DOCSLIB.ORG

Farmers, Farming & Change

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Farmers, Farming & Change FARMERS, FARMING & CHANGE: A SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS Susan Guerrier Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Institute of Social Psychology London School of Economics and Political Science University of London September 2006 UMI Number: U237410 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U237410 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 TUfis'ES F € * 10 Library QnWST' Litxar y o# Pones* and Econofw- s*xhv > n ZSOlZ DECLARATION The work presented in this thesis is entirely my own. Signed: Susan Guerrier 18 September 2006 2 ABSTRACT The UK farming industry is in the midst of rapid change: policy change, decoupling support payments from production; social change, affecting the food consumers buy and from where they buy it; greater awareness of issues of food safety and animal welfare; and greater concern about matters of environmental protection and countryside access. Farmers find such change problematic. To understand how change is being experienced and understood in the farming industry three empirical studies were undertaken: semi­ structured interviews with farmers; narrative interviews with others in the agricultural public sphere; and a content analysis of Farmers Weekly, circulating in the agricultural industry, and The Times, circulating among the general public. Analysis was qualitative, using thematic and content analysis and incorporating the computer programmes ALCESTE and NVIVO. The results indicate that change is problematic for 3 reasons. Firstly, farmers’ identity and self-esteem as producers are being challenged. Secondly, farmers are receiving contradictory messages as to what their role should be. Thirdly, government involvement in the farming industry has created a ‘learned helplessness’ which impedes farmers’ agency to cope with change. The findings demonstrate the use of social representations theory in an applied social setting. They suggest that the structural approach places too much emphasis on the stability of the core of a representation. Observations made during the research are used to argue for a social psychology of change which will enable the discipline to become more adept at investigating and addressing the problems of contemporary society. 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My time in the Institute of Social Psychology at the LSE has been a privilege. That it came later, rather than earlier, in my life meant that I could fully savour the academic experience, without the career planning stresses which face younger students. I much enjoyed the intellectual stimulation of seminars with my fellow students and am full of admiration for many who were studying and debating complex concepts in a language not their own. Special thanks go to my supervisor, Professor George Gaskell. His clarity of thought and very great knowledge guided me through the morass of theory and methodology which engulf a PhD student. I would also like to record my thanks to Professor Cathy Campbell for endorsing my application for a place at the Institute, as well her support during my time here; to Dr Martin Bauer and Dr Caroline Howarth, my thesis committee, for their constructive comments; and to Dr Sandra Jovchelovitch for her elegant lucidity about social representations theory. Others in the Institute whom I acknowledge for their help are Daniel Linehan, Institute Manager, and Steve Bennett and Steve Gaskell, Institute Technicians. Time was generously given to me by all those who took part in the interviews. I am indebted to them, and particularly to Simon Clapp, Ron Duncan, Jim Stobo and George and Amanda Streatfeild, who recruited the farmer interviewees in Scotland and the South West. The Economic and Social Research Council provided financial support for the undertaking of this thesis, and their acceptance of the proposal confirmed to me that an investigation into why farmers found change difficult was a project worth doing. Producing a PhD thesis is a solitary endeavour. But long experience of the food and agricultural industries made my