1 / 44

What Ohioans Think About Food, Agriculture, and Environmental Issues

What Ohioans Think About Food, Agriculture, and Environmental Issues. Northwest Extension District Findlay, OH November 15, 2002. Project Background. Funded by OSU Extension, OARDC and the College of FAES Focus on social issues in agriculture as they relate to the ecological paradigm.

zarola
Download Presentation

What Ohioans Think About Food, Agriculture, and Environmental Issues

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What Ohioans Think About Food, Agriculture, and Environmental Issues Northwest Extension District Findlay, OH November 15, 2002

  2. Project Background • Funded by OSU Extension, OARDC and the College of FAES • Focus on social issues in agriculture as they relate to the ecological paradigm

  3. Project Team • Study conducted by a team associated with Department of HCRD and OSU Extension. • Jeff Sharp, Molly Bean Smith, Bill Flinn, Mark Tucker, Sherrie Whaley, Greg Davis, Jerry Thomas, Denny Hall

  4. Methodology • Sample of 7,976 Ohioans selected and stratified by 5 extension districts and metro core county status • Dillman’s TDM utilized with 5 contacts • Response rate = 55.7% • Analysis of state, NW District, and NW district noncore metro (not including Allen or Ottawa County)

  5. Summary of the Sample • Comparison with State and NW populations (2000 Census) • Close match: gender, age (over 24), households w/ kids, household incomes • Limitations: Renters, Households in homes less than $100,000, 18-24 year olds

  6. Outline of Presentation • Personal Connections to Agriculture • General Views of Agriculture • Livestock Issues • Food Safety Concerns

  7. Connections with farming

  8. Parents ever owned or operated a farm *Does not include core urban counties (Lucas and Allen)

  9. Grandparents ever owned or operated a farm *Does not include core urban counties (Lucas and Allen)

  10. Number of farmers known *Does not include core urban counties (Lucas and Allen)

  11. Views of Farming and Farmers

  12. Overall, farming positively contributes to the quality of life in Ohio • 93% agreed or strongly agreed • 6% undecided • 1% disagreed or strongly disagreed • Strongest agreement among farm respondents • Significant difference by immediate relatives owning/operating a farm and age

  13. Q. I trust Ohio farmers to protect the environment. • 62% agreed or strongly agreed • 27% undecided • 11% disagreed or strongly disagreed • Agreement strongest in NW district • Agreement strongest among farm & country, nonfarm respondents • Significant difference by gender, age and those with immediate relatives owning/operating a farm

  14. Perceived Risks to Environmental Quality (Scaling: 1 = no risk; 7 = serious risk) • Disposal of waste in landfills (5.92) • Industrial activities (5.48) • Urban sprawl (5.14) • Residential chemical use on lawns (5.07) • Logging or mining (4.93) • Agricultural activities (3.89) • NW District respondents perceive lower risks than state respondents for all items except agricultural activities. • Women more likely than men to report higher levels of perceived risk.

  15. Q. Ohio farmers are generally sensitive to the concerns of nonfarm neighbors. • 48% agreed or strongly agreed • 37% undecided • 15% disagreed or strongly disagreed • Agreement lowest among city/suburban residents • Significant difference by those with immediate relatives owning/operating a farm

  16. Q. Farming activities that are offensive to nonfarm neighbors should be restricted. • 35% agreed or strongly agreed • 36% undecided • 29% disagreed or strongly disagreed • NW district is most undecided • Highest level of disagreement among farm and country,nonfarm respondents • Significant difference by gender and age

  17. Views of Ag/Rural Change

  18. Q. The loss of farmland is acceptable if it creates economic growth and new jobs in the state. • 21% agreed or strongly agreed • 25% undecided • 53% disagreed or strongly disagreed • Strongest disagreement among farm respondents

  19. Q. Ohio’s most productive farmland should be preserved for agriculture. • 93% agreed or strongly agreed • 5% undecided • 2% disagreed or strongly disagreed • Strongest agreement among farm respondents • Significant difference by age (older respondents agree more strongly)

  20. The migration of non-U.S. citizens into rural Ohio to work in farming & food production negatively impacts rural quality of life. • 30% agreed or strongly agreed • 39% undecided • 31% disagreed or strongly disagreed • Most disagreement in NW District • Strong disagreement by farm respondents • Significant difference by gender

