Informing Farmers on Environmental Issues

A widespread concern exists on the effects of agricultural practices on the environment. Several researchers have documented the information needs of farmers about various issues, but few researchers have examined their environmental information needs and sources they find useful to learn about these issues. These are critically important questions in developing educational programs. Thus, this study was conducted to determine the perceptions of Pennsylvania farmers and their information needs about environmental issues.

The target population consisted of 23,481 farmers in Pennsylvania. The sampling frame was obtained from the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service (ASCS) of the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture. A random sample of 379 farmers was selected. The questionnaire consisted of five sections: (1) farmers' attitudes about environmental issues measured on a five-point scale from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree," (2) farming practices, (3) demographic characteristics, (4) perceptions of farmers on information use, and (5) human resources. After eight weeks, 246 farmers responded (65%). No significant differences were found (p>.05) between early and late respondents on key variables included in the study. The questionnaire was found to have acceptable reliability (Cronbach's alpha = .88).

The means for the five categories of environmental issues indicated water pollution was perceived as a serious issue (3.79), followed by manure mismanagement (3.60), lack of educational information (3.47), nutrient mismanagement (3.37), and groundwater quality (2.89). These data suggest Pennsylvania farmers perceived water pollution as a serious issue, but were uncertain about groundwater quality being one.

Pennsylvania farmers indicated face-to-face and observational activities were the most useful communication methods to learn about environmental issues. In addition, the farmers indicated newsletters, public meetings, manuals, magazines, brochures, technical notes, videotapes, and photographs and charts were somewhat useful. However, these farmers rated radio lower for learning about environmental issues. The findings of this study are consistent with earlier research.

Pennsylvania farmers ranked the Soil Conservation Service as the most useful human resource, followed by the Penn State Cooperative Extension office in their counties, Penn State faculty, and county conservation districts. These farmers also indicated that the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service, neighbors, friends, family members, and local seed/chemical/fertilizer dealers were useful human resources. However, the farmers were uncertain about the usefulness of the Department of Environmental Resources, Environmental Protection Agency, and machinery dealers as environmental information providers.

The '90s has already been called the environmental decade. It's important for Extension to identify effective and efficient educational delivery systems of environmental issues.

1. L. Bounaga, Preferred Sources and Methods of Obtaining Information Related to Adoption of Soil Conservation Practices by Landowners of Highly Erodible Fields in Franklin County, Iowa (Master's thesis, Iowa State University, Ames, 1990); T. H. Bruening, "Communicating with Farmers About Environmental Issues," Research Paper Abstracts (St. Paul, Minnesota: International Meeting of Agricultural Communicators in Education, 1990); and Steven Padgitt, Agriculture and Groundwater Issues in Big Spring Basin and Winneshiek County, Iowa: Survey of Farm and Nonfarm Households on Perceptions, Attitudes, and Farming Practices (Ames: Iowa State University, Cooperative Extension Service, 1987).