husband, Bill Marlow, an invaluable sounding board to discuss approaches and ideas as they developed. His encouragement and enthusiasm have motivated me. It would not have been possible without him. 4 Table of Contents Page 1 UK FARMERS, FARMING & CHANGE 12 1 The Scene of Change 13 1.2 The Problems of Change for Farmers 15 1.2.1 Exclusion from Decision Making & Centres of Power 17 1.2.2 Change in the Structure of the Markets Farmers * Serve 19 1.2.3 The Contested Nature of Land 20 1.3 Research Perspective and Research Objectives 25 1.4 From Hunter-Gatherers, Through the Golden Age of British Farming, to Farmers in Crisis: A Historical Precis 29 1.5 On Farmers, Farming & Being Rural: Conceptualising the Object of Study 34 1.6 Thesis Overview 45 2 SOCIAL REPRESENTATIONS THEORY IN THE ANALYSIS OF FARMERS, FARMING & CHANGE 47 2.1 The Role of the Social in Thought, Knowledge & Meaning 49 2.1.1 Dialogism 49 2.1.2 Communication 53 2.2 The Role of the Familiar, the Unfamiliar & the Making of Concepts 55 2.2.1 Making Familiar the Unfamiliar 55 2.2.2 How Concepts Arise 57 2.3 Identities: Making & Defending Them, Exclusion & Coping with Threat 59 2.3.1 Making & Defending Identities 59 2.3.2 Exclusion 64 2.3.3 Coping with Threat 70 Farmers, Farming & Change: A Social Psychological Analysis 5 2.4 The Accommodation of Change 71 2.5 Exploring Meaning in a Complex Social Object 73 3 STRATEGY & TACTICS TO ACCESS THE SOCIAL OBJECT 76 3.1 Research Strategy 76 3.1.1 Interpretation, Reliability, Validity & Transparency 78 3.1.2 Data analysis 81 3.2 Semi-structured Interviews 82 3.2.1 Interviewees & Interview Locations 83 3.2.2 Interview Structure & Topics 87 3.3 Narrative Interviews 89 3.3.1 Narrative & the Narrative Interview 90 3.3.2 Features of Narrative 91 3.3.3 Narrative as Data 92 3.3.4 Data collection 94 3.4 Content Analysis 98 3.4.1 Communication, the Media & Social Representations 98 3.4.2 Researching the Media 101 3.4.3 Corpus Construction 102 3.4.4 Corpus Analysis 106 3.5 Participant Observation 107 4 “IT’S A GOOD LIFE WITHOUT A DOUBT”: FARMERS’ EXPERIENCE OF CHANGE 110 4.1 Results 110 4.1.1 Self-Anchoring Ladder Scale no 4.1.2 ALCESTE Analysis 112 4.1.3 NVIVO Analysis 116 Farmers, Farming & Change: A Social Psychological Analysis 6 4.2 Interpreting the Findings 119 4.2.1 Farm Marketing 119 4.2.2 Country Life 120 4.2.3 Farming Business 122 4.2.4 Farm Practicalities 125 4.2.5 Politics 127 4.2.6 Being a Farmer 129 4.2.7 Farming's Future 133 4.3 Why is Change Difficult for UK Farmers? 135 4.3.1 Farmers' Experience of Change 136 4.3.2 Farmers' Understanding of Self 141 4.3.3 New Representations of Farmers & Farming 145 5 STORIES OF CHANGE FROM THE WIDER AGRICULTURAL PUBLIC SPHERE 147 5.1 The Narratives 147 5.2 Results 158 5.2.1 ALCESTE Analysis 158 5.2.2 Thematic Network Analysis 165 5.2.3 Farming is Special 169 5.2.4 Forces Affecting Change 171 5.2.5 Responses to Change 173 5.3 Interpreting the Results 174 5.4 Why is Change Difficult for UK Farmers? 178 6 WHAT THE PAPERS SAID: REPRESENTATIONS IN THE PUBLISHED MEDIA 181 6.1 Cross-Sectional Analysis 182 6.1.1 1954 182 6.1.2 1984 186 6.1.3 2004 189 Farmers, Farming & Change: A Social Psychological Analysis 7 6.2 Longitudinal Analysis 192 6.2.1 The Times 192 6.2.2 Farmers Weekly 195 6.2.3 Comparison of Issues, Actors & Causes 196 6.3 Other Longitudinal Comparisons 201 6.3.1 Topics, Letters to the Editor, Farmers Weekly 202 6.3.2 Optimism/Pessimism in Farmers Weekly 203 6.3.3 ‘Sympathy’ Shown in The Times 203 6.3.4 Key Phrase Connotation from The Times 204 6.4 Constructing the Representational Field 206 6.4.1 Policy 208 6.4.2 The Project of Farming 211 6.4.3 The Wider Rural Community 212 6.4.4 Others 213 6.5 Why is Change Difficult for UK Farmers? 214 7 UK FARMERS & CHANGE: ANSWERING THE RESEARCH QUESTION 221 7.1 Research Findings Summarised 221 7.1.1 Semi-structured Interviews 222 7.1.2 Narrative Interviews 225 7.1.3 Content Analysis 227 7.2 Social Representations of Change 230 7.2.1 Farmers’ Representations of Change 231 7.2.2 The Effect of Change on Farmers ’ Identities 234 7.2.3 New Representations of Farmers & Farming 236 7.3 Why is Change Difficult for UK Farmers? 