Farmer Decision-Making on the Concept of Coexistence: A Comparative Analysis between Organic and Biotech Farmers in the Philippines

Clarisse Mendoza Gonzalvo, Wilson Jr. Florendo Aala and Keshav Maharjan
Additional contact information
Clarisse Mendoza Gonzalvo: Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Hiroshima University, 1-1-1 Kagamiyama, Higashi-Hiroshima City, Hiroshima 739-8524, Japan
Wilson Jr. Florendo Aala: Institute of Clinical Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, No. 1 University Road, Tainan 701, Taiwan

Agriculture, 2021, vol. 11, issue 9, 1-21

Abstract: Farmer perspectives are relevant for understanding agricultural issues and formulating policies. In this study, we conducted a cross-sectional survey on 70 Filipino farmers (i.e., 35 organic and 35 biotech) to understand farmers’ perspectives regarding coexisting farming methods. Internal response variables were tested to verify the type of decision-making processes being undertaken by biotech and organic farmers. Our results showed that a non-linear decision-making process, similar to the Stimulus–Organism–Response Model, was present for both farmer groups. The study also found that biotech farmers were more influenced by internal factors (e.g., consumer resources) than organic farmers, who rely more on external influences (e.g., culture and social interactions), in connection to their coexistence perspective. The presence of “maverick executives” within the organic farmers gives traction to the notion that coexistence can help empower farmers in choosing what farming method is most suitable to their needs. Our data can also provide insights to policymakers in terms of surveying farmer perspectives to balance farmer needs, primarily in yield and income security, with the national agricultural agenda centered on environmental conservation. Thus, farmer perspectives should be considered alongside ongoing studies and debates on coexistence.

Keywords: coexistence; organic farming; biotech farming; farmer decision-making; sustainable agriculture (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q1 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/9/857/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/9/857/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jagris:v:11:y:2021:i:9:p:857-:d:631107

Access Statistics for this article

Agriculture is currently edited by Ms. Leda Xuan

More articles in Agriculture from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().