Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 6

Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology 2(5): 422-427, 2010

ISSN: 2040-7467
© M axwell Scientific Organization, 2010
Submitted Date: May 03, 2010 Accepted Date: May 20, 2010 Published Date: August 01, 2010

Farmer’s Attitude on Sustainable Agriculture and its Determinants:


A Case Study in Behbahan County of Iran
1
S. Abolh asan Sadati, 1 Hosain S haabanali Fami, 1 Ali Asadi and 2 S. Abolghasem Sadati
1
Faculty of Agricultural E conomics and Developm ent, U niversity C ollege of A gricultural
and Natural Resources, Tehran University, Iran
2
Islamic Azad University, Hendijan Center, Iran

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to conduct a descriptive survey to study the attitudes and perceptions
of Iranian farmers on the concep ts and thoug hts of sustainable ag riculture and identifying effective factors on
their attitude. T he target pop ulation of this study consisted of 7314 Behbahan farmers of Khuzestan province
of Iran. A sample consisting of 208 respondents was selected through Stratified Sampling. The instrument used
for assessing the attitude of respondents on the co ncepts of sustainable agriculture was a questionnaire by
reliability 0.78. Responses were grouped based on the differences in standard deviation of mean, which
revealed that 73.4% of respondents had moderate attitude towards concepts of sustainable agriculture. The
results of study showed that there is positive correlation between literacy, participation in extension courses,
off-farm income, farmer's knowledge about sustainable agriculture, level of use of sustainab le agriculture
methods, extension contac ts and job satisfaction and n egative correlation between age, experien ce in
agricultural activities, family size and agrarian land with attitude toward sustainable agriculture. According to
result of regression the ‘extension con tacts’, ‘Fa rmers knowledge abou t sustainable agriculture’, ‘Job
satisfaction’ and ‘literacy’ are effective factors on farmers attitude tow ard sustainable agriculture and explained
52.6% of this scale.

Key w ords: Attitude, Beh bahan County, sustainable ag riculture

INTRODUCTION that is, agriculture should be consume less and be


sustain able more (Pretty, 1995; Williams, 2000;
Currently, the w orld shows extensive worries on the Qam ar, 2002; R asul and T hapa, 2003; Leeu wis, 2004).
destructive effects of advanced agricultural technologies The farmers, environmentalists, protectors of natural
on the environment, natural resources and long-term resources and rural settlers have various interests and
sustain ability of agronomy systems. Soil degradation, concerns on this issue and thu s, each give a separate
erosion, water pollution, excessive use of chemicals, definition on sustainable agriculture; thus, there is no
waste of water, decreasing ground water tables, unique definition for sustainable agriculture (Beus and
destruction of natural habitats for wildlife and insects and Dun lap, 1990; Leeuw is, 2000).
pests resistance against insecticide and pesticide are only The perceived importance of sustainability among
a few of the concerns expressed by environmentalists, farmers differs from farmer to farmer and is influenced by
ecologists, agricultural professionals, policy makers, socio econ omic characteristics as we ll as information-
farmers and public (Leeuwis, 2004 ; Al-Subaiee seeking behavior of the farmers. Since this study explored
et al., 2005). Despite these environmental effects at many the degree of importance that farmers attach to different
places, the mod ern agriculture has been involve d in many sustainable agricultural practices and factors that
econ omic and social changes both in the industrial and influence it, it is useful to define sustainab ility
developing countries. Among this involvement one may (Tatlidil et al., 2008 ).
name: loss of job, transfer of economic opportunities from In many developing coun tries, agriculture plays a
men to women, increasing specialization in livelihood, the vital role in the economy, and sustainability in the
rural institutions becoming governmental and many other agricultural sector m ust address the issues of poverty
cases (Pretty, 1995). Sustainable agriculture, as a alleviation, food security, and stable income generation
managerial philosophy and a system that provides for a rapidly growing population (Lee 2005; Bhutto and
agricultural needs of both present and future generations Bazm i, 2007).
has raised as a major challenge of the 21st century to meet To ensure environmental, economic, and social
these complications and natural and human difficulties; sustainability, farmers must adopt different farm-level

