SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF INDIVIDUAL FARMS BASED ON CHOSEN GROUPS OF FARMERS

Piotr Prus
Department of Economics and Advisory in Agribusiness, University of Technology and Life Sciences in Bydgoszcz, Poland

ABSTRACT

The aim of the study presented in the paper was the evaluation of the possibilities of sustainable development of individual farms. From this point of view, polls were prepared and carried out in central and north provinces of Poland due to their significance for national farm production. The application of an intentional selection of the subjects aimed at the recognition of the innovative opinions of the farmers, who cooperate with agricultural advisory centres and educate their successors at secondary agricultural schools, on whom the image of Polish agriculture will soon depend. The results have shown that the majority of the respondents used techniques and technologies consisting in proper utilisation of natural resources and keeping of long-term balance of the environment. Therefore, it may be said that a true chance of sustainable development of individual farms exists.

Key words: agriculture, rural areas, sustainable development.

INTRODUCTION

Rural areas and agriculture play a significant role in the national economy, as well as in the whole European Union, whose member Poland is since May 2004. They are a place of living and working for a substantial part of the society, one that produces food and raw materials used in industry. Unfortunately, hitherto existing experience with the development of rural areas and agriculture shows that they generate many problems related to the lack of balance between economic, social and ecological factors [11,12].

The contemporary image of agriculture and rural areas will be undergoing changes. The evolutional character of their development is a natural thing caused by the need of adjustment to the changing reality and economic and social surroundings. Therefore, it is important, due to a close connection between agriculture and natural resources, to design a model of rural areas and agriculture development that will guarantee economic development in equilibrium and harmony with social expectations and environmental demands.

The most appropriate agricultural model, one that combines the above criteria (ecological, economic and social), is a sustainable agricultural system, which concentrates on production programming that guarantees reasonable utilisation of natural resources and ensures the preservation of biological diversity. These aims may be achieved thanks to a proper selection of production technology that assures lasting soil fertility. A great role in this farming system is played by a substitution of material input by knowledge and utilisation of farmers' high qualifications. Their theoretical knowledge and experience is indispensable for efficient economic activity planning, making it possible for them to get a good economic and social position.

Sustainable agricultural systems assume a full symbiosis of production and ecological aims. Production and used natural resources management allow the satisfaction of changing needs while keeping a high quality of the environment and protecting its resources.

However, definition of sustainable agriculture is not limited only to the production-economic and natural sphere. Complex theory of sustainable agricultural development includes both economic and ecological issues as well as social and ethical ones. Agricultural production aims at using natural resources in a way that does not damage their sources and at the same time allows the satisfaction of the basic needs of the successive generations of producers and consumers. The above mentioned economic aspects refer to the analysis of agricultural production profitableness, which influences the life standard of families that make their living on farming and to defining spending structure in their family budgets. Ecological aims resolve themselves into the necessity of keeping the environment in good condition and, as far as possible, of recreating natural qualities in polluted or degraded areas. Social sphere concerns defining the position and functioning of the families of farmers in the rural community and of people who give up farming, which imposes the necessity of lowering the level of employment in this sector through the evolution of rural areas in the direction of multifunctional development. Ethical factor accounts for the obligations of the users of the environment towards future generations and of food producers towards consumers [6,9,12].

The aim of the work was to define the possibilities of the sustainable development of family farms, where farmers using appropriate production methods will be able to respect environmental demands and fulfil their economic and social demands.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

While designing the present study, a main research hypothesis was constructed, which was as follows: the farmers in the study cooperating with agricultural advisory centres and educating their successors at agricultural schools respect the rules of sustainable development in their agricultural production at their farms. Moreover, two detailed hypotheses were put forward:

• the farmers in the study use techniques that promote natural resources preservation and environment protection during production,

• the farmers in the study improve their knowledge and raise their qualifications while looking for specific information on production techniques and technologies.