239 7.3.1 Change and Identity 240 7.3.2 Change and History 247 7.3.3 Contradiction in the Regard of ‘Others’ 248 7.3.4 Agency to Accept or Resist Change 249 1A Responding to Change 252 Farmers, Farming & Change: A Social Psychological Analysis g 8 RESEARCHING CHANGE: TOWARDS A SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY OF CHANGE 257 8.1 Social Representations Theory & Practical Social Problems 257 8.2 Answering the Critics 264 8.2.1 Theoretical Ambiguity 264 8.2.2 Social Determinism & Cognitive Reductionism 271 8.2.3 Lack of a Critical Agenda 274 8.3 Developing Social Representations Theory to Research Change 278 8.3.1 The Individual/Society Interface 279 8.3.2 Themata, Core & Periphery 280 8.4 Towards a Social Psychology of Change 283 8.4.1 Meanings of Change 284 8.4.2 The Perception of Change 287 8.4.3 Actors
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Is Factory Farming Making Us Sick? IS FACTORY FARMING MAKING US SICK?
    Is Factory Farming making us sick? IS FACTORY FARMING MAKING US SICK? A Guide to Animal Diseases and their Impact on Human Health 1 Photo by Engin Akyurt Contents Introduction 4 Avian Influenza (Bird Flu) 6 Bovine TB 8 BSE 10 Campylobacter 12 E. Coli (O157: H7) 14 Foot and Mouth Disease 16 Johne’s Disease 18 Meningitis 20 MRSA 22 Nipah 24 Q Fever 25 Salmonella 26 Swine Flu 28 Other Zoonotic Diseases 30 We can change 32 References 34 2 Is Factory Farming making us sick? 3 Photo by Ethan Kent Introduction The majority of farmed animals in the UK In recent years, animal farming has are reared intensively, inside crowded, filthy brought us outbreaks of BSE, bovine sheds which are the perfect environment TB, foot and mouth, bird flu, swine flu, for bacteria and viruses to flourish. Stressed campylobacter, salmonella and many by their surroundings and their inability more devastating diseases. No wonder to display natural behaviours, forced to the United Nations Food and Agriculture live in their own excrement alongside sick Organization has warned that global and dying animals, it is not surprising that industrial meat production poses a serious farmed animals are vulnerable to infection. threat to human health3. Their immunity is further weakened by the industry breeding from just a few CREATING ANTIBIOTIC high-yielding strains, which has led to genetic erosion. This makes it easier for RESISTANCE disease to sweep swiftly through a group Instead of protecting of animals, who are likely to share near- ourselves by changing identical genetics with little immunological how we treat animals resistance.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 BATTLE and WILLIAM COBBETT This Article Explores
    BATTLE AND WILLIAM COBBETT This article explores William Cobbett’s relationship with Battle, which he visited in 1822 and, famously, on 16 October 1830. We look at this under the following headings: Who was Cobbett? Cobbett’s first visit to Battle, 1822, his address in the George Hotel The meeting of 16 October 1830 and why it was nationally significant The Battle Declaration: who signed, and what the document tells us How the Government sought to “frame” Cobbett: Arising from his meeting at Battle, Cobbett’s trial at the Guildhall 7 July 1831 Sources and further reading An account of some of the personalities who emerged during the crisis of 1830-31- Charles Inskipp, John Pearson, James Gutsell, George Maule The political background of the “Captain Swing” riots What influence did the meeting have – how close was E Sussex to insurrection? Who was Cobbett? William Cobbett (1763 -1835) straddled the late eighteenth century and the early nineteenth, in lifespan as well as in attitudes. He was a farmer who believed in an old order of the countryside based on respect for all its parties: decently paid labourers helping reasonable landowners to produce food which should be available at affordable prices, while small government would reduce taxes and keep farmers comfortable. Cobbett saw reform of Parliament as the means by which politicians would be put back in touch with the real problems of the country and its poor. But he defies modern political categories: he opposed abolition of slavery as hypocritical and was arguably anti-semitic in his views on what he saw as usury.
