IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/umcowp/26040.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Ethics Of Constrained Choice: How The Industrialization Of Agriculture Impacts Farming And Farmer Behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Hendrickson, Mary K.
  • James, Harvey S., Jr.

Abstract

The industrialization of agriculture not only alters the ways in which agricultural production occurs, but also impacts the decisions farmers make in important ways. First, constraints created by the economic environment of farming limit what options a farmer has available to him. Second, because of the industrialization of agriculture and the resulting economic pressures it creates for farmers, the fact that decision are constrained creates new ethical challenges for farmers. Having fewer options when faced with severe economic pressures is a very different situation for farmers than having many options available. We discuss the implications of constrained choice and show that it increases the likelihood that farmers will consider unethical behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Hendrickson, Mary K. & James, Harvey S., Jr., 2004. "The Ethics Of Constrained Choice: How The Industrialization Of Agriculture Impacts Farming And Farmer Behavior," Working Papers 26040, University of Missouri Columbia, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:umcowp:26040
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.26040
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/26040/files/wp040003.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.26040?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Levins, Richard A., 2001. "An Essay On Farm Income," Staff Papers 13559, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    2. Glazer, Rashi & Kahn, Barbara E & Moore, William L, 1991. "The Influence of External Constraints on Brand Choice: The Lone-Alternative Effect," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 18(1), pages 119-127, June.
    3. repec:bla:devpol:v:21:y:2003:i::p:333-355 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. C. Hinrichs & Rick Welsh, 2003. "The effects of the industrialization of US livestock agriculture on promoting sustainable production practices," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 20(2), pages 125-141, June.
    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. Judith Janker, 2020. "Moral conflicts, premises and the social dimension of agricultural sustainability," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 37(1), pages 97-111, March.

    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. Megan Swindal & Gilbert Gillespie & Rick Welsh, 2010. "Community digester operations and dairy farmer perspectives," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 27(4), pages 461-474, December.
    2. Jill Harrison & Christy Getz, 2015. "Farm size and job quality: mixed-methods studies of hired farm work in California and Wisconsin," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 32(4), pages 617-634, December.
    3. Soler, Louis-Georges & Thomas, Alban, 2020. "Is there a win-win scenario with both limited beef production and reduced beef consumption?," TSE Working Papers 20-1067, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    4. Louis-Georges Soler & Alban Thomas, 2020. "Is there a win–win scenario with increased beef quality and reduced consumption?," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 101(1), pages 91-116, October.
    5. James, Harvey S., Jr. & Hendrickson, Mary K., 2009. "Are Farmers of the Middle Distinctively “Good Stewards?” Evidence from the Missouri Farm Poll, 2006," Working Papers 92623, University of Missouri Columbia, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    6. Siwi Gayatri & Vincent Gasso-tortajada & Mette Vaarst, 2016. "Assessing Sustainability of Smallholder Beef Cattle Farming in Indonesia: A Case Study Using the FAO SAFA Framework," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(3), pages 236-236, April.
    7. Gita Surie, 2017. "Achieving Sustainability: Insights from Biogas Ecosystems in India," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-20, February.
    8. Mark Heitmann & Andreas Herrmann & Christian Kaiser, 2007. "The effect of product variety on purchase probability," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 111-131, August.
    9. Manrai, Ajay K., 1995. "Mathematical models of brand choice behavior," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 1-17, April.
    10. Michael Stahlman & Laura McCann, 2012. "Technology characteristics, choice architecture, and farmer knowledge: the case of phytase," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 29(3), pages 371-379, September.
    11. Gonzalez-Prieto, David & Sallan, Jose M. & Simo, Pep & Carrion, Raimon, 2013. "Effects of the addition of simple and double decoys on the purchasing process of airline tickets," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 39-45.
    12. Holgar Müller & Eike Benjamin Kroll & Bodo Vogt, 2009. "Fact or Artifact Does the compromise effect occur when subjects face real consequences of their choices?," FEMM Working Papers 09009, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    13. Marcel Lichters & Marko Sarstedt & Bodo Vogt, 2015. "On the practical relevance of the attraction effect: A cautionary note and guidelines for context effect experiments," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 5(1), pages 1-19, June.
    14. Francisca Sinn & Sandra Milberg & Leonardo Epstein & Ronald Goodstein, 2007. "Compromising the compromise effect: Brands matter," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 223-236, December.
    15. Eugene J. S. Won, 2007. "—A Theoretical Investigation of the Effects of Similarity on Brand Choice Using the Elimination-by-Tree Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 868-875, 11-12.
    16. Marcel Lichters & Marko Sarstedt & Bodo Vogt, 2015. "On the practical relevance of the attraction effect: A cautionary note and guidelines for context effect experiments," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 5(1), pages 1-19, June.
    17. C. Hinrichs & Rick Welsh, 2003. "The effects of the industrialization of US livestock agriculture on promoting sustainable production practices," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 20(2), pages 125-141, June.
    18. Douglas H. Constance, 2023. "The doctors of agrifood studies," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(1), pages 31-43, March.
    19. Jennifer Hayden & Sarah Rocker & Hannah Phillips & Bradley Heins & Andrew Smith & Kathleen Delate, 2018. "The Importance of Social Support and Communities of Practice: Farmer Perceptions of the Challenges and Opportunities of Integrated Crop–Livestock Systems on Organically Managed Farms in the Northern U," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-26, December.
    20. Thiago Lima, 2015. "Agricultural Subsidies for Non-farm Interests: An Analysis of the US Agro-industrial Complex," Agrarian South: Journal of Political Economy, Centre for Agrarian Research and Education for South, vol. 4(1), pages 54-84, April.

    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:ags:umcowp:26040. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/daumous.html .

    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.