Corresponding Author: S. Abolghasem Sadati, Islamic Azad University, Hendijan Center, Iran
422
Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 2(5): 422-427, 2010

practices such as judicious use of chemicals, integrated relationships betw een attitudes and behav iors: attitudes
pest man agem ent, adequate irrigation, and proper care of cause behaviors; behaviors cause attitudes; attitudes and
plant and animal health. Especially, the relationsh ip behavior have mutual causal impact; and attitudes and
between pest sellers and farmers behavior about the behaviors are slightly, if at all related (Bentler and
proper use of pesticides is very important. In a research Speck art, 1981).
conducted by Aktas (2001), the place of pest sellers in the
agricultural extension system was investigated and it was The objectives of the study were a s follows:
found that at the macro level there is a lack of law and C To describe the socio-economic characteristics;
regulations, which will direct the optimal use of chemicals C To measure the farmers attitude toward sustainable
and pesticides. Soil pollution in the locality is b asically agriculture, and
caused by improper use of farm machinery, improper use C To determine the extent to which selected socio-
of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, improper irrigation economic characteristics influence the importance the
and lack of modern irrigation systems such as trickle and farmers’ attitude to sustainable agriculture.
drip irrigation, deforestation, early and excessive gazing
of range lands, and farm land being used for housing and MATERIALS AND METHODS
industrialization purposes.
Attitudes are defined as a disposition to respond This research was done from M arch o f 2009 to
favorably or unfa vorably to an ob ject, person, institution November of 2009 in Behbahan County from Khuzestan
or event. An attitude is (a) directed tow ards an object, Province in Iran. The population of this study consisted of
person, institution, or event; (b) has evaluative, positive or 7314 farmers of Behbahan county of Khuzestan province
negative, elements; (c) is based on cognitive beliefs in Iran. 208 farmers were selected by Stratified Sampling.
towards the attitude-object (i.e., the balancing between The instrument was for data collection w as questionn aire
positive and negative attributes of an object leads to an that consists of two sections. Section one had 24
attitude); and (d) has consequences for behavior statem ents of the sustainable agriculture. Five point Likert
when confronted with the attitude object scale range d from 1 = strongly d isagree to 5 = strongly
(Bergevoet et al., 2004 ). agree. Meanwhile, some of the statements were designed
Attitude is determined by the beliefs that are salient negative. The highest possible value for the general
or important to a person. Attitudes are formed by what an perception in this sca le was 120 and the lowest 24. Higher
individual perceives to b e true about the attitude-object. values indicated positive attitude toward sustainable
This perception may or may not be based upon agriculture concepts. Section two con tained dem ographic
information and knowledge and/or an emotional reaction information, asking farmers' age, years of experience,
towards the object. Many beliefs and values may underpin level of education, literacy, agrarian land and etc.,
an attitude (Willock et al., 1999). Attitude simply refers Que stionnaire reliability was estimated by calculating
to ‘a person’s evaluation of any psyc hological ob ject’. Cronbach's alpha, which was 0.78. Group of respondents
These evaluation judgments are represented as items of for their attitude regarding sustainab le agriculture
knowledge, which are based on three general classes of concepts was used by the interval standard deviation from
i n f o rm a t i o n : cogn itiv e in fo rm atio n , e motional mean:
information, and information about past behaviors
(Allen et al., 2003). A = very low: Min # A< Mean-S t.d,
In fact attitude reflects personal factors. Attitude is a B = low: Mean-St.d # B<Mean,
predisposition to act in a certain way. It is the state of C = moderate: Mean # C<M ean+St.d,
readiness that influences a person to act in a given manner D = high: Mean+St.d #D# Max
(Rahman et al., 1999). Therefore, attitude surveys in
agriculture could lead to a more adequate explanation and Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for
prediction of farmers’ economic behavior and have been the Social Sciences (SPSS-11.5). Appropriate descriptive
used on conservation and environmentally related issues statistics such as frequencies, Percentage scores, mean
focusing on the influence of attitude variables as scores, standard deviations and correlation and multiple
predictors of conservation behavior (Dimara and regression were used to analyze the data.
Skuras, 1999). Dimara and Skuras (1999) concluded from
their research that a significant relationship was found Study area: Behbahan County with extent of 3516 Km 2
between behavior and the goals and intentions of farmers. has located in between longitude of 50°13! and 50°16! at
This relationship is even stronger when statements on East and in latitude of between 34°30! and 30°37! in
attitudes, social n orms and perceived b ehav ioral control North. This county is placed in sem iarid region in east
are included (Bergevoet et al., 2004). Investigators have southern of Khuzestan province of Iran and heig ht of it
taken four different positions concerning causal from sea surface is 300 m. Annual rainfall average of