    [Show full text]
  • WHAT IS a FARM? AGRICULTURE, DISCOURSE, and PRODUCING LANDSCAPES in ST ELIZABETH, JAMAICA by Gary R. Schnakenberg a DISSERTATION
    WHAT IS A FARM? AGRICULTURE, DISCOURSE, AND PRODUCING LANDSCAPES IN ST ELIZABETH, JAMAICA By Gary R. Schnakenberg A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Geography – Doctor of Philosophy 2013 ABSTRACT WHAT IS A FARM? AGRICULTURE, DISCOURSE, AND PRODUCING LANDSCAPES IN ST. ELIZABETH, JAMAICA By Gary R. Schnakenberg This dissertation research examined the operation of discourses associated with contemporary globalization in producing the agricultural landscape of an area of rural Jamaica. Subject to European colonial domination from the time of Columbus until the 1960s and then as a small island state in an unevenly globalizing world, Jamaica has long been subject to operations of unequal power relationships. Its history as a sugar colony based upon chattel slavery shaped aspects of the society that emerged, and left imprints on the ethnic makeup of the population, orientation of its economy, and beliefs, values, and attitudes of Jamaican people. Many of these are smallholder agriculturalists, a livelihood strategy common in former colonial places. Often ideas, notions, and practices about how farms and farming ‘ought-to-be’ in such places results from the operations and workings of discourse. As advanced by Foucault, ‘discourse’ refers to meanings and knowledge circulated among people and results in practices that in turn produce and re-produce those meanings and knowledge. Discourses define what is right, correct, can be known, and produce ‘the world as it is.’ They also have material effects, in that what it means ‘to farm’ results in a landscape that emerges from those meanings. In Jamaica, meanings of ‘farms’ and ‘farming’ have been shaped by discursive elements of contemporary globalization such as modernity, competition, and individualism.
    [Show full text]
  • The Failure of Early Demonstration Agriculture on 19Th Century Model/Pattern Farms: Lessons for Contemporary Demonstration
    Almost final draft (September 23rd 2019): Text may not be identical to published paper The failure of early demonstration agriculture on 19th Century model/pattern farms: lessons for contemporary demonstration. Rob J.F. Burton Abstract Purpose: Demonstration farming has been an important part of agricultural extension since the first decades of the 20th Century. While Seaman Knapp is often credited with developing demonstration farming, his son acknowledged that the concept has much earlier origins in the 19th Century development of model/pattern farms. However, little is known of these early origins or why early demonstration agriculture failed. This paper addresses this gap. Design/methodology/approach: The methodology involves analysis of out of copy-right historical journal articles, letters, pamphlets, and books recently made available by online services such as Google Books. Findings: The study details how the concept of demonstration farming was developed by agricultural societies of the 18th Century but was not implemented until the early 19th Century with the advent of model/pattern farms. Demonstration activities were run by a variety of different types of private and public farm organisations who sought to improve agriculture through emulation. Enthusiasm for model farms died out by the end of the 19th Century but the failure of model farm demonstration leaves us with lessons for demonstration farming today. Theoretical implications: The study provides new knowledge on the conceptual and historical development of demonstration farming and why it failed to influence change. Practical implications: The study identifies factors that might contribute to the failure of demonstration activities. Originality/value: This is the first study to explore in detail demonstration farming on 19th Century model farms and, methodologically, outlines how free on-line digitised literature can be used to investigate early agricultural education activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Farm Inspection and Regulation Review
