IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agrhuv/v38y2021i4d10.1007_s10460-021-10215-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using the ‘good farmer’ concept to explore agricultural attitudes to the provision of public goods. A case study of participants in an English agri-environment scheme

Author

Listed:
  • George Cusworth

    (University of Oxford)

  • Jennifer Dodsworth

    (University of Oxford)

Abstract

Across the European Union, the receipt of agricultural subsidisation is increasingly being predicated on the delivery of public goods. In the English context, in particular, these changes can be seen in the redirection of money to the new Environmental Land Management scheme. Such shifts reflect the changed expectations that society is placing on agriculture—from something that provides one good (food) to something that supplies many (food, access to green spaces, healthy rural environment, flood resilience, reduced greenhouse gas emissions). Whilst the reasons behind the changes are well documented, understanding how these shifts are being experienced by the managers expected to deliver on these new expectations is less well understood. Bourdieu’s social theory and the good farmer concept are used to attend to this blind spot, and to provide timely insight as the country progresses along its public goods subsidy transition. Evidence from 65 interviews with 40 different interviewees (25 of whom gave a repeat interview) show a general willingness towards the transition to a public goods model of subsidisation. The optimisation and efficiency that has historically characterised the productivist identity is colouring the way managers are approaching the delivery of public goods. Ideas of land sparing and land sharing (and the farming preference for the former over the latter) are used to help understand these new social and attitudinal realities. The policy implications of these findings are discussed, with reference to the new scheme’s ‘priority themes’.

Suggested Citation

  • George Cusworth & Jennifer Dodsworth, 2021. "Using the ‘good farmer’ concept to explore agricultural attitudes to the provision of public goods. A case study of participants in an English agri-environment scheme," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(4), pages 929-941, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:38:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s10460-021-10215-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s10460-021-10215-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10460-021-10215-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10460-021-10215-z?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. Bateman, Ian J. & Balmford, Ben, 2018. "Public funding for public goods: A post-Brexit perspective on principles for agricultural policy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 293-300.
    2. Henry Buller & Carol Morris, 2004. "Growing Goods: The Market, the State, and Sustainable Food Production," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 36(6), pages 1065-1084, June.
    3. Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer & Nick Hanley & Philippe Le Coent & Mathieu Désolé, 2016. "Nudges, Social Norms, and Permanence in Agri-environmental Schemes," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 92(4), pages 641-655.
    4. Zein Kallas & José A. Gómez‐Limón & Manuel Arriaza, 2007. "Are citizens willing to pay for agricultural multifunctionality?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 36(3), pages 405-419, May.
    5. Lee-Ann Sutherland, 2013. "Can organic farmers be ‘good farmers’? Adding the ‘taste of necessity’ to the conventionalization debate," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 30(3), pages 429-441, September.
    6. Murat Arsel & Bram Büscher, 2012. "Nature™ Inc.: Changes and Continuities in Neoliberal Conservation and Market-based Environmental Policy," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 53-78, January.
    7. Wigier, Marek (ed.) & Kowalski, Andrzej (ed.), 2018. "The CAP and national priorities within the EU budget after 2020," Multiannual Program Reports 302754, Institute of Agricultural and Food Economics - National Research Institute (IAFE-NRI).
    8. Nelson, Gerald C. & Rosegrant, Mark W. & Palazzo, Amanda & Gray, Ian & Ingersoll, Christina & Robertson, Richard & Tokgoz, Simla & Zhu, Tingju & Sulser, Timothy B. & Ringler, Claudia & Msangi, Siwa & , 2010. "Food security, farming, and climate change to 2050: Scenarios, results, policy options," Research reports Gerald C. Nelson, et al., International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    9. Walid Oueslati & Julien Salanie, 2011. "Landscape valuation and planning," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(1), pages 1-6.
    10. Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2005. "A tale of two market failures: Technology and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 164-174, August.
    11. Carmen Hubbard & John Davis & Siyi Feng & David Harvey & Anne Liddon & Andrew Moxey & Mercy Ojo & Myles Patton & George Philippidis & Charles Scott & Shailesh Shrestha & Michael Wallace, 2018. "Brexit: How Will UK Agriculture Fare?," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 17(2), pages 19-26, August.
    12. Meyer, Claas & Matzdorf, Bettina & Müller, Klaus & Schleyer, Christian, 2014. "Cross Compliance as payment for public goods? Understanding EU and US agricultural policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 185-194.
    13. Dieter Helm, 2017. "Agriculture after Brexit," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(suppl_1), pages 124-133.
    14. Matthew Gorton & Elodie Douarin & Sophia Davidova & Laure Latruffe, 2006. "Attitudes to farming and agricultural policy in the context of 2003 CAP reform: A comparison of farmers in selected established and new Member States," Post-Print hal-02283469, HAL.
    15. Ian Hodge, 2000. "Agri‐environmental Pelationships and the Choice of Policy Mechanism," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 257-273, February.
    16. Rob Burton, 2012. "Understanding Farmers' Aesthetic Preference for Tidy Agricultural Landscapes: A Bourdieusian Perspective," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 51-71.
    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. Dimitrios Iakovidis & Yiorgos Gadanakis & Julian Park, 2023. "Farmer and Adviser Perspectives on Business Planning and Control in Mediterranean Agriculture: Evidence from Argolida, Greece," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, February.
    2. Huang, Iona Y. & Behrendt, Karl & Parker, Eleanor & Hill, Nigel & Purewal, Amandeep Kaur & Swales, David & Baker, Sarah, 2022. "Ready or not, here I come: Understanding English farmers perceptions of the changes in UK agricultural and environmental policy," 96th Annual Conference, April 4-6, 2022, K U Leuven, Belgium 321210, Agricultural Economics Society - AES.
    3. Manel Díaz Llobet & Manel Plana-Farran & Micaela L. Riethmuller & Victor Rodríguez Lizano & Silvia Solé Cases & Mercè Teixidó, 2023. "Mapping the Research into Mental Health in the Farming Environment: A Bibliometric Review from Scopus and WoS Databases," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Rachel Opitz & Philippe De Smedt & Victorino Mayoral-Herrera & Stefano Campana & Marco Vieri & Eamonn Baldwin & Carolina Perna & Daniele Sarri & Jeroen Verhegge, 2023. "Practicing Critical Zone Observation in Agricultural Landscapes: Communities, Technology, Environment and Archaeology," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, January.