423
Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 2(5): 422-427, 2010

Table 1: Classification of farmers according to their attitude toward sustainable agriculture


Attitude Frequency % Cumu lative %
V e ry lo w (A ) 30 14 .4 14 .4
l ow ( B ) 95 45 .7 60 .1
m o d er at e( C ) 39 18 .8 78 .9
h ig h (D ) 44 21 .2 100
Total 208 100
A = very low: Min # A<M ean-St.d G B = low: Mean-St.d # B<M ean G C = moderate: Mean # C< M ean +S t.dG D = high: Mean+St.d #D # Max

Table 2: Ra nking of statemen ts


statem ents Mean SD CV Rank
Soil and water are the sources of all life and should therefore be strictly conserved. 4.32 0.809 0.187 1
The indiscriminate uses of ag ricultural chemicals are harmful for human s. 4.29 0.961 0.224 2
Clover and alfalfa cultivation improves the soil fertile. 3.89 0.891 0.229 3
Application of animal fertilizers can increase soil fertile. 4.15 0.974 0.235 4
The key to agriculture’s future success lies in learning to imitate natural 4.10 0.970 0.237 5
ecosystems and farm in harmony w ith nature.
Farm ers sho uld farm only as muc h land as they c an pe rsonally c are for. 4.17 1.030 0.247 6
The primary goal of farmers should be to maximize the productivity, 4.08 1.071 0.263 7
effi cien cy, a nd pro fitab ility o f the ir far ms . *
Consump tion of animal fertilizers can increase income. 3.76 1.020 0.271 8
Most of farms should integrate agronomy and animal husbandry. 3.88 1.146 0.295 9
Crop rotation and diversity can reduce farms pests. 3.62 1.709 0.298 10
Minimum tillage can reduce erosion and soil degradation. 3.48 1.047 0.301 11
M y farm p rodu ctivity will be reduc ing If I use not ch emical fe rtilizers 3.92 1.185 0.302 12
an d p estic ide s in my farm . *
On e o f the prin cip les o f ag ricu lture is re du ces the en viro nm en tal d am ag es. 3.88 1.181 0.304 13
Pe st att ack wi ll be inc rea sin g d ue to C on sec utiv e p lan ting a p lan t in th e fa rm. 3.71 1.161 0.313 14
Ag ricultu ral ch emic als m aterials pollu te the env ironm ent. 3.98 1.266 0.318 15
For inc reased a gricultural p rodu ction sh ould b e used mach inery 3.85 1.275 0.331 16
an d n ew tech no log ies. *
The best way to reduce pest and weed damage is Weed farm. 3.24 1.149 0.354 17
Th e be st w ay to con trol an d red uce dam age of fa rm p ests a nd w eed s is bio logic al co ntrol. 3.20 1.137 0.355 18
Ap plic atio n o f gr een ma nu re is no t ne ces sary du e to ex ist ch em ical ferti lize rs. * 3.07 1.106 0.360 19
Fa rme r's in co me wi ll be red uc ing du e to cro p ro tatio n. * 3.32 1.249 0.376 20
Ap pro pria te m eth od for co ntro l of p est a nd we ed is u se o f pe st p estic ide an d p ois on s. * 3.62 1.388 0.383 21
Fa rm p rod uc tivity inc rea se o nly du e to inc rea se in co nsu mp tion of f ertiliz ers. * 3.22 1.385 0.422 22
Re sid ue s of be for e p lan ting red uc e fe rtile s oil. * 2.47 1.513 0.613 23
Cr op rota tion can cau se to soi l ero sio n. * 2.16 1.366 0.632 24
* = neg ative statem ents

