Risk and risk management in organic agriculture: Views of organic farmers

Hanson, James A.; Dismukes, Robert; Chambers, William; Greene, Catherine; Kremen, Amy

doi:10.1079/rafs200482

Cited by 111 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 6 publications

(3 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, according to a study conducted in the United States by Hanson et al (2004), OF has remarkable potential to positively affect farmers' risk by diversifying products through intercropping and rotation and to help them reduce the risk of main crop failures. Hence, OF as a low-risk strategy is a feasible option for farmers in the United States [57], yet this advantage is not the same for all regions.…”

Section: Organic Farmingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A World without Hunger: Organic or GM Crops?

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been estimated that the world population will increase to 9.2 billion by 2050; supplying the growing population with food will require a significant increase in agricultural production. A number of agricultural and ecological scientists believe that a large-scale shift to organic farming (OF) would not only increase the world's food supply, but might be the only way to eradicate hunger sustainably. Nevertheless, OF has recently come under new scrutiny, not just from critics who fear that a large-scale shift in this direction would cause billions to starve but also from farmers and development agencies who question whether such a shift could improve food security. Meanwhile, the use of genetically modified (GM) crops is growing around the world, leading to possible opportunities to combat food insecurity and hunger. However, the development of GM crops has been a matter of considerable interest and worldwide public controversy. So far, no one has comprehensively analyzed whether a widespread shift to OF or GM would be the sole solution for both food security and safety. Using a literature review from databases of peer-reviewed scientific publications, books, and official publications, this study aims to address this issue. Results indicate that OF and GM, to different extents, are able to ensure food security and safety. In developed countries, given that there are relatively few farmers and that their productivity, even without GMOs, is relatively high, OF could be more a viable option. However, OF is significantly less efficient in land-use terms and may lead to more land being used for agriculture due to its lower yield. In developing countries, where many small-scale farmers have low agricultural productivity and limited access to agricultural technologies and information, an approach with both GM and OF might be a more realistic approach to ensure food security and safety.

show abstract

Section: Organic Farmingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A World without Hunger: Organic or GM Crops?

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A farmer's income or resource base and ability to obtain credit will also influence his/her choice of crops, farming systems, and willingness to invest in new crops, systems, or technologies (McCann 1997, Knowler andBradshaw 2007). A risk-averse farmer or one who is credit or income-constrained (which often is the norm rather than the exception, particularly in developing countries) may be less likely to adopt new technologies, even if they are likely to reduce his susceptibility to risk or increase productivity or income over the long-run (Nerlove et al 1996, Hanson et al 2004. Lack of knowledge and information about the costs and benefits of adopting new technologies or conservation practices or lack of knowledge about how to implement such technologies or practices will also affect a farmer's propensity to adopt them Kim 2010).…”

Section: Factors That Impact the Profitability Of Agricultural Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Just as individual consumers have different preferences about products they consume, farmer characteristics, asset endowments, risk preferences, and intertemporal considerations affect their choices. Farmer attitudes, resource availability, and education and knowledge are especially important; farmers may be riskaverse toward making changes in cropping decisions or adopting new agricultural practices, or might have very conservative attitudes toward technology or lower or higher levels of concern for the natural environment (McCann 1997, Hanson et al 2004, Musshoff and Hirschauer 2008, Serra et al 2008. A farmer's income or resource base and ability to obtain credit will also influence his/her choice of crops, farming systems, and willingness to invest in new crops, systems, or technologies (McCann 1997, Knowler andBradshaw 2007).…”

Section: Factors That Impact the Profitability Of Agricultural Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic Factors Affecting Diversified Farming Systems

Bowman¹,

Zilberman²

2013

E&S

205

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. In response to a shift toward specialization and mechanization during the 20th century, there has been momentum on the part of a vocal contingent of consumers, producers, researchers, and policy makers who call for a transition toward a new model of agriculture. This model employs fewer synthetic inputs, incorporates practices which enhance biodiversity and environmental services at local, regional, and global scales, and takes into account the social implications of production practices, market dynamics, and product mixes. Within this vision, diversified farming systems (DFS) have emerged as a model that incorporates functional biodiversity at multiple temporal and spatial scales to maintain ecosystem services critical to agricultural production. Our aim is to provide an economists' perspective on the factors which make diversified farming systems (DFS) economically attractive, or not-so-attractive, to farmers, and to discuss the potential for and roadblocks to widespread adoption. We focus on how a range of existing and emerging factors drive profitability and adoption of DFS. We believe that, in order for DFS to thrive, a number of structural changes are needed. These include: 1) public and private investment in the development of low-cost, practical technologies that reduce the costs of production in DFS, 2) support for and coordination of evolving markets for ecosystem services and products from DFS and 3) the elimination of subsidies and crop insurance programs that perpetuate the unsustainable production of staple crops. We suggest that subsidies and funding be directed, instead, toward points 1) and 2), as well as toward incentives for consumption of nutritious food.

show abstract

“…This approach constrains the efficiency of their tactical adoption. Along the same lines, Wisconsin farmers in the USA agreed that their group sharing greatly supported each of them in selecting and correctly applying appropriate risk management strategies through learning from others' experiences (Hanson et al 2004); similarly, the research of Baez and Mason (2008) in Latin America concluded that the rate of recovery and the aftershock steady state of farming households appear to be further enhanced by higher levels of skill and education.…”

Section: Impact Of Household Characteristics On the Application Of Thmentioning

confidence: 95%

Assessment of household risk management strategies for coastal aquaculture: the case of clam farming in Thaibinh Province, Vietnam

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clam farmers have experienced different types of risks that have been further exacerbated by the rapid expansion of clam farming areas, increased growing densities, and increased market difficulties in recent years in the Thaibinh Province of Vietnam. Most farmers have been seriously affected by production risk, market risk, and financial risk, while a number of others have met with success in almost all of their clam-raising cycles. This study applied a differentiating comparative analysis method and multiple discriminant analysis method to discuss the differences in risk management strategies between and among clam farming households and the impacts of those differences on their success/failure rates. In general, the tactics are related to increase in farm size, the application of technical innovations, diversifying livelihood activities, and accessing secure financial sources all provided better conditions for clam growth, diminished losses, and led to speedier recovery from shocks. To support farmers in managing risks, several government interventions are needed: (1) better re-zoning of clam farming areas in parallel with an increase in the farm size of each household, (2) promoting sustainable linkages between the farmers and the formal financial market and output market, and (3) investing more funding into research and extension related to sustainable clam farming practices and to the improvement of farmers' skills in cooperative works and management.

show abstract

Risk and risk management in organic agriculture: Views of organic farmers

Abstract: this work was provided by the Risk Management Agency, USDA. The views expressed in this article do not necessarily represent those of the University of Maryland or USDA.

Cited by 111 publications

References 6 publications

A World without Hunger: Organic or GM Crops?

A World without Hunger: Organic or GM Crops?

Economic Factors Affecting Diversified Farming Systems

Assessment of household risk management strategies for coastal aquaculture: the case of clam farming in Thaibinh Province, Vietnam

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About