IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v92y2020ics0264837719318101.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using Q-methodology to identify rural women’s viewpoint on succession of family farms

Author

Listed:
  • Barbosa, Roseli Azambuja
  • Domingues, Carla Heloisa de Faria
  • Silva, Marcelo Corrêa da
  • Foguesatto, Cristian Rogério
  • Pereira, Mariana de Aragão
  • Gimenes, Régio Marcio Toesca
  • Borges, João Augusto Rossi

Abstract

In the world, the majority of farms are family-based. However, migration of young people from rural to urban areas, and a lack of farm successors negatively impact on the continuity of family farming. The pattern of migration is unbalanced in terms of gender: women are more likely to leave rural areas than men, which has negative consequences for rural development. The objective of this study was to identify rural women’s viewpoint about the elements that would facilitate them to eventually take over the family farm. Q-methodology was used to identify rural women’s viewpoints. Data were collected individually from 28 women, face-to-face with each woman, using a transportable board game to enable friendlier dynamics. Our findings showed five women’s viewpoints: rural attractiveness, family support, recognition, working and living conditions, and financial autonomy. The identification of these different viewpoints could provide insights that can be used to design public and private interventions aimed to favor female heirs to take over the family farm.

Suggested Citation

  • Barbosa, Roseli Azambuja & Domingues, Carla Heloisa de Faria & Silva, Marcelo Corrêa da & Foguesatto, Cristian Rogério & Pereira, Mariana de Aragão & Gimenes, Régio Marcio Toesca & Borges, João August, 2020. "Using Q-methodology to identify rural women’s viewpoint on succession of family farms," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:92:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719318101
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104489
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837719318101
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104489?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Walder, Peter & Kantelhardt, Jochen, 2018. "The Environmental Behaviour of Farmers – Capturing the Diversity of Perspectives with a Q Methodological Approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 55-63.
    2. Morais, Manoela & Borges, João Augusto Rossi & Binotto, Erlaine, 2018. "Using the reasoned action approach to understand Brazilian successors’ intention to take over the farm," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 445-452.
    3. Margaret Alston, 2004. "Who is down on the farm? Social aspects of Australian agriculture in the 21st century," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 21(1), pages 37-46, March.
    4. Greiner, Romy & Patterson, Louisa & Miller, Owen, 2009. "Motivations, risk perceptions and adoption of conservation practices by farmers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 99(2-3), pages 86-104, February.
    5. Alexander, Kim S. & Parry, Lucy & Thammavong, Phomma & Sacklokham, Silinthone & Pasouvang, Somphanh & Connell, John G. & Jovanovic, Tom & Moglia, Magnus & Larson, Silva & Case, Peter, 2018. "Rice farming systems in Southern Lao PDR: Interpreting farmers’ agricultural production decisions using Q methodology," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 1-10.
    6. Pereira, Mariana A. & Fairweather, John R. & Woodford, Keith B. & Nuthall, Peter L., 2016. "Assessing the diversity of values and goals amongst Brazilian commercial-scale progressive beef farmers using Q-methodology," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 1-8.
    7. Graeub, Benjamin E. & Chappell, M. Jahi & Wittman, Hannah & Ledermann, Samuel & Kerr, Rachel Bezner & Gemmill-Herren, Barbara, 2016. "The State of Family Farms in the World," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 1-15.
    8. Zou, Baoling & Mishra, Ashok K. & Luo, Biliang, 2018. "Aging population, farm succession, and farmland usage: Evidence from rural China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 437-445.
    9. Fairweather, John R. & Keating, Norah C., 1994. "Goals and management styles of New Zealand farmers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 181-200.
    10. Viira, Ants-Hannes & Pöder, Anne & Värnik, Rando, 2014. "Discrepancies between the Intentions and Behaviour of Farm Operators in the Contexts of Farm Growth, Decline, Continuation and Exit – Evidence from Estonia," Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, vol. 63(1).
    11. Viira, Ants-Hannes & Pöder, Anne & Värnik, Rando, 2014. "Discrepancies between the Intentions and Behaviour of Farm Operators in the Contexts of Farm Growth, Decline, Continuation and Exit – Evidence from Estonia," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 63(01), pages 1-17, March.
    12. Maybery, Darryl & Crase, Lin & Gullifer, Chris, 2005. "Categorising farming values as economic, conservation and lifestyle," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 59-72, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sheridan, Alison & Newsome, Lucie & Howard, Tanya & Lawson, Andrew & Saunders, Skye, 2021. "Intergenerational farm succession: How does gender fit?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    2. Chengzhi Yin & Jianhua Xiao & Tianqi Zhang, 2021. "Effectiveness of Chinese Regulatory Planning in Mitigating and Adapting to Climate Change: Comparative Analysis Based on Q Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-14, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Heidi Leonhardt & Michael Braito & Reinhard Uehleke, 2022. "Combining the best of two methodological worlds? Integrating Q methodology-based farmer archetypes in a quantitative model of agri-environmental scheme uptake," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(1), pages 217-232, March.