    Farm Inspection and Regulation Review December 2018 Contents Foreword i Key Facts ii Executive Summary iii Farming today iii Why we regulate iv The building blocks of effective regulation iv What we found v What should change vii Recommendations xi Introduction to the review xiii Farming today 1 Farming in England 2 Farming business organisation 5 Farming incomes 5 Behaviours and risk management 10 Plant and animal health 12 Bovine tuberculosis 14 Environment and ecosystems 15 Challenges from a regulatory perspective 17 Why we regulate 19 The economic and social impact of harm 19 Understanding hazards and harm 20 Facilitating national and international trade 22 Conclusion 23 The building blocks for effective regulation 25 Core elements of a regulatory system 25 Effective regulation 29 Regulatory strategy 29 Regulatory approaches and how they compare 31 Choosing the right approach 31 Regulating across the spectrum 34 What we found 37 The governance and delivery of regulation 37 How we regulate 41 What is achieved 45 The culture of regulation 45 What should change 48 Building confidence 48 More straightforward regulation 58 Being clear about what is expected, and why 61 Reflect mature regulatory thinking 64 A sophisticated and balanced view of regulation 71 Conclusion 81 Annexes 82 Recommended Powers 83 Design Principles 97 Current Regulatory Instruments 99 Terms of Reference 104 Who we consulted 106 Glossary 110 Foreword I am pleased to present this final report on farm inspection and regulation in England, having reported on an interim basis earlier this year. Most land in England is farmed, and UK farmers produce most of the food we eat.
    [Show full text]
  • Tom Jenkins Dr Kate Pressland
    Plant. Grow. Innovate. O C T O B E R 9 T H - O C T O B E R 1 1 T H 2 0 2 0 V I R T U A L E V E N T London office +44 203 2878731 Europe Email address [email protected] South Asia Website www.thpoint0.io United Kingdom Contents I n t r o d u c t io n Introduction 2 From the British Agricultural Revolution of the 18th Programme 3 century to playing a fundamental part in the Green Revolution of the 1960s and 70s, the UK is no stranger Challenges 5 to agricultural innovation in evolving, growing and implementing revolutionary methods to increase productivity, drive efficiency and maximise yields. Challenge AgriTech Innovation 6 With the termination of the EU’s Common Agricultural Challenge Agri BioTech 7 Policy, new agricultural liinitiatives are driving and making it easier for the industry to embrace AgriTech, Challenge Smart Farming to enable innovation, and transform the agriculture, 8 horticulture and forestry sectors. Challenge Soil Productivity 9 There is now, and will continue to be, more opportunities for investment in the excellence of the UK Prizes 10 AgriTech sector to grow new businesses and export overseas. Judges 11 Keynote Speakers 13 Network/Clients 14 Contact Details 15 2 Programme Day 1 - Friday 9th October Day 3 - Sunday 11th October 19:00 - Official Launch 09:00 - Workshop - Pitch Perfect 19:30 - Final Team Formation 10:00 - Mentor Sessions 20:00 - Challenge Brief 12:00 - Final Demos 20:30 - Intro to Judges & Mentors 15:00 - Jury Deliberation 16:00 - Winner Announcement 16:30 - End of Hackathon Day 2 - Saturday 10th October
    [Show full text]
  • Emerging Leaders 2019
    Emerging Leaders 2019 Janelle Anderson Scottish Enterprise Rural Leadership Janelle is from a farming family based in Aberdeenshire. Their farming enterprise includes breeding cattle, a small flock of sheep and forestry. Having completed her Batchelor of Technology Degree in Agriculture in 2000, she currently works as Regional Events Manager for the Scottish Association of Young Farmers Clubs based at Thainstone Agricultural Centre and also manages the SAYFC Agri and Rural Affairs Group. Janelle is a director of the Royal Northern Agricultural Society, having been the society President in 2017. She is also past chairman of the North East Farm Management Association (2017/18) and currently secretary of the North East Aberdeen Angus Breeders Club. As well as having a long association with SAYFC as a member, from club to national level, she is also a trustee of John Fotheringham Memorial Trust and Willie Davidson 75th Fund which promotes health and safety amongst young farmers. Since being selected to represent Scotland at the Royal Agricultural Society of the Commonwealth Conference in Calgary in 2006, Janelle has kept a close link to the RASC, attending conferences in New Zealand and Zambia on behalf of the Royal Highland Agricultural Society of Scotland, who hosted the conference in Scotland in 2010 where Janelle was their Next Generation Leader. Janelle is honoured to be attending the Oxford Farming Conference on behalf of the Scottish Enterprise Rural Leaders and is looking forward to meeting the other delegates. James Beary 38-year-old James (Jim) is an upland tenant farmer from the Peak District, producing prime lambs on contract for Tesco.
