livestock

Respondents were asked: How Respondents were asked: How concerned are you about the concerned are you about the development of large-scale poultry and development of large-scale poultry and livestock production facilities in Ohio?livestock production facilities in Ohio?

21 percent very concerned21 percent very concerned 51 percent somewhat concerned51 percent somewhat concerned 28 percent not at all concerned28 percent not at all concerned

Concern among those Concern among those familiar with the issuesfamiliar with the issues

Concern was higher among those Concern was higher among those indicating they were familiar with the indicating they were familiar with the issuesissues

34 percent very concerned34 percent very concerned 51 percent somewhat concerned51 percent somewhat concerned 15 percent not at all concerned15 percent not at all concerned

Level of Concern by age (among Level of Concern by age (among those familiar with the issues)those familiar with the issues)

0

10

20

30

40

50

% Very

Concerned

27 33 41

40 or younger41 to 60

years61 and older

Level of Concern by region (among Level of Concern by region (among those familiar with the issues)those familiar with the issues)

0

10

20

30

40

50

% Very

Concerned

38 27 41 33 16

North

west

South

westCentral

South

east

North

east

Attitudes about Attitudes about livestock among livestock among those familiar w/ the those familiar w/ the issueissue

Q. Large-scale poultry and Q. Large-scale poultry and livestock production facilities in livestock production facilities in rural areas are a threat to rural rural areas are a threat to rural quality of life. quality of life.




Q. There needs to be increased Q. There needs to be increased regulation of livestock production regulation of livestock production in Ohio to protect the environment. in Ohio to protect the environment.




Q. Large-scale poultry and Q. Large-scale poultry and livestock facilities pose a serious livestock facilities pose a serious threat to water and stream quality threat to water and stream quality in Ohio in Ohio




Q. Large-scale livestock facilities Q. Large-scale livestock facilities positively contribute to the positively contribute to the economy of Ohio. economy of Ohio.




Q. In general, increased regulation Q. In general, increased regulation of the treatment of animals in of the treatment of animals in farming is needed. farming is needed.




Q. Animal agriculture raises Q. Animal agriculture raises serious ethical questions about the serious ethical questions about the treatment of animals treatment of animals




Modeling results Modeling results related to livestock related to livestock measuresmeasures

ModelsModels

DependentsDependents Familiarity with the issuesFamiliarity with the issues Livestock Welfare concernLivestock Welfare concern Rural and Environmental Impact ConcernsRural and Environmental Impact Concerns Overall level of concernOverall level of concern

Independent MeasuresIndependent Measures

Respondent demographicsRespondent demographics Region & metro characterRegion & metro character Proximity to livestockProximity to livestock Links and Networks with Farms/RuralLinks and Networks with Farms/Rural Trust of FarmersTrust of Farmers

Findings: Familiarity w/ Findings: Familiarity w/ Issues surrounding livestockIssues surrounding livestock

Age, education, being male are positively Age, education, being male are positively related to familiarityrelated to familiarity

Living in central Ohio has a very strong positive Living in central Ohio has a very strong positive relationshiprelationship

Parents owning a farm, frequency of Parents owning a farm, frequency of conversing with a farmer, and frequency of conversing with a farmer, and frequency of visiting rural area is positively relatedvisiting rural area is positively related

Know of nearby facility has a very strong, Know of nearby facility has a very strong, positive relationship, living in a county with positive relationship, living in a county with more livestock sales positively related to more livestock sales positively related to familiarityfamiliarity

Findings: Concern for Findings: Concern for livestock welfarelivestock welfare

Women indicate more concernWomen indicate more concern More educated indicate less concernMore educated indicate less concern Southwest Ohioans indicate less concernSouthwest Ohioans indicate less concern Less concern among those w/ parent owning a Less concern among those w/ parent owning a

farm and those frequently meeting farm folksfarm and those frequently meeting farm folks Strong pro-agrarian attitudes, greater concernStrong pro-agrarian attitudes, greater concern Greater trust of farmers, less concernGreater trust of farmers, less concern

Findings: Concern Findings: Concern rural/environment rural/environment impactsimpacts

Parents own a farm, less concernParents own a farm, less concern Near a facility, less concern but in a Near a facility, less concern but in a

county with higher sales, more concerncounty with higher sales, more concern Pro-agrarian attitudes, greater concernPro-agrarian attitudes, greater concern Greater trust in farmers, less concernGreater trust in farmers, less concern

Findings: Overall Findings: Overall concernconcern

Older respondents indicate greater concernOlder respondents indicate greater concern Living near a facility, more overall concernLiving near a facility, more overall concern Concern about rural/environmental impacts, Concern about rural/environmental impacts,

substantial impact on level of concernsubstantial impact on level of concern Concern about animal welfare, more modest Concern about animal welfare, more modest

impact on level of concernimpact on level of concern

Wrap-upWrap-up

Concluding Observations Concluding Observations on Livestockon Livestock

Regional Issue—NW, Central, and SE to Regional Issue—NW, Central, and SE to some extentsome extent

““Social capital” (trust and networks Social capital” (trust and networks among farmers and nonfarmers) is among farmers and nonfarmers) is associated with lower concernassociated with lower concern

Family histories associated with Family histories associated with agriculture appears to temper some agriculture appears to temper some concernconcern

Concluding Observations Concluding Observations on Livestock (cont.)on Livestock (cont.)

Agrarianism associated with greater Agrarianism associated with greater concern (perhaps a conflict between concern (perhaps a conflict between farming as way of life and a business)farming as way of life and a business)

Animal welfare concern—it exists; could Animal welfare concern—it exists; could it grow?it grow?

Environmental concern--the strongest Environmental concern--the strongest factor in this analysis; where will it trend factor in this analysis; where will it trend in the future?in the future?

Other topical report Other topical report seriesseries

Food SafetyFood Safety Agricultural land-use and the Agricultural land-use and the

environmentenvironment Animal WelfareAnimal Welfare Agrarianism and links to agricultureAgrarianism and links to agriculture

Previews of future Previews of future analysisanalysis

Food Safety:Food Safety: Over 39 percent of respondents agreed or Over 39 percent of respondents agreed or

strongly agreed that food is not as safe as it strongly agreed that food is not as safe as it was 10 years agowas 10 years ago

Nearly 62 percent of respondents indicated Nearly 62 percent of respondents indicated they were undecided as to whether they were undecided as to whether biotechnology is having a negative impact biotechnology is having a negative impact on the safety of our food supplyon the safety of our food supply

Future plansFuture plans

Additional analysis and associated Additional analysis and associated Extension and research manuscripts to Extension and research manuscripts to be generated through mid-2003be generated through mid-2003

Willingness to do customized analysis for Willingness to do customized analysis for interested partiesinterested parties

Explore possibility of repeating study in Explore possibility of repeating study in 2004 examining these and other 2004 examining these and other emerging FAE issuesemerging FAE issues

what ohioans think about food, agriculture, and environmental issues presentation by jeff s. sharp...

Documents

state slide

gender slide

farm slide

country slide

natural environment

denny hall slide

place of residence slide

ecological paradigm