    2. Leonhardt, Heidi & Braito, Michael & Uehleke, Reinhard, 2021. "Who participates in agri-environmental schemes? A mixed-methods approach to investigate the role of farmer archetypes in scheme uptake and participation level," FORLand Working Papers 27 (2021), Humboldt University Berlin, DFG Research Unit 2569 FORLand "Agricultural Land Markets – Efficiency and Regulation".
    3. Larcher, Manuela & Engelhart, Reinhard & Vogel, Stefan, 2019. "Agricultural Professionalization of Austrian Family Farm Households the Effects of Vocational Attitude, Social Capital and Perception of Farm Situation," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 68(1), March.
    4. Radosław PASTUSIAK & Magdalena JASINIAK & Michał SOLIWODA & Joanna STAWSKA, 2017. "What may determine off-farm income? A review," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 63(8), pages 380-391.
    5. Chiara Calabrese1 & Stefan Mann1 & Michel Dumondel, 2012. "Patterns of occupational choice in the Swiss alpine labor market," Journal of Socio-Economics in Agriculture (Until 2015: Yearbook of Socioeconomics in Agriculture), Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, vol. 5(1), pages 31-54.
    6. Graskemper, Viktoria & Meine, Karolin & Feil, Jan-Henning, 2020. "Values of Farmers in the Context of Entrepreneurship – Evidence from Germany," 60th Annual Conference, Halle/ Saale, Germany, September 23-25, 2020 305603, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    7. Lijing Gao & J. Arbuckle, 2022. "Examining farmers’ adoption of nutrient management best management practices: a social cognitive framework," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(2), pages 535-553, June.
    8. Buckley, Cathal & Howley, Peter & Jordan, Phil, 2015. "The role of differing farming motivations on the adoption of nutrient management practices," International Journal of Agricultural Management, Institute of Agricultural Management, vol. 4(4), July.
    9. Howley, Peter & Buckley, Cathal & O Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary, 2015. "Explaining the economic ‘irrationality’ of farmers' land use behaviour: The role of productivist attitudes and non-pecuniary benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 186-193.
    10. Akhmadiyeva, Zarema & Herzfeld, Thomas, 2021. "How does practice matches land laws in Central Asia?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    11. Pereira, Mariana A. & Fairweather, John R. & Woodford, Keith B. & Nuthall, Peter L., 2016. "Assessing the diversity of values and goals amongst Brazilian commercial-scale progressive beef farmers using Q-methodology," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 1-8.
    12. Roman Neyter & Oleg Nivievskyi, 2023. "Effect of subsidies on farms' exit decision," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(4), pages 941-959, October.
    13. Greiner, Romy, 2015. "Motivations and attitudes influence farmers' willingness to participate in biodiversity conservation contracts," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 154-165.
    14. François J Dessart & Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & René van Bavel, 2019. "Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: a policy-oriented review," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 417-471.
    15. Dengyan Ji & Xiaoping Shi & Xiaojuan Luo & Xianlei Ma, 2023. "The Impact of Intergenerational Inheritance on the Scale of Farmland Management in the Context of Aging: Evidence from Eastern China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, July.
    16. Graskemper, Viktoria & Meine, Karolin & Feil, Jan-Henning, 2020. "Values of Farmers in the Context of Entrepreneurship – Evidence from Germany," 60th Annual Conference, Halle/ Saale, Germany, September 23-25, 2020 305603, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    17. Paul Swagemakers & Maria Dolores Dominguez Garcia & Amanda Onofa Torres & Henk Oostindie & Jeroen C. J. Groot, 2017. "A Values-Based Approach to Exploring Synergies between Livestock Farming and Landscape Conservation in Galicia (Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-16, October.
    18. Huaranca, Laura Liliana & Iribarnegaray, Martín Alejandro & Albesa, Federico & Volante, José Norberto & Brannstrom, Christian & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2019. "Social Perspectives on Deforestation, Land Use Change, and Economic Development in an Expanding Agricultural Frontier in Northern Argentina," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    19. Yatao Huang & Hua Liu & Xuanxuan Guo & Wenxian Jiao, 2022. "The Perception of the National Traceability Platform among Small-Scale Tea Farmers in Typical Agricultural Areas in Central China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-20, December.
    20. Emtage, Nicholas & Herbohn, John, 2012. "Assessing rural landholders diversity in the Wet Tropics region of Queensland, Australia in relation to natural resource management programs: A market segmentation approach," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 107-118.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:92:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719318101. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.