    [Show full text]
  • USDA Sustainable Farming Programs Guide
    Growing Opportunity A Guide to USDA Sustainable Farming Programs January 2017 © Edwin Remsberg Farmers’ Guide to Table of Innovative USDA Contents Programs and Resources © Edwin Remsberg Today’s farmers are changing the way we farm and eat in this country. Folks starting out in farming today are: PAGE • From both rural and urban areas, and everywhere in between • Conscious of their impact on the environment and interested in learning how to protect 4-5 Getting Started Quick Reference natural resources on their farms 6 Direct and Guaranteed Farm Operating Loans 7 Direct and Guaranteed Farm Ownership Loans • Pursuing new markets and selling both fresh and value-added products directly to consumers, wholesalers, restaurants, schools, and food hubs 8 Microloans 9 Down Payment Loan Program • More likely to be female, a person of color, and/or have served in the U.S. military 10 Land Contract Guarantee Program • More likely to consider diversification options, comprehensive conservation systems, 11 Farm Storage Facility Loans (FSFL) and organic farming practices 12 Conservation Reserve Program – Transition Incentives Program (CRP-TIP) 13 Conservation Reserve Program – Field Border Buffer Initiative USDA recognizes the needs of farmers of all kinds, and has worked hard to improve federal resources so they work for all farmers. It has also reached out to farm organizations like the National Sustainable Agriculture 14 Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP) Coalition (NSAC) to help with outreach to an increasingly diverse constituency for USDA programs. NSAC 15 National Organic Certification Cost Share Program (NOCCSP) worked with USDA to produce this guide, and has also been very involved in the creation of the programs 16 Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) Audits included in the guide.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Copy 2020 02 17 Baker
    This electronic thesis or dissertation has been downloaded from Explore Bristol Research, http://research-information.bristol.ac.uk Author: Baker, Leonard Title: Spaces, Places, Custom and Protest in Rural Somerset and Dorset, c. 1780-1867. General rights Access to the thesis is subject to the Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International Public License. A copy of this may be found at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode This license sets out your rights and the restrictions that apply to your access to the thesis so it is important you read this before proceeding. Take down policy Some pages of this thesis may have been removed for copyright restrictions prior to having it been deposited in Explore Bristol Research. However, if you have discovered material within the thesis that you consider to be unlawful e.g. breaches of copyright (either yours or that of a third party) or any other law, including but not limited to those relating to patent, trademark, confidentiality, data protection, obscenity, defamation, libel, then please contact [email protected] and include the following information in your message: •Your contact details •Bibliographic details for the item, including a URL •An outline nature of the complaint Your claim will be investigated and, where appropriate, the item in question will be removed from public view as soon as possible. Spaces, Places, Custom and Protest in Rural Somerset and Dorset, c. 1780-1867 Leonard John Baker A dissertation submitted to the University of Bristol in accordance with the requirements for award of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Arts School of Humanities September 2019 Word Count: 79,998 Abstract This thesis examines how material space, meaningful place and custom shaped the forms and functions of protest in rural Somerset and Dorset between 1780 and 1867.
