What Ohioans Think About Food, Agriculture, and Environmental Issues

1
What Ohioans Think About Food, Agriculture, and
Environmental Issues

• Presentation by Jeff S. Sharp
• Rural Sociological Summit
• Columbus, Ohio
• December 12, 2002

2
Project Background

• Funded by OSU Extension, OARDC and the College of
  FAES
• Focus on social issues in agriculture as they
  relate to the ecological paradigm

3
Project Team

• Study conducted by a team associated with
  Department of HCRD and OSU Extension.
• Jeff Sharp, Molly Bean Smith, Bill Flinn, Mark
  Tucker, Holli Kendall, Linda Lobao, Sherrie
  Whaley, Greg Davis, Jerry Thomas, Denny Hall

4
Methodology

• A stratified sample of 7,976 Ohioans was selected
• Stratified by 5 extension districts and metro
  core county status
• Dillmans TDM utilized with 5 contacts
• Response rate 56.4

5
Sample vs. State Population (2000 Census)

• Close match gender, age (over 24), households w/
  kids, employment status and household incomes
• Limitations
• sample had lower proportion of renters, lower
  of 18-24 year olds, and lower proportion of
  African Americans than expected compared to state
  population statistics

6
Outline of Presentation

• Overview of some general ag-related findings
• Focus on livestock
• Familiarity with the issues
• Level of concern about large-scale livestock
• Brief review of other topical research/findings
• Future plans

7
Links to Farming and Rural Areas
8
Parents ever owned or operated a farm
9
Grandparents ever owned or operated a farm
10
Number of farmers known
11
Take a recreational drive through the country
12
Travel to a rural area to experience or view the
natural environment
13
Farmers and the Environment
14
Overall, farming positively contributes to the
quality of life in Ohio

• 2 Strongly Disagreed or Disagreed
• 6 Undecided
• 92 Agreed or Strongly Agreed

15
Ohios economy will suffer if it continues to
lose farmers

• 6 Strongly Disagreed or Disagreed
• 14 Undecided
• 80 Agreed or Strongly Agreed

16
Q. Ohios most productive farmland should be
preserved for agriculture.

• 2 Strongly Disagreed or Disagreed
• 6 Undecided
• 92 Agreed or Strongly Agreed

17
Q. I trust Ohio farmers to protect the
environment.

• 12 Strongly Disagreed or Disagreed
• 29 Undecided
• 59 Agreed or Strongly Agreed

18
Q. Ohio farmers are generally sensitive to the
concerns of nonfarm neighbors.

• 11 Strongly Disagreed or Disagreed
• 45 Undecided
• 44 Agreed or Strongly Agreed

19
Q. Environmental protection laws regulating
farming practices are too strict.

• 19 Strongly Disagreed or Disagreed
• 59 Undecided
• 22 Agreed or Strongly Agreed

20
Large-scale livestock and poultry
21
Familiarity with Issues

• Respondents were asked Are you familiar with the
  issues associated with large-scale poultry and
  livestock facilities?
• 33 percent of respondents indicated yes
• 66 percent indicated no

22
Familiarity by gender
23
Familiarity by place of residence
24
Familiarity by region of the state
25
Concern about livestock

• Respondents were asked How concerned are you
  about the development of large-scale poultry and
  livestock production facilities in Ohio?
• 21 percent very concerned
• 51 percent somewhat concerned
• 28 percent not at all concerned

26
Concern among those familiar with the issues

• Concern was higher among those indicating they
  were familiar with the issues
• 34 percent very concerned
• 51 percent somewhat concerned
• 15 percent not at all concerned

27
Level of Concern by age (among those familiar
with the issues)
28
Level of Concern by region (among those familiar
with the issues)
29
Attitudes about livestock among those familiar w/
the issue
30
Q. Large-scale poultry and livestock production
facilities in rural areas are a threat to rural
quality of life.

• 22 Strongly Disagreed or Disagreed
• 19 Undecided
• 59 Agreed or Strongly Agreed

31
Q. There needs to be increased regulation of
livestock production in Ohio to protect the
environment.

• 17 Strongly Disagreed or Disagreed
• 26 Undecided
• 57 Agreed or Strongly Agreed

32
Q. Large-scale poultry and livestock facilities
pose a serious threat to water and stream quality
in Ohio

• 11 Strongly Disagreed or Disagreed
• 18 Undecided
• 71 Agreed or Strongly Agreed

33
Q. Large-scale livestock facilities positively
contribute to the economy of Ohio.

• 14 Strongly Disagreed or Disagreed
• 27 Undecided
• 59 Agreed or Strongly Agreed

34
Q. In general, increased regulation of the
treatment of animals in farming is needed.

• 23 Strongly Disagreed or Disagreed
• 29 Undecided
• 48 Agreed or Strongly Agreed

35
Q. Animal agriculture raises serious ethical
questions about the treatment of animals

• 24 Strongly Disagreed or Disagreed
• 41 Undecided
• 35 Agreed or Strongly Agreed

36
Modeling results related to livestock measures
37
Models

• Dependents
• Familiarity with the issues
• Livestock Welfare concern
• Rural and Environmental Impact Concerns
• Overall level of concern

38
Independent Measures

• Respondent demographics
• Region metro character
• Proximity to livestock
• Links and Networks with Farms/Rural
• Trust of Farmers

39
Findings Familiarity w/ Issues surrounding
livestock

• Age, education, being male are positively related
  to familiarity
• Living in central Ohio has a very strong positive
  relationship
• Parents owning a farm, frequency of conversing
  with a farmer, and frequency of visiting rural
  area is positively related
• Know of nearby facility has a very strong,
  positive relationship, living in a county with
  more livestock sales positively related to
  familiarity

40
Findings Concern for livestock welfare

• Women indicate more concern
• More educated indicate less concern
• Southwest Ohioans indicate less concern
• Less concern among those w/ parent owning a farm
  and those frequently meeting farm folks
• Strong pro-agrarian attitudes, greater concern
• Greater trust of farmers, less concern

41
Findings Concern rural/environment impacts

• Parents own a farm, less concern
• Near a facility, less concern but in a county
  with higher sales, more concern
• Pro-agrarian attitudes, greater concern
• Greater trust in farmers, less concern

42
Findings Overall concern

• Older respondents indicate greater concern
• Living near a facility, more overall concern
• Concern about rural/environmental impacts,
  substantial impact on level of concern
• Concern about animal welfare, more modest impact
  on level of concern

43
Wrap-up
44
Concluding Observations on Livestock

• Regional IssueNW, Central, and SE to some extent
• Social capital (trust and networks among
  farmers and nonfarmers) is associated with lower
  concern
• Family histories associated with agriculture
  appears to temper some concern

45
Concluding Observations on Livestock (cont.)

• Agrarianism associated with greater concern
  (perhaps a conflict between farming as way of
  life and a business)
• Animal welfare concernit exists could it grow?
• Environmental concern--the strongest factor in
  this analysis where will it trend in the future?

46
Other topical report series

• Food Safety
• Agricultural land-use and the environment
• Animal Welfare
• Agrarianism and links to agriculture

47
Previews of future analysis

• Food Safety
• Over 39 percent of respondents agreed or strongly
  agreed that food is not as safe as it was 10
  years ago
• Nearly 62 percent of respondents indicated they
  were undecided as to whether biotechnology is
  having a negative impact on the safety of our
  food supply

48
Future plans

• Additional analysis and associated Extension and
  research manuscripts to be generated through
  mid-2003
• Willingness to do customized analysis for
  interested parties
• Explore possibility of repeating study in 2004
  examining these and other emerging FAE issues