IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jfpoli/v54y2015icp25-34.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identifying viewpoints on innovation in low-input and organic dairy supply chains: A Q-methodological study

Author

Listed:
  • Mandolesi, Serena
  • Nicholas, Philippa
  • Naspetti, Simona
  • Zanoli, Raffaele

Abstract

In a rapidly changing ecological, economic and political environment, environmentally sustainable and energy-efficient farming systems are required (SCAR, 2008). The development and adoption of innovation are critical to improve the competitiveness of organic and low-input dairy systems. Understanding the viewpoints of dairy supply-chain members on acceptable innovation is important to be able to improve organic and low-input dairy supply chains. This study uses Stephenson’s Q methodology to investigate the opinions of organic and low-input dairy supply-chain members in relation to innovation in the dairy sector. A sample of dairy supply-chain members (consumers, farmers, retailers, processors) was recruited from each European country involved in the study (Belgium, Italy, Finland, the United Kingdom). On the one hand, the data show a high degree of consensus across all of the participants within the supply chain, for whom innovations were deemed not to be acceptable in organic (from an ethical and/or regulatory perspective) and low-input dairy systems. On the other hand, the consumer views of acceptable dairy innovations were centred around animal welfare, while the farmers and processors/retailers preferred innovations related to feed quality, feed efficiency, and soil management. This study illustrates the value of Q methodology in eliciting subjectivities about food-policy-related issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Mandolesi, Serena & Nicholas, Philippa & Naspetti, Simona & Zanoli, Raffaele, 2015. "Identifying viewpoints on innovation in low-input and organic dairy supply chains: A Q-methodological study," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 25-34.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:54:y:2015:i:c:p:25-34
    DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2015.04.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919215000457
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.foodpol.2015.04.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cyril Burt & William Stephenson, 1939. "Alternative views on correlations between persons," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 4(4), pages 269-281, December.
    2. Naspetti, Simona & Lampkin, Nicolas & Nicolas, P. & Stolze, Matthias & Zanoli, Raffaele, 2009. "Organic supply chain collaboration: a case study in eight EU Countries," 113th Seminar, September 3-6, 2009, Chania, Crete, Greece 58105, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Brodt, Sonja & Klonsky, Karen & Tourte, Laura, 2006. "Farmer goals and management styles: Implications for advancing biologically based agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 90-105, July.
    4. Davies, B.B. & Hodge, I.D., 2007. "Exploring environmental perspectives in lowland agriculture: A Q methodology study in East Anglia, UK," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 323-333, March.
    5. Wm. Stephenson, 1936. "The foundations of psychometry: Four factor systems," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 1(3), pages 195-209, September.
    6. Dryzek, John S. & Berejikian, Jeffrey, 1993. "Reconstructive Democratic Theory," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(1), pages 48-60, March.
    7. Eden, Sally & Bear, Christopher & Walker, Gordon, 2008. "The sceptical consumer? Exploring views about food assurance," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 624-630, December.
    8. Barry, John & Proops, John, 1999. "Seeking sustainability discourses with Q methodology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 337-345, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Simona Naspetti & Serena Mandolesi & Jeroen Buysse & Terhi Latvala & Philippa Nicholas & Susanne Padel & Ellen J. Van Loo & Raffaele Zanoli, 2017. "Determinants of the Acceptance of Sustainable Production Strategies among Dairy Farmers: Development and Testing of a Modified Technology Acceptance Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-16, October.
    2. Simona Naspetti & Serena Mandolesi & Jeroen Buysse & Terhi Latvala & Phillipa Nicholas & Susanne Padel & Ellen J. Loo & Raffaele Zanoli, 2021. "Consumer perception of sustainable practices in dairy production," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-26, December.
    3. Iofrida, Nathalie & De Luca, Anna Irene & Gulisano, Giovanni & Strano, Alfio, 2018. "An application of Q-methodology to Mediterranean olive production – stakeholders' understanding of sustainability issues," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 46-55.
    4. Zagata, Lukas & Uhnak, Tomas & Hrabák, Jiří, 2021. "Moderately radical? Stakeholders' perspectives on societal roles and transformative potential of organic agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    5. Franz Sinabell & Fabian Unterlass & Peter Walder & Jochen Kantelhardt, 2017. "Austria 2025 – Innovation: A Motor of Growth and Employment in the Rural Economy," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 60604, February.
    6. Góngora, R. & Milán, M.J. & López-i-Gelats, F., 2019. "Pathways of incorporation of young farmers into livestock farming," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 183-194.
