Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T01:47:49.668Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Factors in the decision by Swiss farmers to convert to organic farming

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2018

Robert Home*
Affiliation:
Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Ackerstrasse 113, 5070 Frick, Switzerland
Annina Indermuehle
Affiliation:
Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Ackerstrasse 113, 5070 Frick, Switzerland
Anna Tschanz
Affiliation:
Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Ackerstrasse 113, 5070 Frick, Switzerland
Elke Ries
Affiliation:
Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Ackerstrasse 113, 5070 Frick, Switzerland Justus-Liebig-Universität, Senckenbergstrasse 3, 35390Giessen
Matthias Stolze
Affiliation:
Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Ackerstrasse 113, 5070 Frick, Switzerland
*
Author for correspondence: Robert Home, robert.home@fibl.org

Abstract

Demonstrated economic benefits of conversion to organic agriculture, combined with solutions to technical and production-related problems, suggest that farmers in Switzerland should have converted in large numbers to organic production. However, the number of organic farms in Switzerland has remained virtually constant in the last 10 yr, so it appears there are other factors that influence the decision of whether or not to convert. Several studies have sought to identify the factors that influence the decisions by farmers whether or not to convert to organic, but have found a range of factors that appear to be context dependent, while others can be seen as context transcendent, which makes it difficult to draw generalizable conclusions. The aim of this study was to identify how Swiss farmers’ decisions reflect the interaction of perceptions, relationships, policies and economic factors, which either enable or provide barriers to conversion. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in 2015 with 39 farmers of mixed and arable farms in the German- (n = 24) and French-speaking (n = 15) parts of Switzerland. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed according to their content. The results show that the decision of whether or not to convert relies on belief that technical problems have been sufficiently solved, as well as a range of social factors. Farmers perceive social pressure for them to be productive, but non-organic farmers often incorrectly perceive organic farming as not being oriented toward production. Furthermore, ‘official’ advice, which could correct this misperception, is sought about how, rather than whether, to convert and typically comes after farmers have made their decision. Major barriers in an area with a low density of organic farms are the lack of supply and delivery points within an acceptable travel distance, and lack of peer networks to provide informal support. On the basis of these findings, we propose that strategies to encourage conversion should be based around two main pillars: investment to create a network of supply and delivery points in areas with low density of organic farms; and actions, such as information events, to encourage dialogue between conventional and organic farmers to counteract feelings of ‘us vs them’.