  21. Large-scale livestock and poultry

  22. Do you know of any large-scale poultry or livestock production facilities near where you live? *Does not include core urban counties (Lucas and Allen)

  23. How concerned are you about the development of large-scale poultry and livestock production facilities? *Does not include core urban counties (Lucas and Allen)

  24. Are you familiar with some of the issues related to large-scale poultry and livestock production facilities? *Does not include core urban counties (Lucas and Allen)

  25. Narrowing the focus: • Focus on NW district (not including Allen and Lucas Counties) • Analysis is based on data from respondents reporting they were familiar with some of the issues related to large-scale livestock and poultry (n=285)

  26. Level of Concern by self-reported place of residence

  27. Level of Concern by Age

  28. Select attitudes about livestock • Following items from a series of eight questions related to large scale livestock and poultry facilities & two questions related to livestock and animal welfare

  29. Q. Large-scale poultry and livestock production facilities in rural areas are a threat to rural quality of life • 66% agreed or strongly agree • 12% undecided • 22% disagreed or strongly disagreed • Women agreed more strongly than men • Similar pattern of response by place of residence

  30. Q. Large-scale livestock facilities positively contribute to the economy • 48% agreed or strongly agreed • 26% undecided • 25% disagreed or strongly disagreed • Agreement lowest in NW district • Agreement lowest among country, farm respondents

  31. Q. The environmental impact of large-scale livestock operations have been greatly exaggerated. • 23% agreed or strongly agreed • 24% undecided • 54% disagreed or strongly disagreed • Younger respondents more likely to agree than older respondents

  32. Q. Large-scale facilities pose a serious threat to water and stream quality • 75% agreed or strongly agree • 13% undecided • 12% disagreed or strongly disagreed • Respondents over 60 more strongly agreed with the statement • Similar pattern of response by place of residence

  33. Q. Odors are the most serious problem with large-scale poultry and livestock facilities • 23% agreed or strongly agreed • 35% undecided • 42% disagree or strongly disagree • Respondents over 60 and women reported strongest level of agreement

  34. Q. In general, increased regulation of the treatment of animals in farming is needed. • 44% agreed or strongly agreed • 28% are undecided • 28% disagreed or strongly disagreed • Women reported stronger agreement than men

  35. Food Safety

  36. Q. Food is not as safe as it was 10 years ago. • 32% agreed or strongly agreed • 28% undecided • 40% disagreed or strongly disagreed

  37. Perceived Risks to Food Safety (NW District)(Scaling: 1 = no risk; 7 = serious risk) • Pesticide residues in food (5.23) • Contamination of drinking water (5.15) • Bio-terrorist attacks on food supply (5.12) • Bacterial contamination (5.10) • Growth hormones in meat or milk (5.04) • Mad cow disease (4.59) • Genetically modified organisms (4.40) • NW District respondents perceive lower risks than state respondents for all items. • Women more likely than men to report higher levels of perceived risk.

  38. Trust in Sources of Environmental and Food Safety Information(Scaling: 1 = no trust; 5 = High trust) • Physician/health professional (3.89) • University scientist (3.74) • Farmer or grower (3.75) • U.S. Dept. of Agriculture (3.66) • Extension (3.61) • Lesser trusted sources: U.S. FDA, friends and family, U.S. EPA, and consumer advocacy group.

  39. Q. I consider imported foods as safe as those produced in the U.S. • 13% agreed or strongly agreed • 25% undecided • 62% disagreed or strongly disagreed

  40. Q. When given a choice, I prefer to buy foods produced locally. • 85% agreed or strongly agreed • 10% undecided • 5% disagreed or strongly disagreed

  41. Q. Organic foods are safer than conventionally produced foods. • 35% agreed or strongly agreed • 41% undecided • 24% disagreed or strongly disagreed

  42. Biotechnology

  43. Q. Biotechnology is having a negative impact on food safety. • 19% agreed or strongly agreed • 61% undecided • 20% disagreed or strongly disagreed

  44. Q. The use of biotechnology in agriculture is having a positive impact on the environment. • 30% agreed or strongly agreed • 61% undecided • 9% disagreed or strongly disagreed

More Related