Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Dueling Land Ethics: Uncovering Agricultural Stakeholder Mental Models to Better Understand Recent Land Use Conversion

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

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to investigate how alternative land ethics of agricultural stakeholders may help explain recent land use changes. The paper first explores the historical development of the land ethic concept in the United States and how those ethics have impacted land use policy and use of private lands. Secondly, primary data gathered from semi-structured interviews of farmers, ranchers, and influential stakeholders are then analyzed using stakeholder analysis methods to identify major factors considered in land use decisions, priorities of factors of each group, and to define relevant mental models describing each group’s view of the land ethic concept. Results show that these stakeholder groups prioritize land use factors qualitatively differently and possess strikingly different land ethics. It is concluded that shifts in stakeholder land ethics have contributed to recent land use changes. Lastly, we discuss how current agricultural policy sends mixed signals about preferred land use and the potential ramifications based on the different land ethics we’ve described.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alston, M., & Whittenbury, K. (2013). Does climatic crisis in Australia’s food bowl create a basis for change in agricultural gender relations? Agriculture and Human Values, 30, 115–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anthony, R. (2012). Building a sustainable future for animal agriculture: An environmental virtue ethic of care approach with the philosophy of technology. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 25, 123–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barlowe, T. (1981). Soil conservation policies: An assessment. Ankeny, IA: Soil Conservation Society of America.

  • Baumhardt, R. L. (2003). Dust Bowl Era. Encyclopedia of Water Science, DOI: 10.1081/E-EWS.

  • Boyd, J. P., Cullen, C. T., Catanzariti, J., & Oberg, B. B. (Eds.). (1950). The papers of Thomas Jefferson. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Towards the moral management of the organisations stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 38–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Claassen, R., Carriazo, F., Cooper, J. C., Hellerstein, D., & Udea, K. (2011). Grassland to cropland conversion in the Northern Plains: The role of crop insurance, commodity, and disaster programs. ERR-120, U.S.D.A. Economic Research Service, June 2011.

  • Cooke, M. L., Bennett, H. H., Fowler, F. H., Harrington, F. C., Moore, R. C., Page, J. C., Wallace, H. A., & Tugwell, R. G. (1936). Report of the great plains drought area committee. Box 13, Hopkins Papers, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lib. http://newdeal.feri.org/texts/450.htm.

  • Didier, E. A., & Brunson, M. W. (2004). Adoption of range management innovations by Utah ranchers. Journal of Range Management, 52, 7–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diebel, P. L. (2008). Ethics and agriculture: A teaching perspective. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 33(3), 303–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, J. K., & Ford, D. N. (1998). Mental model concepts for system dynamics research. System Dynamics Review, 15(4), 411–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dundon, S. J. (2003). Agricultural ethics and multi functionality are unavoidable. Plant Physiology, 133, 427–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, R. W. (1836). Nature. Boston: James Munroe and Company. http://ia700204.us.archive.org/22/items/naturemunroe00emerrich/naturemunroe00emerrich.pdf.

  • Encarta, Manifest Destiny, United States History. (2006). http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761568247/manifest_destiny.html.

  • Faber, S., Rundquist, S., & Male, T. (2012). Plowed under: How crop subsidies contribute to massive habitat losses. Environmental Working Group. http://www.ewg.org/. Accessed 7 Aug 2012.

  • FAO. (2011). In D. B. Hannaway & H. A. Fribourg (Eds.), Country pasture/forage resource profiles, United States of America. Rome, Italy: Food and Agricultural Organization. http://www.fao.org/ag/Agp/AGPC/doc/Counprof/PDF%20files/USA.pdf.

  • GAO. (1977). To protect tomorrow’s food supply, soil conservation needs priority attention. CED 77-30. GAO, Washington, DC. http://www.gao.gov/products/CED-77-30.

  • Gray, L. C., Bennett, J. B., Kraemer, E., & Sparhawk, W. N. (1938). The causes: Traditional attitudes and institutions. In Soils and men USDA yearbook of agriculture (pp. 111–135). Washington, DC: USA Government Printing Office.

