Final Thesis Draft
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EXPLORING THE SOCIAL BASES OF HOME GARDENING A Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree Master of Science in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Justin Schupp, B.S. Graduate Program in Rural Sociology The Ohio State University 2009 Master’s Examination Committee: Dr. Jeff S. Sharp, Advisor Dr. Joseph Donnermeyer Copyright by Justin Schupp 2009 ABSTRACT The study of and participation in alternatives to conventional industrial agricultural production have risen steadily in popularity in recent years. Several different types of production have been embraced, utilized, and studied. While many types of alternative production and the motivations to participate have been studied, there have been significant gaps in the literature. One such dearth appears in the work done on those participating in self-provisioning activities. This study begins to fill the gap by looking at the self-provisioning activity of household home gardening using data from the 2008 Ohio Survey of Food, Agriculture, and Environmental Issues. Discerning who the household gardeners are seems important given the recent economic, cultural, and political climate of the United States. The results show that household home gardening is occurring throughout the state of Ohio. In addition, bivariate and multivariate analysis show noteworthy associations between gardening and several household characteristics, including location in the countryside and on farms; the demonstration of environmentalist and economic hardship behaviors; and high levels of engagement in more localized food systems. ii DEDICATION Dedicated to my wife, Carly Keehn-Schupp, whose love and support made this possible, and Snoopy and Zamboni, for keeping the good life in perspective iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are many individuals to whom I owe a deep sense of gratitude as I have completed this thesis. I would first like to thank Jeff Sharp as serving as my advisor. I am especially thankful for his time and guidance in helping me prepare this project, as without it I would have never been able to finish. I will forever remember our weekly chats in his office while we worked out the finer details not only of this document, but of my plans for life as an effective individual in academia. I would also like to thank Joseph Donnermeyer for agreeing to serve on my committee. His contribution to this document was invaluable. May I one day be able to emulate the deep passion and drive that you bring to your work every day. There are many others whom I would like to thank because their assistance was indispensable in helping me to complete this project. In no particular order, I would like to thank: Dr. Lazarus Adua, Dr. Molly Bean-Smith, Kelly Turpin, Anjel Stough-Hunter, Dani Deemer, and Daniel Foster. All of you have contributed not only to the success in this project but also to my development as a sociologist. Lastly, I would like to thank my wife, Carly Keehn-Schupp. Words cannot begin to express how important she has been as I have worked on this document. Her constant love, support, and challenge to succeed have been irreplaceable and, though it may not have seemed like this all the time, deeply appreciated. iv VITA June 9th, 1981 . Born, Boulder, Colorado 2005 . B.S. in Sociology, Colorado State University 2007 - Present . .Graduate Student, The Ohio State University 2008 - Present . .Graduate Teaching Associate, The Ohio State University FIELD OF STUDY Major Field: Rural Sociology v TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT . ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . iii VITA . v LIST OF TABLES . ix LIST OF FIGURES . x Chapters: 1. INTRODUCTION . 1 1.1 Study Background and Goal . 1 1.2 Significance of the Study . .. 5 2. LITERATURE REVIEW . .. 7 2.1 Review of the Literature and Propositions . .. 7 Gardening in Historical Context . .. 7 2.2 Empirical and Theoretical Foundation . 20 Differences between Rural and Urban . 22 Environmental Literature . .. 26 Economic Hardship and Self-Provisioning. 33 Literature on Agriculture and Food . .43 2.3 Reviewing the Theoretical Predictions and Hypotheses . 49 3. RESEARCH DESIGN . 51 3.1 Source of Data . .51 3.2 Sampling Procedure . 51 3.3 Sample Limitations. 51 3.4 Variable Measurements. 52 vi 3.4.1 Dependent Variable . 55 3.4.2 Independent Variables . 57 3.4.3 Control Variables. 70 3.5 Type of Data Analyses . 73 3.6 Measurement Model. 73 4. RESULTS . 75 4.1 Results from Bivariate Analysis . 75 4.2 Bivariate Analysis Between Dependent and Independent Variables . 76 4.3 Logistic Regression Analysis. 83 4.3.1 Logistic Regression Diagnostics . 83 4.3.2 Logistic Regression . 86 4.4 Putting the Results Together . 91 5. CONCLUSION . 95 5.1 Summary and Discussion of the Overall Study Findings . 