The main method of empirical material gathering was diagnostic poll, in which questionnaires were used. The presented polls were carried out from October 2002 to May 2003 among the owners of farms from the following provinces: zachodnio-pomorskie, pomorskie, kujawsko-pomorskie, wielkopolskie, warmińsko-mazurskie, mazowieckie and łódzkie. 714 questionnaires were analyzed, including 321 filled out by farmers cooperating with agricultural advisory centres and 393 farm owners educating their successors at agricultural schools. With this sample, 95% results probability may be assumed and sampling error equals 4%. Among the farmers who took part in the presented study, a big group was composed of fairly young people with a long period of professional activity ahead of them. 48.3% of the respondents were between 41 and 50 years of age, 32.6% were no more than 40 years old and only 19.1% of the subjects were 51 or older. According to the stated level of education, the biggest group was formed by the graduates of vocational schools (51.0%) and secondary schools (34.0%), which may have meant that most of the farmers in the study were well prepared professionally. There were fewer respondents with no more than primary (9.8%) and with higher (5.2%) education. For the most part, farmers owning big farms for Polish conditions took part in the study. The most numerous were owners of 15 ha or bigger farms (73.9%), the second most numerous group was owners of 7.0 to 14.9 ha farms (18.8%), the fewest were owners of less than 6.9 ha farms (7.3%).

The application of an intentional selection of the subjects aimed at the recognition of innovative opinions of the farmers who are the most open to novelties because it is them who will form the image of Polish agriculture in the nearest future. To achieve this, two groups of farm owners were chosen for the study. The first group was composed of farmers who actively improve their knowledge through the pursuit of new solutions at trainings and courses organised by agricultural advisory centres. Thanks to the obtained information they will be able to manage their farms effectively. The second group consisted of farmers taking care of their successors’ vocational education, who thanks to the knowledge and skills acquired at agricultural schools will be able to consciously and sensibly modernise their own farms in the foreseeable future. At a latter stage of the obtained empirical data analysis, both groups were compared and it was checked whether the respective respondents varied according to the answers they gave. To achieve this, a χ² (chi-square) independence test was used. The analysis was carried out at the significance level of α = 0.01, whilst testing the research hypotheses H₀ and H₁, which indicated: 1) H₀ – the lack of relationship between the features in question, 2) H₁ – there is relationship between the features in question.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The statistical calculations done in the study did not show the existence of significant differences in the way of running agricultural production between the respondents who cooperated with agricultural advisory centres and the farm owners who educated their successors at secondary agricultural schools (Table 1) (χ² was smaller than tabular). Therefore, the study results refer to the whole sample, excluding the division into both groups of farmers.

The results of the study showed that the majority of the respondents declared fulfilment of most criteria that condition running agricultural production according to the rules of sustainable development [1,8,10,13], which are: mixed production running (plant and animal), the application of balanced mineral and organic fertilisation, the so-called "green fields" introduction, the enrichment of soil with humus through straw ploughing, selection of disease resistant plants, the application of proper plant rotation (Fig. 1). As far as animal production is concerned, the majority of the respondents declared the securement for domestic animals of: proper area per head, bedding, proper light and ventilation, optimal temperature and humidity, pasture nutrition in the summer and favouring fodder produced at one's own farm (Fig. 2).

Correct planning of future actions requires a lot of knowledge and skills form agricultural producers in the field of their own farm management as well as in the analysis of events that take place in agricultural environment [3,4,5,7]. Unfortunately, the empirical material analysis showed the existence of many shortcomings in the field of agricultural production planning, organisation and monitoring on the farms in the study. In the minority were respondents who ran agricultural accounting and used computers for production planning, as well as those declaring: owning up-to-date soil-agricultural maps informing of soil pH and fertility, noting information on the applied doses of plant protection chemical means, mineral and organic fertilisers, or making notes of the applied nutritional doses, the obtained animal productivity or the performed veterinary operations (Fig. 3).