Type
Research Paper
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alexopoulos, G, Koutsouris, A and Tzouramani, I (2010) Should I stay or Should I go? Factors affecting farmers’ decision to convert to organic farming as well as to abandon it, paper presented at 9th European IFSA Symposium, 4–7 July 2010, Vienna (Austria).Google Scholar
Andreasen, L, Rasmussen, I and Halberg, N (2015) Organic research and development in Denmark (1996-2010)–effects on the organic sector and society. Sustainable Agriculture Research 4(3), 173183.Google Scholar
Bangemann, L, Westphal, A, Zwerger, P, Sieling, K and Kage, H (2014) Copper reducing strategies for late blight (Phytophthora infestons) control in organic potato (Solanum tuberosum) production. Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection 121(3), 105116.10.1007/BF03356498Google Scholar
Baron, J (2004) Thinking and Deciding. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
BioSuisse (2017) Geschichte. Available at https://www.bio-suisse.ch/de/geschichte.php, site visited November 25, 2017.Google Scholar
BfS (Bundesamt für Statistik) (2016) Strukturen: Anzahl Betriebe. Available at http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/de/index/themen/07/03/blank/ind24.indicator.240201.2402.html (Accessed 22 October 2016).Google Scholar
Burton, R and Paragahawewa, U (2011) Creating culturally sustainable agri-environmental schemes. Journal of Rural Studies 27, 95104. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2010.11.001.Google Scholar
Cranfield, J, Henson, S and Holliday, J (2010) The motives, benefits, and problems of conversion to organic production. Agriculture and Human Values 27(3), 291306.Google Scholar
Darnhofer, I, Schneeberger, W and Freyer, B (2005) Converting or not converting to organic farming in Austria: farmer types and their rationale. Agriculture and Human Values 22(1), 3952.10.1007/s10460-004-7229-9Google Scholar
Daugbjerg, C, Tranter, R, Hattam, C and Holloway, G (2011) Modelling the impacts of policy on entry into organic farming: evidence from Danish–UK comparisons, 1989–2007. Land Use Policy 28(2), 413422.Google Scholar
Ferjani, A, Reissig, L and Mann, S (2010a) Opting into and out of organic farming. Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon.Google Scholar
Ferjani, A, Zimmermann, A and Reissig, L (2010b) Organic agriculture: why so few farms convert. Agrarforschung Schweiz 1(6), 238243.Google Scholar
Flückiger, S (2010) Bio Suisse startet die bio-offensive: Neue Bio-Bauernfamilien Braucht Das Land. Available at http://www.bio-suisse.ch/media/Aktuell/Dokumente2010/d_beitrag_bio-offensive.pdf (Accessed 16 February 2017).Google Scholar
FOAG (Swiss Federal office of Agriculture) (2012) Swiss agricultural policy: Objectives, tools, prospects. Available at https://www.cbd.int/financial/pes/swiss-pesagriculturalpolicy.pdf (Accessed 16 February 2017).Google Scholar
Garland, A, Bickman, L and Chorpita, B (2010) Change what? Identifying quality improvement targets by investigating usual mental health care. Administration and Policy in Mental Health 37(1), 1526. doi: 10.1007/s10488-010-0279-y.Google Scholar
Gigerenzer, G and Todd, P (1999) Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goy, I and Waibel, H (2005) Situationsanalyse des ökologischen Gartenbaus in Deutschland. In Hess, J, Rahmann, G (eds). Ende der Nische, Beiträge zur 8. Wissenschaftstagung Ökologischer Landbau. Kassel: Kassel University Press GmbH, pp. 537541.Google Scholar
Häfliger, M and Maurer, J (1996) Umstellung auf biologischen landbau: motivation und hemmnisse. Agrarforschung 3, 531534.Google Scholar
Heinze, S and Vogel, A (2017) Reversion from organic to conventional agriculture in Germany: an event history analysis. German Journal of Agricultural Economics 66(1), 1325.Google Scholar
Jenny, M, Zellweger-Fischer, J, Balmer, O, Birrer, S and Pfiffner, L (2013) The credit point system: an innovative approach to enhance biodiversity on farmland. Aspects of Applied Biology 118, 2330.Google Scholar
Karki, L, Schleenbecker, R and Hamm, U (2012) Factors influencing a conversion to organic farming in Nepalese tea farms. Agriculture and Rural Development 112(2), 113123.Google Scholar
Khaledi, M, Gray, R, Weesen, S and Sawyer, E (2007) Assessing the Barriers to Conversion to Organic Farming: An Institutional Analysis. Saskatoon: Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Saskatchewan.Google Scholar
Khaledi, M, Weseen, S, Sawyer, E, Ferguson, S and Gray, R (2010) Factors influencing partial and complete adoption of organic farming practices in Saskatchewan, Canada. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 58(1), 3756.Google Scholar
Koesling, M, Løes, A, Flaten, O, Kristensen, N and Hansen, M (2012) Farmers’ reasons for deregistering from organic farming. Organic Agriculture 2, 103116. doi: 10.1007/s13165-012-0030-y.Google Scholar
Lamine, C and Bellon, S (2009) Conversion to organic farming: a multidimensional research object at the crossroads of agricultural and social sciences: a review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 29, 97112. doi: 10.1051/agro:2008007.Google Scholar
Läpple, D (2013) Comparing attitudes and characteristics of organic, former organic and conventional farmers: evidence from Ireland. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 28(4), 329337.10.1017/S1742170512000294Google Scholar
Läpple, D and Cullinan, J (2012) The development and geographic distribution of organic farming in Ireland. Irish Geography 45(1), 6785.10.1080/00750778.2012.698585Google Scholar