96 5.2 Reviewing the Research Question . 99 5.3 Study Limitations . .100 5.4 Implications for Theory and Future Research . 106 5.5 Implications for Policy. .108 LIST OF REFERENCES . 110 APPENDIX: SURVEY INSTRUMENT . .120 vii LIST OF TABLES Table Page 3.1 Socio-demographic Characteristics of the Survey Sample and the state of Ohio .53 3.2 Descriptive Statistics for the Dependent Variable. 55 3.3 Descriptive Statistics for the Rural to Urban Continuum Variable. 58 3.4 Descriptive Statistics for the Current Geographic Location Variable . .. .60 3.5 Sample Statistic of Variables Making Up Environmental Behaviors . .63 3.6 Histogram of the Environmental Behavior Count Variable . 63 3.7 Histogram of the Economic Hardship Behavior Count Variable . .. 65 3.8 Factor Analysis Results for Engagement in Local Foods. 67 3.9 Sample Statistic for the Variables Measuring Engagement in Local Foods . 67 3.10 Histogram of Money Spent on Buying Directly From a Farmer . 67 3.11 Descriptive Statistics for the Control Variables. 71 4.1 Chi2 test on Garden Present with Independent Variables . 80 4.2 Independent t-sample Tests between Dependent and Independent Variables .. 81 4.3 Correlation Coefficients of the Independent Variables . .. 84 4.4 Logistic Regression Model for the Likelihood of Household Gardening . 89 4.5 Goodness of Fit Test Results . 89 4.6 Direction of Predicted Relationship Between Independent and Dependent Variables from the Literature Review, Study Predictions, and Model Results.. 92 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 3.1 Measurement Model . 73 4.1 Revisiting the Measurement Model . 93 ix CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Study Background and Goal Participation in alternatives to conventional industrial agricultural production has steadily risen in popularity in recent years. Several different types of production have been embraced, utilized, and studied. One of the most cited examples of alternative agriculture production is the organic industrial production system. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA, 2006) reported that in 2005, for the first time, each of the fifty States in the U.S. had some amount of certified organic cropland, totaling more than four million acres nationwide. Further demonstrating this growth in production, Fromartz (2006) states that sales of food items produced organically have increased by an average of twenty percent per year since 1990, reaching the $40 billion level worldwide in 2006 (Organic Monitor 2006). In addition, there has been an increased participation in the local foods movement, which is another indicator of the rising tide of interest in alternative production types. Both Lyson (2007) and Ostrom et al. (2007) have documented the increasing level of involvement in civic agriculture and direct farmer-to- consumer interaction as alternatives to the conventional industrial production system. Typically, supporters have been motivated to get involved in alternative production techniques because of three overarching themes: food production preference, the consideration of the environment, and concerns of societal impact. Notably, these 1 themes are rarely subscribed to individually and should not be considered mutually exclusive. Consumers have demonstrated an inclination for food that is produced outside the conventional agricultural norms. Govindasamy et al. (1998) found that the reemergence of farmers’ markets could be traced in part to consumers' desire to have fresher and better-quality food than the conventional industrial system offers. Similarly, Allen (2004) posits that certain individuals attempt to avoid conventionally produced food because it has, “become almost a negation of itself, either because it is absent, harmful to . health, or because it is virtual in the sense of any nutritional content has been neutralized (p. 24).” Gaining significant momentum in the 1970s in the United States, Hannigan (1995) notes, concern for the preservation of the environment has been significant in several areas of life, especially agriculture. Beus and Dunlap (1990) note that an increasing number of individuals consider the environmental cost of conventional agriculture to be too high. For example, individuals and organizations identifying themselves as environmentally concerned decry the deleterious effects of conventional food production upon the environment, especially on the soil and water utilized (see Trautmann and Porter 1989 for example). The negative externalities have functioned as one of the prime motivating factors for attracting individuals to alternative agricultural techniques. Concern for the social impact of conventional agriculture has served as the third motivating theme for individuals to consider alternative agriculture techniques. 2 Literature has documented numerous instances of individuals choosing alternative