Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Demographic and farm characteristic differences in ontario farmers’ views about sustainability policies

  • Published:
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study was undertaken to assess farmers’ attitudes toward sustainable agriculture and the environment. The majority of Ontario farmers in this 1991 survey supported the need for government policies which promote sustainable agriculture but there were major differences in the government policies which farmers thought would be sustainable or desirable. Most farmers felt the Government should promote diversified rural economic development, sponsor appropriate research and provide conservation grants to farmers willing to change to more sensitive environmental methods. Those least interested in forms of government intervention designed to enhance agricultural sustainability operated the largest farms. Conversely, those most likely to be receptive to government regulations and interventions designed to enhance rural equity, stability, productivity and sustainability were the smaller operation farmers who most often had off-farm employment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Black, A.W., and I. Reeve. 1992. Participation in Landcare Groups: The Relative Importance of Attitudinal and Situational Factors. Paper presented at the Third National Social Research Conference, University of Western Sydney, Hawkesbury, 29 June–2 July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breburda, J. 1990. Land-use Zones and Soil Degradation in the Soviet Union. InCommunist Agriculture, edited by K-E Wadekin. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buttel, F.H., G.W. Gillespie Jr., R. Janke, B. Caldwell, and M. Sarrantonio. 1986. Reduced-input Agricultural Systems.The Rural Sociologist 6(5): 350–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buttel, F.H., G.W. Gillespie Jr., and A. Power. 1990. Sociological Aspects of Agricultural Sustainability in the United States: a New York State Case Study. InSustainable Agricultural Systems, edited by C.A. Edwards et al. Ankeny, IA: Soil and Water Conservation Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conway, G.R. 1985. Agro-ecosystem Analysis.Agricultural Administration 20: 31–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conway, G.R. 1987. The Properties of Agroecosystems.Agricultural Systems 24: 95–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coughler, P. 1992. Comparative Analysis of Dairy Farm Family Support Systems: New York and Ontario, Master’s thesis, University of Guelph.

  • Filson, G.C. 1993. Comparative Differences in Ontario Farmers’ Environmental Attitudes.Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 6(2): 165–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filson, G.C., G. Butyrin, A. Klubov, and V. Krasnov. Forthcoming. Differences between Ontario and Moscow Region Farmers regarding their Attitudes toward Sustainable Agricultural Issues.

  • Friedland, W., and E. Pugliese. 1989. Class formation and Decomposition in Modern Capitalist Agriculture: Comparative Perspectives.Sociologia Ruralis 29(2): 149–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, K. 1984. Households as Income-pooling Units. InHouseholds and the World Economy, edited by J. Smith, I. Wallerstein, and H. Evers. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedmann, H. 1978. Simple Commodity Production and Wage Labour in the American Plains.The Journal of Peasant Studies 6(1): 71–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gasson, R. 1986. Part-time Farming: Strategy for Survival?Sociologia Ruralis 24(3/4): 364–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghorayshi, P. 1986. The Identification of Capitalist Farms: Theoretical and Methodological Considerations.Sociologia Ruralis 26(2): 146–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillespie W.W., Jr., and F.H. Buttel. 1989. Farmer Ambivalence toward Agricultural Research: An Empirical Assessment.Rural Sociology 54(3): 382–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, J.C., C.S. Kauffmann, and A. Schauer. 1995. Attitudes and Practices of Sustainable Farmers, with Applications to Designing a Sustainable Agriculture Extension Program.Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 6(2/3): 135–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassebrook, C., and R. Kroese. 1990. Policy Proposals to Foster Sustainable Agriculture.Journal of Soil and Water Conservation (January/February, 24–27).

  • McCoy, M. 1992.The Effects of Nonfarm Employment on the Quality of Life of Farm Families in Western Ontario. Master’s thesis, University of Guelph.

  • McCoy, M.A., and G.C. Filson. 1996. Working off the Farm: Impacts on Quality of Life.Social Indicators Research 37(2):149–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mooney, P.H. 1983. Toward a Class Analysis of Midwestern Agriculture.Rural Sociology 48(4): 563–584.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norusis, M.J. 1988.SPSS-X Introductory Statistics Guide for SPSS-X Release 3. Chicago: SPSS Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pineo, P., and J. Porter. 1967. Occupational Prestige in Canada.The Canadian Review of Anthropology and Sociology 4(1): 24–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeve, I., and A. Black. 1991. Taking the Scales from One’s Eyes: Understanding Farm Attitudes to Land Degradation. A paper presented to the University of Guelph, Rural Extension Studies Department (November).

  • Reinhardt, N., and P. Bartlett. 1989. The Persistence of Family Farms in United States Agriculture.Sociologia Ruralis 29(3/4): 203–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmink, M. 1984. Household Economic Strategies: Review and Research Agenda.Latin American Research Review 19(3): 87–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarzweller, H.K., and D.C. Clay. 1992. Conceptualizing and Researching Household Survival Strategies. A paper given at the 8th World Congress of Rural Sociology, Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania, August.

  • Stover, R.G., et al. 1991. Successful Family Farming: the Intersection of Economics and Family Life. InRural Sociology and Development, edited by Daniel C. Clay and Harry K. Schwarzweller. Greenwich, CT: Jai Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Statistics Canada. 1992a.The Daily (June 4): 1–22.

  • Statistics Canada. 1992b.The Daily (Nov. 17): 1–25.

  • Vanclay, F., G. Lawrence and I. Gray. 1992. Environmental and Social Consequences of Capitalist Agriculture: the Australian Context. A paper read at the 8th World Congress for Rural Sociology, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, (11–16 Aug.): 1–28.

  • Winson, A. 1992.The Intimate Commodity: Food and the Development of the Agro-Industrial Complex in Canada. Toronto: Garamond Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, E.O. 1978.Class, Crisis and the State. London: NLB.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Rural Extension Studies, University of Guelph, N1G 2W1, Guelph, Ontario, Canada

    Glen C. Filson

Authors
  1. Glen C. Filson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Filson, G.C. Demographic and farm characteristic differences in ontario farmers’ views about sustainability policies. J Agric Environ Ethics 9, 165–180 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03055300

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03055300

Keywords

Search

Navigation