  • Hancock, B., Windridge, K., Ockleford, E. (2007). An introduction to qualitative research. The National Institute of Health Research, Research Design Service for the East Midlands, Yorkshire and the Humbler.

  • Harlin, J., & Barardi, G. (1987). Agricultural soil loss. Boulder: Westview.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, V. (1947). Heaven’s tableland: The dust bowl story. New York: Farrar, Straus and Company.

  • Johnston, C. (2013). Wetland losses due to row crop expansion in the Dakota Prairie Pothole Region. Wetlands, 33(1), 175–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H., & Andersen, D. F. (2012). Building confidence in casual maps generated from purposive text data: Mapping transcripts of the Federal Reserve. System Dynamics Review, 28(4), 311–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, L. K. (1984). Land use and soil loss: A 1982 update. Journal of Soil Water Conservation, 39, 226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leopold, A. (1949). A sand county almanac. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockeretz, W. (1978). The lessons of the dust bowl: Several decades before the current concern with environmental problems, dust storms ravaged the Great Plains, and the threat of more dust storms still hangs over us. American Scientist, 66(5), 550–569.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meijboom, F. L. B., & Brom, F. W. A. (2012). Ethics and sustainability: Guest or guide? On sustainability as a moral ideal. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 25, 117–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moodley, K., Smith, N., & Preece, C. N. (2008). Stakeholder matrix for ethical relationships in the construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 26, 625–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Philpott, T. (2008). A reflection on the lasting legacy of 1970s USDA Secretary Earl Butz. http://grist.org/article/the-butz-stops-here/.

  • Preston, L. E. (1975). Corporation and society: The search for a paradigm. Journal of Economic Literature, 13, 434–453.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed, M. S., Graves, A., Dandy, N., Posthumas, H., Hubacek, K., Morris, J., et al. (2009). Who’s in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. Journal of Environmental Management, 90, 1933–1949.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reimer, A. P., Thompson, A. W., & Prokopy, L. S. (2012). The multi-dimensional nature of environmental attitudes among farmers in Indiana: Implications for conservation adoption. Agriculture and Human Values, 29, 29–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, S., Dixon, J. R., Preece, C. N., & Moodley, K. (2007). Engineering, business and professional ethics. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roosevelt, T. R. (1907a). Seventh state of the union address, December 3, 1907. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Theodore_Roosevelt%27s_Seventh_State_of_the_Union_Address.

  • Roosevelt, T. R. (1907b). Address to the deep waterway convention, Memphis, TN. October 4, 1907.

  • Sachs, A. (1994). Dust to dust: Forgotten lessons of America’s great agricultural catastrophe. World Watch, 7(1), 32–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sohl, T. L., Sleeter, B. M., Sayler, K. L., Bouchard, M. A., Reker, R. R., Bennett, S. L., et al. (2012). Spatially explicit land-use and land-cover scenarios for the Great Plains of the United States. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 153, 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stegner, W. (1992). Beyond the hundredth meredian. New York: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephens, S. E., Walker, J. A., Blunck, D. R., Jayarman, A., Naugle, D. E., Ringleman, J. K., et al. (2008). Predicting risk of habitat conversion in native temperate grasslands. Conservation Biology, 22(5), 1320–1330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, P. B. (1990). Agricultural ethics and economics. Journal of Agricultural Economics Research, 42(1), 3–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thoreau, H. D. (1854). Walden. New York: New American Library, Penguin Putnam Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varvasovszky, Z., & Brugha, R. (2000). Stakeholder analysis: A review. Heath Policy Plan, 15(3), 239–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warwick, S. L., & Cochoran, P. L. (1985). The evolution of the corporate social performance model. Academy of Management Review, 4, 758–769.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, C. K., & Wimberly, M. C. (2012). Recent land use change in the Western Corn Belt threatens grasslands and wetlands. Proceeding to the National Academy of Sciences, 110(10), 4134–4139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benjamin L. Turner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Turner, B.L., Wuellner, M., Nichols, T. et al. Dueling Land Ethics: Uncovering Agricultural Stakeholder Mental Models to Better Understand Recent Land Use Conversion. J Agric Environ Ethics 27, 831–856 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-014-9494-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-014-9494-y

Keywords

Navigation