One of the most important elements making it possible for farm owners to make rational production decisions is access to information. The level of one’s knowledge is one of the endogenous factors that condition the development and adaptation to the changes that occur in farm surroundings, it enhances personal predispositions and their supervisors' intellectual supplies. Information is also an important component influencing the quality of human capital, which determines people's ability to work, to adapt to changes in their surroundings and the possibility to create new solutions [1,7,12]. The most important sources of information deepening the farmers' knowledge of farm management were trade periodicals and courses, trainings and presentations organised by agricultural advisory centres, as well as agricultural TV programmes. Agricultural fairs and exhibitions were often pointed out as places where one may broaden one's knowledge. Books and radio programmes came later. Many farmers in the study said that they obtain valuable information thanks to exchange of experiences at markets and fairs. The least useful for the people who took part in the study were all sorts of contests. A part of farmers giving different answers indicated that a valuable source of information to them was advice given by family, including parents and neighbours along with other farmers (Fig. 4).

Running sustainable agriculture requires high ecological awareness of farm owners, which is composed of the knowledge of environment protection, understanding of the ways of human coexistence with nature, as well as sensitivity to environmental requirements. The farmers in the study showed a high ecological awareness and conviction about the necessity of taking care of the environment (Fig. 5). They also declared ecological knowledge and skills improvement (Fig. 6). However, their practical actions for eco-development were limited above all to interfield road tidying. In the minority were respondents who declared introduction of ecological grounds or who segregated empty packaging of plant protection chemical means. Slightly over half of the farmers in the study admitted that they possessed proper containers for storing animal excrements protected from the leakage of harmful substances to the soil.

The basic economic aim of every enterprise, including a farm, is drawing an income, which conditions further investments and planned consumption. Moreover, the income level of a farm influences the possibility of the satisfaction of the needs of the farmer and his family [2]. The majority of the respondents were not satisfied with the obtained agricultural production income (Fig. 7). Moreover, they did not see the possibility of its increase in the near future. In the minority were also farmers satisfied with the amount of mechanizing equipment. Slightly over half of the subjects showed satisfaction with the number as well as the condition of the owned farm buildings.

Among the main factors preventing the farmers in the study from agricultural production planning, the most often quoted were: unstable prices of agricultural products and production means, lack of money for investments, lack of possibilities to sign agricultural contracts, little production scale, uneasy access to investment credits (Fig. 8).

Concluding, it may be stated that the main research hypothesis predicting that the farmers in the study cooperating with agricultural advisory centres and educating their successors at agricultural schools in their agricultural production respect the rules of sustainable development, was only partly confirmed. This is because, in spite of the application by the majority of the respondents of production techniques and technologies consisting in proper utilisation of natural resources and keeping of long-term balance of the environment, many mistakes were notices in the process of production planning, organisation and monitoring. Unfortunately, internal as well as external barriers existing in the closer and farther surrounding did not allow fully sustainable development of the farms in the study.

CONCLUSIONS

1. The majority of the farmers in the study declared the fulfilment of most of the criteria that condition running production according to the rules of sustainable development.
2. The majority of the respondents improved their knowledge and professional qualifications by looking for specialistic information on production techniques and technologies.
3. The farmers in the study were aware of the influence of their activities on the condition of the environment. Unfortunately, this very often did not have any broad reflection in their practical actions for eco-development.
4. The farmers in the study pointed out the existence of many barriers hindering farm development and showed many deficiencies in the process of agricultural production planning, organisation and monitoring.
5. The majority of the respondents did not have accounting at heart, meaning that they did not value its role in the successful process of money flux monitoring.
6. The majority of the farmers in the study were not satisfied with the obtained income and did not see the possibility of its increase at the farms they ran.

REFERENCES

1. De Buck A.J., van Rijn I., Roling N.G., Wossink G.A.A., 2001. Farmers' reasons for changing or not changing to more sustainable practices: an exploratory study of arable farming in the Netherlands. J. Agr. Educ. and Exten. 7(3), 153-166.

2. Gutkowska K., 2002. Funkcjonowanie wiejskich gospodarstw domowych w procesie zmian społecznych na wsi i przejawiane przez nie strategie radzenia sobie [W:] Samoorganizacja w społecznościach wiejskich – przejawy – struktury – zróżnicowania, pod red. [Functioning of rural households in the process of social changes in the country and their managing strategies [In:] Self-organisation in rural communities – indications – structures – diversifications. Ed. M. Wieruszewska, PAN, IRWiR Warszawa, 91-180 [in Polish].