    7. Franz Sinabell & Fabian Unterlass & Peter Walder & Jochen Kantelhardt, 2017. "Österreich 2025 – Innovation: der Motor für Wachstum und Beschäftigung in der ländlichen Wirtschaft," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 60801, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tahereh Zobeidi & Masoud Yazdanpanah & Masoumeh Forouzani & Bahman Khosravipour, 2016. "Climate change discourse among Iranian farmers," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 521-535, October.
    2. Latvala, Terhi & Mandolesi, Serena & Nicholas, Phillipa & Zanoli, Raffaele, 2013. "Identifying Expectations for Innovations in Management Practices in Dairy Sector by Using Q Methodology," 2013 International European Forum, February 18-22, 2013, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 164734, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    3. Winkler, Klara J. & Nicholas, Kimberly A., 2016. "More than wine: Cultural ecosystem services in vineyard landscapes in England and California," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 86-98.
    4. Gruszka, Katarzyna & Scharbert, Annika Regine & Soder, Michael, 2017. "Leaving the mainstream behind? Uncovering subjective understandings of economics instructors' roles," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 485-498.
    5. Cuppen, Eefje, 2012. "A quasi-experimental evaluation of learning in a stakeholder dialogue on bio-energy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 624-637.
    6. Serena Mandolesi & Emilia Cubero Dudinskaya & Simona Naspetti & Francesco Solfanelli & Raffaele Zanoli, 2022. "Freedom of Choice—Organic Consumers’ Discourses on New Plant Breeding Techniques," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-17, July.
    7. Eefje Cuppen, 2012. "Diversity and constructive conflict in stakeholder dialogue: considerations for design and methods," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 45(1), pages 23-46, March.
    8. Sneegas, Gretchen & Beckner, Sydney & Brannstrom, Christian & Jepson, Wendy & Lee, Kyungsun & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2021. "Using Q-methodology in environmental sustainability research: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    9. Nordhagen, Stella & Pascual, Unai & Drucker, Adam G., 2017. "Feeding the Household, Growing the Business, or Just Showing Off? Farmers' Motivations for Crop Diversity Choices in Papua New Guinea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 99-109.
    10. Buckwell, Andrew & Fleming, Christopher & Muurmans, Maggie & Smart, James & Mackey, Brendan, 2020. "Revealing the dominant discourses of stakeholders towards natural resource management in Port Resolution, Vanuatu, using Q-method," 2020 Conference (64th), February 12-14, 2020, Perth, Western Australia 305231, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    11. Clare Hall & Anita Wreford, 2012. "Adaptation to climate change: the attitudes of stakeholders in the livestock industry," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 207-222, February.
    12. Buckley, Cathal & Howley, Peter & Jordan, Phil, 2015. "The role of differing farming motivations on the adoption of nutrient management practices," International Journal of Agricultural Management, Institute of Agricultural Management, vol. 4(4), July.
    13. Katarzyna Gruszka & Annika Scharbert & Michael Soder, 2016. "Changing the world one student at a time? Uncovering subjective understandings of economics instructors' roles," Ecological Economics Papers ieep7, Institute of Ecological Economics.
    14. Leonhardt, Heidi & Braito, Michael & Uehleke, Reinhard, 2021. "Who participates in agri-environmental schemes? A mixed-methods approach to investigate the role of farmer archetypes in scheme uptake and participation level," FORLand Working Papers 27 (2021), Humboldt University Berlin, DFG Research Unit 2569 FORLand "Agricultural Land Markets – Efficiency and Regulation".
    15. Pereira, Mariana A. & Fairweather, John R. & Woodford, Keith B. & Nuthall, Peter L., 2016. "Assessing the diversity of values and goals amongst Brazilian commercial-scale progressive beef farmers using Q-methodology," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 1-8.
    16. Urquhart, Julie & Courtney, Paul, 2011. "Seeing the owner behind the trees: A typology of small-scale private woodland owners in England," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(7), pages 535-544, September.
    17. Upadhaya, Suraj & Arbuckle, J. Gordon & Schulte, Lisa A., 2021. "Developing farmer typologies to inform conservation outreach in agricultural landscapes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    18. Huaranca, Laura Liliana & Iribarnegaray, Martín Alejandro & Albesa, Federico & Volante, José Norberto & Brannstrom, Christian & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2019. "Social Perspectives on Deforestation, Land Use Change, and Economic Development in an Expanding Agricultural Frontier in Northern Argentina," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    19. Cuppen, Eefje & Breukers, Sylvia & Hisschemöller, Matthijs & Bergsma, Emmy, 2010. "Q methodology to select participants for a stakeholder dialogue on energy options from biomass in the Netherlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 579-591, January.
    20. Góngora, R. & Milán, M.J. & López-i-Gelats, F., 2019. "Pathways of incorporation of young farmers into livestock farming," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 183-194.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:54:y:2015:i:c:p:25-34. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/foodpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.