county is 354 mm , the minimum temp erature is -2.8ºC off-farm activities and 45% of farmers access to
and maximum temperature is 50.2ºC (Anon yms, 2009). agriculture credits for their activities. Only 30% of
Number of exploitable units of county is 7314 units that respo ndents participated in extension courses.
82% of them have a space under 10 ha (An onym s, 2006). The result of study showed that majority of farmers
have low and very low know ledge abou t sustainable
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION agriculture (52.4% ) and 5 3.8 of farmers have low and
very low level use of methods of sustainable agriculture.
The ages of the respon dents ranged from 22 to 81 and According to result of assessment of farmers’ job
the mean age was 44 (SD = 13 .56, N = 208). Majority satisfaction, 50.5% of farmers have low and very low
(56.7%, n =118) of respondent w ere 30 -54 years old. All level of this factor.
of the respondents in the study were male. The years of To group the respondents on their attitude towards
experience of respondents ranged from 3 to 50 and the concepts of sustainable agriculture, the interval of
mean of their ex perien ce w as 22 years. The educational standard deviation from mean was use d. Accord ing to
level of majorities (30%) of farmers was primary, average Table 1 attitudes of 45.7% (n = 95) of respondents on
number of family size of farmers wa s five people. The sustain able agriculture was at the low level. In addition,
average size of farm to each farmer was equal to 5.5 ha, 21.2% (n = 44) of respondents had high attitude and
average of irrigated land was 4.1, and 1.5 ha of their lands 18.7% of them (n = 39) had mod erate attitude and 14.4%
were dry lands. Average num ber of pieces for the farmers of them (n = 30) had very low attitude on the concepts of
under this study was 3.3 pieces. M ajority of farmers w ere sustainable ag riculture (Table 1).
landowner and dominant farming system was agronomy Table 2 shows the mean and standard deviations of
and animal husbandry in this region (45.2% ) and m ostly statem ents used to evaluate the attitude of farmers on
have alternative cropping and they used of labor for their sustainable agriculture.
agricultural activities. 43.3% of farmers in this study have

424
Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 2(5): 422-427, 2010

Table 3: correlation between attitude toward sustainable agriculture and other variables
Farmers attitude to organic farming
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Variables Correlation p-value
Farmers age - 0.502 * * 0.000
Literacy 0.529 * * 0.000
**
Family size - 0.434 0.000
Experience in agriculture activities - 0.477 * * 0.000
participation in extension courses 0.506 * * 0.000
**
agrarian land - 0.245 0.000
Off -farm income 0.265 * * 0.000
Farm ers kno wled ge ab out su stainable a griculture 0.587 * * 0.000
Level of use of sustainable agriculture methods 0.448 * * 0.000
**
Ex tensio n co ntac ts 0.611 0.000
Job satisfaction 0.181 * * 0.009

Tab le 4: R esu lts of m ultiple regre ssion ana lysis


Source of variation SS df MS F-ratio p-value
Regression 18355.508 4 4588.877 53.483 0.000
Residual 16559.487 193 85.800
Total 34914.995 197
Variables in the equation
Variables R 2 Cumulative R 2 Change F Change P Change $
con stant - - - < .01 52.422
Ex tensio n co ntac ts 0.373 0.373 116.440 < .01 0.551
Farmers knowledge about 0.435 0.062 75.143 < .01 0.482
sustainab le agriculture
Job satisfaction 0.511 0.076 67.562 < .01 -0.502
literacy 0.526 0.015 53.483 < .01 1.496
Variables not in the equation
Variables $ t Sig-t
Farmers age 0.023 0.263 0.793
Family size 0.127 1.561 0.120
Experience in agriculture activities 0.080 0.944 0.347
participation in exten sion courses 0.115 1.748 0.082
agrarian land 0.076 1.391 0.166
Off-farm income 0.027 0.505 0.614
Level of use of sustainable agriculture methods -0.040 -0.521 0.603
SV = So urce o f variation, S S = S um o f squa res, M S = M ean S quare