3. Helander C.A., 1997. The Logarden project: development of an ecological and integrated arable farming systems. Perspectives for Agronomy Developments in Crop Science 25, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 309-317.

4. Karwowski S., 2002. Zarządzanie chowem bydła w gospodarstwie rolnym. [W:] Organizacja i zarządzanie gospodarstwem rolnym w aspekcie środowiskowym [Cattle breeding management at the farm. [In:] Farm organisation and management at an environmental aspect]. Eds. M. Radzimierski, Z. Szemczak, S. Karwowski, RCDRRiOW Przysiek, 28-35 [in Polish].

5. Lantinga E.A, Rabbinge R., 1997. The renaissance of mixed farming system: a way towards Sustainable agriculture. [In:] Gaseous Nitrogen Emissions from Grasslands. Eds. S.C. Jarvis, B.F. Pain, CAB International Willingford, UK, 408-410.

6. Marcysiak T., Prus P., 2008. The Concept of Agricultural Sustainable Development in Relation to Ecological Consciousness of Polish Farmers on the Example of the Kujawsko-Pomorskie Province [In:] Enhancing the Capacities of Agricultural Systems and Producers. Eds. C. Schäfer, Ch. Rupschus, U.J. Nagel. Proc. of the Second Green Week Scientific Conference, Berlin, 76-81.

7. Oittinen J., 2004. Kompleksowe zarządzanie gospodarstwem rolnym. [W:] Nowoczesne techniki informacyjne w nauce, edukacji i doradztwie dla wsi i rolnictwa [Complex farm management [In:] Modern information techniques in science, education and counselling for villages and agriculture]. Mat. Konf. KCDRRiOW, Brwinów – Warszawa, 120-129 [in Polish].

8. Oomen Ormowski J.M., Lantinga E.A., Goewie E.A., Van der Hoek Ormowski W., 1998. Mixed farming systems as a way towards a mere efficient use of nitrogen in European Union agriculture. Env. Poll. 102, 697-704.

9. Prus P., 2007. Teoretyczne podstawy zrównoważonego rozwoju obszarów wiejskich i rolnictwa. [Theoretical foundations of sustainable development of rural areas and agriculture]. Zesz. Nauk. WTN, Sekcja Nauk Rol. III(1), 89-104 [in Polish].

10. Runowski H., 2000. Zrównoważony rozwój gospodarstw i przedsiębiorstw rolnych [Sustainable development of farms and agricultural enterprises]. Rocz. Nauk. SERiA II(1), Warszawa – Poznań – Zamość, 94-102 [in Polish].

11. Sadowski A., 2001. Dylematy wyboru drogi rozwoju rolnictwa w Polsce [Dilemmas of the choice of the way of agricultural development in Poland]. Rocz. Nauk. SERiA III(2), Warszawa – Poznań – Białystok, 12-16 [in Polish].

12. Zawisza S., 2001. Innowacyjność i przedsiębiorczość w agrobiznesie wobec koncepcji zrównoważonego rozwoju. [W:] Rola agrobiznesu w rozwoju obszarów wiejskich [Innovation and initiative in agribusiness in relation to sustainable development theory. [In:] The role of agribusiness in the development of rural areas]. Mat. Międzynarodowej Konf. Nauk., AR Szczecin, 325-332 [in Polish].

13. Ziętara W., 2000. Tradycyjne i współczesne podejście do równowagi w gospodarstwach i przedsiębiorstwach rolniczych [Traditional and contemporary approach to balance at farms and agricultural enterprises]. Pam. Puł. 120, 553-563 [in Polish].<

Accepted for print: 29.07.2008

Responses to this article, comments are invited and should be submitted within three months of the publication of the article. If accepted for publication, they will be published in the chapter headed 'Discussions' and hyperlinked to the article.