Läpple, D and Donnellan, T (2010) Adoption and abandonment of organic farming: an empirical investigation of the Irish drystock sector. Journal of Agricultural Economics 61(3), 697714.10.1111/j.1477-9552.2010.00260.xGoogle Scholar
Läpple, D and Kelly, H (2013) Understanding the uptake of organic farming: accounting for heterogeneities among Irish farmers. Ecological Economics 88, 1119.10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.12.025Google Scholar
Läpple, D and Kelley, H (2015) Spatial dependence in the adoption of organic drystock farming in Ireland. European Review of Agricultural Economics 42(2), 315337.10.1093/erae/jbu024Google Scholar
Läpple, D and Van Rensburg, T (2011) Adoption of organic farming: are there differences between early and late adoption? Ecological Economics 70(7), 14061414.Google Scholar
Latruffe, L and Nauges, C (2013) Technical efficiency and conversion to organic farming: the case of France. European Review of Agricultural Economics 41(2), 227253.Google Scholar
Madelrieux, S and Alavoine-Mornas, F (2012) Withdrawal from organic farming in France. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 33, 457468. doi: 10.1007/s13593-012-0123-8.Google Scholar
Mann, S and Gairing, M (2012) ‘Loyals’ and ‘optimizers’: shedding light on the decision for or against organic agriculture among Swiss farmers. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25(3), 365376.10.1007/s10806-011-9309-3Google Scholar
Mzoughi, N (2011) Farmers adoption of integrated crop protection and organic farming: do moral and social concerns matter? Ecological Economics 70(8), 15361545.10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.03.016Google Scholar
O'Donoghue, T and Rabin, M (1999) Doing it now or later. The American Economic Review 89, 103124.10.1257/aer.89.1.103Google Scholar
Padel, S (2001) Conversion to organic farming: a typical example of the diffusion of an innovation? Sociologia Ruralis 40, 4061. doi: 10.1111/1467-9523.00169.Google Scholar
Padel, S, Röcklinsberg, H and Schmid, O (2009) The implementation of organic principles and values in the European regulation for organic food. Food Policy 34, 245251. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2009.03.008.Google Scholar
Patton, M (1990) Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
Rodriguez, J, Molnar, J, Fazio, R, Sydnor, E and Lowe, M (2009) Barriers to adoption of sustainable agriculture practices: change agent perspectives. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 24, 6071. doi: 10.1017/S1742170508002421.Google Scholar
Sahm, H, Sanders, J, Nieberg, H and Behrens, G (2013) Reversion from organic to conventional agriculture: a review. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 28(3), 263275.Google Scholar
Sanders, J, Stolze, M and Padel, S (2011) Use and Efficiency of Public Support Measures Addressing Organic Farming. Thünen-Institute of Farm Economics. Available at www.ec.europa.eu/agriculture/external-studies/2012/organic-farming-support/fulltexten.pdf. Accessed 16 February 2017.Google Scholar
Schmidtner, E, Lippert, C, Engler, B, Häring, A, Aurbacher, J and Dabbert, S (2011) Spatial distribution of organic farming in Germany: does neighbourhood matter? European Review of Agricultural Economics 39(4), 661683.10.1093/erae/jbr047Google Scholar
Schneider, R (2001) Umstellung von Marktfruchtbetrieben im Marchfeld und Weinviertel auf die biologische Wirtschaftsweise––Umstellungshemmnisse, Umstellungsprobleme und Wirtschaftlichkeit. Dissertation, Universität für Bodenkultur, Vienna.Google Scholar
Schramek, J and Schnaut, G (2004) Hemmende und fördernde Faktoren einer Umstellung auf den ökologischen Landbau aus der Sicht landwirtschaftlicher Unternehmer/innen in verschiedenen Regionen Deutschlands (unter Einbeziehung soziologischer Fragestellungen). Geschäftsstelle Bundesprogramm Ökologischer Landbau in der BLE, Bonn.Google Scholar
Tversky, A and Kahneman, D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185, 11241131. doi: 10.1126/science.185.4157.1124.Google Scholar
Valente, T and Rogers, E (1995) The origins and development of the diffusion of innovations paradigm as an example of scientific growth. Science Communication 16, 245246. doi: 10.1177/1075547095016003002.Google Scholar
Willer, H and Lernoud, J (2012) Current statistics on organic agriculture. In Willer, H, Kilcher, L (eds) World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics and Emerging Trends 2012. Bonn: IFOAM and Frick, Switzerland: FiBL, pp. 35120.Google Scholar
Willer, H and Lernoud, J (2017) Current statistics on organic agriculture worldwide: area, operators, and market. In Lernoud, J and Willer, H (eds) World of Organic Agriculture: Statistics and Emerging Trends 2017. Bonn: IFOAM and Frick, Switzerland: FiBL, pp. 3676.Google Scholar
Willer, H, Schaack, D and Lernoud, J (2017) Organic farming and market development in Europe and the European Union. In Lernoud, J and Willer, H (eds) World of Organic Agriculture: Statistics and Emerging Trends 2017. Bonn: IFOAM and Frick, Switzerland: FiBL, pp. 207226.Google Scholar
Wilson, C and Dowlatabadi, H (2007) Models of decision making and residential energy use. Annual Review of Environmental Resources 3, 169203. doi: 10.1146/ Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 32.053006.141137.Google Scholar
Wisdom, J, Chor, K, Hoagwood, K and Horwitz, S (2014) Innovation adoption: a review of theories and constructs. Administration and Policy in Mental Health 41(4), 480502. doi: doi: 10.1007/s10488-013-0486-4.Google Scholar