Correlation analysis of attitude toward sustainable influence on farmers’ attitude. These variables together
agriculture with some variables: Pearson correlation explained 52.6% of the variance of effective factors on
was used to test the relationship betw een farme r’s attitude farmers attitude toward sustainable agriculture in the
and other variables. According to Tab le 3 there are region selected for the study.
negative correlation between ag e, experience in The variable that entered the regression model first
agricultural activities, family size and agrarian land with was ‘extension co ntacts’ considered alone; this variable
attitude toward sustainable agriculture. In addition, there explained 37.3% of the variance for farmers’ attitude. The
are positive significant relation ships betw een attitudes second variable that entered into model was ‘Farme rs
toward sustainable agriculture with variables such as: knowledge about sustainable agriculture’ and explained
literacy, participation in extension courses, off-farm 6.2% of the variance. The third was ‘Job satisfaction’ and
income, and farmers’ knowledge abou t sustainable explained 7.6% of the variable alone and finally the
agriculture, level of use of sustainable agriculture forth variable was ‘literacy’ that explained 1.5% of the
methods, extension contacts and job satisfaction. Other scale.
variables did not show any significant correlation with the
main scale of this research. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Identifying the effective factors on attitude toward The subject of sustainable agriculture and n ecessity
sustainable agriculture: Table 4 presents the selected of chan ges in the activities of ag riculture sector in a
variables influence on the attitude toward sustainab le direction that would fit sustainable development is an
agriculture. This objective was accomplished using issue recently raised in our country and man y scien tific
multiple regression analysis. Among 11 variables that groups have show n interest to it. Sustainable agriculture,
entered into model, only 4 variables had significant as a system for producing foods and fibers, is more

425
Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 2(5): 422-427, 2010

knowledge - intensiv e than input intensive and needs pressure on natural recourse and inc rease farmers
knowledge, managem ent and skills (Cho and income in other hand;
Boland, 2004). To transfer this knowledge, skills and C Access to more rural infrastructural and credits can
management to farmers, it is necessary to generate increased job satisfaction between farmers.
desirable chan ges in the attitudes of farmers as first step;
therefore, assessing attitudes in connection with the REFERENCES
principles and concepts of sustainable agriculture gives a
standard of existing status on which basis, planning c ould Aktas, Y., 2001. Tarimsal yay2m surecinde tar2msal ilac
be mad e to achieve desirable status. Therefore propose of saticilarinin yeri ve onemi: The place and importance
this study was assessment of farmers attitude tow ard of pest sellers in agricultural extension process. GAP
sustain able agriculture and identifying de terminants of it. II. Tarim Kongresi, 1: 581-592.
Based on the research findings, age of farmers under Allen, C.T., R.A . Machleit, S.S. Kleine an d A.S. Notani,
study and their level of experience in agriculture activities 2003. A place for emotion in attitude models. J. Bus.
were appropriate for these activities, but they have low Res., 56(1): 1-6.
literacy level. The majority of farmers were not Al-Subaiee, S.S.F., E.P. Yoder and J.S. Thomson, 2005.
participated in extension courses and they do not access Extension agen ts’ perceptions of sustainab le
to agriculture credits. The finding s of this study indicated agriculture in the Riyadh Region of Saudi Arabia. J.
that the attitude of farmers is not in a favorable situation. Int. Agric. Exten. Edu., 12: 5-13.
Results of correlation test showed that older farmers with Anony ms, 2006. Annals of Khuzesatan Province: Vice-
more age, experience in agriculture activities, family size presidency for Statistical Center of Iran. Strategic
and more ag rarian land hav e low attitude tow ard Planning and Supervision.
sustain able agriculture than younger farmers. In addition
Anony ms, 2009. Annual Meteorological Report. Iran
farmers with h igh level of literacy and participa tion in
Meteorological O rgan ization , Khu zesta n
extension courses have better attitude toward this type of
Meteorological Organization.
agriculture. In other hand off-farm income, farmers’
Bentler, P.M. and G. Speckart, 1981. Attitudes ‘cause’
knowledge abou t sustainable agriculture, level use of
behaviors: A structural equation analysis. J. Pers.
sustain able agriculture methods, extension contacts and
Soc. Psychol., 40(2): 226-238.
job satisfaction have positive correlation with farmers’
Bergevoet, R.H.M., C.J.M. Ondersteijn, H .W . Saatkamp,
attitude toward sustainable agriculture.
C.M .J. W oerkum a nd R .B.M . Huirne, 2004.
In study area according to research findings, the
Entrepreneurial behavior of dutch da iry farmers
factors that have positive correlation with farmers attitude
under a milk q uota system : Goals, objectives and
as literacy, off-farm income, farmers knowledge, use of
attitudes. Agr. Sys., 80: 1-21.
sustain able methods don’t have good status therefore can
result that all of this factors caused that farmers don ’t Beus, C.E. and R.E. Dunlap, 1990. Conventional versus
have good level of attitude toward sustainable agriculture. alternative agriculture: The paradigm roots of the
Survey the affective factors on attitude toward debate. Rural Sc o., 55: 590-616.
organic farming showed that extension contacts related Bhutto, A.W . and A.A. B azm i, 2007 . Sustainable
sustain able agriculture w as the m ost effective factor in agriculture and eradication of poverty in Pakistan.
improving attitude towards sustainable agriculture and Nat. Resour. Forum, 31: 253-262.
using the extension contacts are in the next order. Other Cho, K.M. and H. Boland, 2004. Education and extension
effective factors that recognized in this study w ere for multi - functional agriculture: Extension conc epts
Farmers knowledge about sustainable agriculture, Job for sustainable agricultural developme nt in myan mar.
satisfaction and farmers literacy. According to the Proceedings of 20th Annual Conference of AIAEE.
findings of this research, the educational level of Dublin, Ireland.
majorities of farmers was primary were low. In other hand Dimara, E. and D. Skuras, 1999. Importance and need for
these factors have had negative correlation with attitude rural deve lopm ent instru men ts under the C AP : A
toward sustainable agriculture. That is why majority of survey of farmers’ attitudes in marginal areas of
farmers have low-level attitude towards sustainable. Greece. J. Agr. Econ., 50(2): 304-315.
Therefore recom men ded that: Lee, D.R ., 2005 . Agricultural sustainability and
technology adoption: Issues and policies for
C Can increased farmers attitude, knowledge and skills developing countries. Am. J. Agr. Econ., 87:
about sustainable agriculture with holdin g 1325-1333. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8276.2005.00826.x.
extensional workshop for farmers in area Leeuw is, C., 2000. Learnin g to be sustainable: D oes the
C Create rural industries and ind ustrial related to Dutch agrarian knowledge market fail? J. Agr. Edu.
processing the agriculture production can decrease Exten., 7: 79-92.