    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. Anthony M. Fuller & Siyuan Xu & Lee-Ann Sutherland & Fabiano Escher, 2021. "Land to the Tiller: The Sustainability of Family Farms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-24, October.
    2. Avery Lavoie & Chloe B. Wardropper, 2021. "Engagement with conservation tillage shaped by “good farmer” identity," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(4), pages 975-985, December.
    3. Jana Poláková & Josef Soukup, 2020. "Results of Implementing Less-Favoured Area Subsidies in the 2014–2020 Time Frame: Are the Measures of Environmental Concern Complementary?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-16, December.
    4. Arnott, David & Chadwick, David & Harris, Ian & Koj, Aleksandra & Jones, David L., 2019. "What can management option uptake tell us about ecosystem services delivery through agri-environment schemes?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 194-208.
    5. Katherine Dentzman & Jessica R. Goldberger, 2020. "Plastic scraps: biodegradable mulch films and the aesthetics of ‘good farming’ in US specialty crop production," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 37(1), pages 83-96, March.
    6. Kam, Hermann & Potter, Clive, 2024. "Who should deliver agri-environmental public goods in the UK? New land managers and their future role as public good providers," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    7. Bosetti, Valentina & Carraro, Carlo & Duval, Romain & Tavoni, Massimo, 2011. "What should we expect from innovation? A model-based assessment of the environmental and mitigation cost implications of climate-related R&D," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1313-1320.
    8. Vitaliy Roud & Thomas Wolfgang Thurner, 2018. "The Influence of State‐Ownership on Eco‐Innovations in Russian Manufacturing Firms," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(5), pages 1213-1227, October.
    9. Emanuele Massetti & Lea Nicita, 2010. "The Optimal Climate Policy Portfolio when Knowledge Spills across Sectors," CESifo Working Paper Series 2988, CESifo.
    10. Giancarlo Giudici & Massimiliano Guerini & Cristina Rossi-Lamastra, 2019. "The creation of cleantech startups at the local level: the role of knowledge availability and environmental awareness," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 815-830, April.
    11. Christoph P. Kiefer & Pablo Del Río González & Javier Carrillo‐Hermosilla, 2019. "Drivers and barriers of eco‐innovation types for sustainable transitions: A quantitative perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 155-172, January.
    12. Orsatti, Gianluca & Pezzoni, Michele & Quatraro, Francesco, 2017. "Where Do Green Technologies Come From? Inventor Teams’ Recombinant Capabilities and the Creation of New Knowledge," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201711, University of Turin.
    13. Jae Yun Jeong & Inje Kang & Ki Seok Choi & Byeong-Hee Lee, 2018. "Network Analysis on Green Technology in National Research and Development Projects in Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-12, April.
    14. Meike Weltin & Silke Hüttel, 2023. "Sustainable Intensification Farming as an Enabler for Farm Eco-Efficiency?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(1), pages 315-342, January.
    15. Yu-Hong Ai & Di-Yun Peng & Huan-Huan Xiong, 2021. "Impact of Environmental Regulation Intensity on Green Technology Innovation: From the Perspective of Political and Business Connections," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-23, April.
    16. Michael Peneder & Spyros Arvanitis & Christian Rammer & Tobias Stucki & Martin Wörter, 2022. "Policy instruments and self-reported impacts of the adoption of energy saving technologies in the DACH region," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 49(2), pages 369-404, May.
    17. Xing Xiong & Xinghou Yu & Yuxin Wang, 2022. "The impact of basic public services on residents’ consumption in China," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-8, December.
    18. Apak, Ömer Ceyhun & Gürbüz, Ahmet, 2023. "The effect of local food consumption of domestic tourists on sustainable tourism," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    19. Feser, Daniel & Runst, Petrik, 2016. "Energy efficiency consultants as change agents? Examining the reasons for EECs’ limited success," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 309-317.
    20. Clément Bonnet, 2016. "Revisiting the optimal patent policy tradeoff for environmental technologies," EconomiX Working Papers 2016-34, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.

    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:spr:agrhuv:v:38:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s10460-021-10215-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.