    [Show full text]
  • Farming Today
    METHODIST CONFERENCE 2001 REPORTS Farming Today 1. CARE IN CRISIS No one can dispute that many farming families are facing a crisis. This is acute for small upland farmers, or those in the wetlands of the west of Britain. There have been four years of depressed incomes. All aspects of farming have been in recession at the same time. The pictures of the mass culling of herds and disposing of the carcasses have brought home to everyone, rural and urban alike, the pain of farming today. For generations there has been a steady decline in mixed farming and for the past 55 years there has been state support, encouraging farmers to intensify production and to drive down prices. This support comes at a price, the first being increased paper work and the second increased use of technology to replace skilled people working on the land. Demands of shoppers for healthy eating, the demise of local shops and the rise of out-of-town supermarkets have created the need for traceable stock and the attendant bureaucracy. The strength of the pound sterling has meant that British agriculture is at a disadvantage when exporting produce. The combination of BSE, swine fever, and Foot and Mouth Disease with poor weather conditions has brought many farmers and their families to abject despair. A survey by the industry magazine, "Farmer's Weekly" of 128 farmers who saw their livestock slaughtered showed that 6% planned to quit agriculture altogether and more than a third will not be restocking their farms. The average age in the industry is 58 and there is real anxiety because farmers cannot pass on a profitable business to sons or daughters.
    [Show full text]
  • Preserving Common Ground Page 18 Commentary
    Rural COOPERATIVESCOOPERATIVESUSDA / Rural Development November/December 2012 Preserving Common Ground Page 18 Commentary ‘How Can a Bunch of Farmers Do It?’ By Dan Campbell, Editor As co-op member David Hughes said when leading a tour of his farm: “This co-op is a true, grassroots success story.” he question above is what some bankers Indeed, there is no more dramatic example of the value of T asked when approached by Virginia poultry cooperatives than in a situation such as this, involving a growers about financing their takeover of a processing plant or other critical facility which, if shuttered, major turkey processing plant in the would likely also put producers out of business and hurt the Shenandoah Valley seven years ago. After all, rural economy. one of the nation’s largest poultry corporations had not been There are many valuable lessons in this story, including: able to make a go of the operation, the bankers reasoned, so • Farmers can better control their own fate when they own how could a bunch of farmers possibly make the operation the processing and marketing infrastructure that is critical to fly? their survival. There is no guarantee of success with a co-op, Farmers may know how to grow verdant fields of grain and but at least farmers themselves will be making the key raise livestock, but when it comes decisions about whether to make to further processing and investments or changes needed to marketing, those tasks are best left keep the plant in business. to “real business people,” some • Farmers don’t run the have long reasoned.
    [Show full text]
  • PSA Target 3 (Ii) Delivery Plan
    CAMPAIGN FOR THE FARMED ENVIRONMENT INTERIM REPORT (JULY to DECEMBER 2011) CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................... 3 2. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 5 3. PROGRESS AGAINST THE CFE TARGETS ..................................................................... 5 3.1 Participation in AES ...................................................................................................... 7 3.2 Key target option uptake in ELS ................................................................................... 7 3.3 Option uptake in HLS .................................................................................................... 8 3.4 Uptake of ELS buffers ................................................................................................... 8 3.5 Uncropped land ............................................................................................................. 8 3.6 Voluntary management ................................................................................................. 9 3.7 Remaining targets ......................................................................................................... 9 3.8 Changing attitudes and behaviour .............................................................................. 10 4. COMMUNICATIONS ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]