426
Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 2(5): 422-427, 2010

Leeuw is, C., 2004. Communication for Rural Innovation: Tatlidil, F.F., I. Boz an d H. Tatlidil, 2008. Farmers’
Rethinking Agricultural Extension. Blackwell, Iowa, perception of sustainable agriculture and its
US A. determinants: a case study in Kahramanmaras
Pretty, J.N., 1995. Regenerating Agriculture: Policies and province of Turkey. Environ. Dev . Sustain., doi:
Practice for Sustainab ility and Self-reliance. 10.1007/s10668-008-9168-x.
Earthscan, London. W illiams, D.L., 2000. Student’s knowledge of and
Qam ar, M.K., 2002. Global Trends in Agricultural expected impact from sustainable agriculture. J.
Extension: Challenges Facing A sia and the Pacific Agric. Edu., 41: 19-24.
Region. Sustainable Development Department (SD), W illock, J., I.J. Deary, J. Edwards-Jones, G.J. Gibson,
FAO, Rom e. M.J. McGregor, A. Sutherland, J.B. Dent, O. Morgan
Rahman, M.Z., H. Mikuni and M.M. Rahm an, 1999. and R. G rieve, 1999. The role of attitude and
Towards sustainable farming development: The objectives in farmer decision making: Business and
attitude of farmers in a selected area of Shimane environmentally-oriented beha vior in Scotland. J.
Prefecture, Japan. J. Sustain. Agr., 14(4): 19-33. Agri. Econ., 50(2): 286-303.
Rasul, G. and G.B. Thapa, 2003. Sustainability of
ecological and convention al agricultural sy stems in
Bangladesh: An assessment based on en vironmen tal,
econ omic and social perspectives. Agri. Syst., 79:
327-351.

427

Вам также может понравиться