T he adoption/diffusion model, developed in the United States by rural sociologists (Rogers 1983), is a very important model describing a process of change, i.e. the diffusion of an innovation into a community. It attempted to predict the adoption behaviour of individuals by looking at their personal characteristics, the time factor and the characteristics of the innovation itself. The model was, for a long time, the main theoretical model for agricultural extension and the development of agricultural advisory services (Albrecht 1980;Vanclay and Lawrence 1994).At first, the model appears ideally suited to the process of adoption of organic agriculture. However, some doubts arise if the background of the adoption research is considered. It was developed at the height of the productivity paradigm for agriculture and the 'green revolution.' Organic farming, on the other hand, is a challenge to this productivity paradigm, with a wide range of environmental and sustainability objectives, and one of the main areas of criticism of the model was concerned with its suitability to study environmental change in agriculture (e.g. Buttel et al. 1990;Heffernan 1982;Nowak 1982) (see below).The intention of this paper is to review a large number of studies of organic farmers carried out in several countries over a period of approx. 20 years and critically assess whether or not the results appear to fit the framework of the adoption model. If this is the case the model could help to improve the understanding of the diffusion of organic farming into the farming community and how this process can be supported, for example through organic farming information and advisory services. If this is not the case, the analysis might highlight potential weaknesses of the model.After a summary of the adoption/diffusion model and a short description of organic farming and its development in Europe, the next section compares the results of studies of organic farmers with the personal and social characteristics of the categories of early adopters of other innovations. This is followed by a section about organic farming compared to other innovations that were the focus of adoption research. After a short summary of the main criticisms of the adoption model, the paper finishes with some tentative conclusions and recommendations. 41 Conversion to Organic Farming Summary of the adoption/diffusion model
Purpose-The purpose of the paper is to explore the values that underlie consumers purchasing decisions of organic food. Design/methodology/approach-The paper draws on data from focus groups and laddering interviews with a total of 181 regular and occasional consumers of organic food that were contrasted with survey results of other studies. Findings-The results show that most consumers associate organic at first with vegetables and fruit and a healthy diet with organic products. Fruit and vegetables are also the first and in many cases only experience with buying organic product. The decision-making process is complex and the importance of motives and barriers may vary between product categories. Research limitations/implications-While further research would be required to facilitate full understanding of the consumer-decision making process with regard to organic produce, this work indicates the complexity of the process and the likelihood of variation between different product categories. Future research should consider tradeoffs that consumers make between values and product as well as consumer segmentation. Originality/value-Prior research concerning the consumer decision-making process with regard to organically produced food is limited. Theses findings have implications for future sector-based communications to consumers and, potentially, for product development and labelling.
ABSTRACT. Although the literature on sustainability assessment tools to support decision making in agriculture is rapidly growing, little attention has been paid to the actual tool choice. We focused on the choice of more complex integrated indicator-based tools at the farm level. The objective was to determine key characteristics as criteria for tool choice. This was done with an in-depth comparison of 2 cases: the Monitoring Tool for Integrated Farm Sustainability and the Public Goods Tool. They differ in characteristics that may influence tool choice: data, time, and budgetary requirements. With an enhanced framework, we derived 11 key characteristics to describe differences between the case tools. Based on the key characteristics, we defined 2 types of indicator-based tools: full sustainability assessment (FSA) and rapid sustainability assessment (RSA). RSA tools are more oriented toward communicating and learning. They are therefore more suitable for use by a larger group of farmers, can help to raise awareness, trigger farmers to become interested in sustainable farming, and highlight areas of good or bad performance. If and when farmers increase their commitment to on-farm sustainability, they can gain additional insight by using an FSA tool. Based on complementary and modular use of the tools, practical recommendations for the different end users, i.e., researchers, farmers, advisers, and so forth, have been suggested.
When trying to optimize the sustainability performance of farms and farming systems, a consideration of trade-offs and synergies between different themes and dimensions is required. The aim of this paper is to perform a systematic analysis of trade-offs and synergies across all dimensions and themes. To achieve this aim we used the Sustainability Monitoring and Assessment Routine (SMART)-Farm Tool which operationalizes the Sustainability Assessment of Food and Agriculture Systems (SAFA) Guidelines by defining science-based indicator sets and assessment procedures. It identifies the degree of goal achievement with respect to the 58 themes defined in the SAFA Guidelines using an impact matrix that defines 327 indicators and 1769 relations between sustainability themes and indicators. We illustrate how the SMART-Farm Tool can be successfully applied to assess the sustainability performance of farms of different types and in different geographic regions. Our analysis revealed important synergies between themes within a sustainability dimension and across dimensions. We found major trade-offs within the environmental dimension and between the environmental and economic dimension. The trade-offs within the environmental dimension were even larger than the trade-offs with other dimensions. The study also underlines the importance of the governance dimension with regard to achieving a good level of performance in the other dimensions.
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explain the growing interest of English consumers in local organic food sold through box schemes, by providing insights into the motives of customers of such schemes and examining the relationship with their awareness about problems of the agro-food system. Design/methodology/approach A mixed methods approach combined in-depth interviews with 22 box scheme customers with a quantitative survey of 416 consumers, analysed by means of principal component analysis and an ordered logit model. Findings Consumers of small local organic box schemes in England are both altruistically and hedonistically motivated. This includes a strong political motivation to change the current food system, as shown by the strong influence of an anti-globalisation factor and wanting to support small farmers. They perceive local organic food as a more environmentally sustainable alternative to the mainstream food system. The box schemes offer consumers a practical alternative by providing high quality products combined with convenience illustrating the importance of the latter also in local food shopping. This reinforces the possibility to successfully combining the attributes of “local” and “organic”. Research limitations/implications The study was conducted in only one country (England) with about 400 consumers of ten organic farmer-led box schemes. It was based on a self-selecting sample of consumers of such schemes, which included a large proportion of females and people with high level of education. Further research is needed to validate the results. Originality/value This study is the first academic study investigating the main factors affecting consumers’ choice to purchase local organic food through a number of English box schemes. It identifies that such consumers are ethically and politically motivated and show some differences compared with the general literature on organic food consumption.
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to consider whether UK consumers recognise and trust organic certification logos and whether the presence of these logos on a product increases consumer willingness to pay for that product.Design/methodology/approachTo ascertain the reaction of UK consumers to organic certification logos commonly used in the UK, this study makes use of three methods: focus groups, a consumer survey and a willingness to pay experiment (choice experiment).FindingsThese three approaches reveal that UK consumers associate certain benefits with organic foods but are generally unaware of how the industry is regulated. With regards to trust of the logo, the standards they think underlie the logo and the inspection system that they think is associated with the logo, UK consumers rate the Soil Association and Organic Farmers and Growers logos more highly than the EU logo or products labelled with just the word “organic”. They appear willing to pay a premium for the additional assurance that these two logos provide, suggesting that where they are recognised, certification logos are valued.Originality/valueTo the authors' knowledge, no previous studies exist on whether UK consumers recognise and trust different organic certification logos. These findings show that where such logos are recognised they can help to give some assurance to the UK consumer and this is reflected in a willingness to pay a premium for foods labelled with the Soil Association and Organic Farmers and Growers certification logos, as opposed to no logo or the (less well known) EU logo.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.