Farmers’ health compared to the general population has been the object of some studies and reviews. Among all factors implied in psychological and physical health, the farming system (i.e., organic or conventional farming) was identified as one of the relevant factors to investigate. This article aims to review the literature established on the comparison between organic and conventional farmers’ health and its correlates. Twenty-nine quantitative or qualitative articles were identified for inclusion (n = 29). Results showed that organic farmers had globally better psychological and physical health than conventional farmers. Effect sizes were small to large; they differed according to the target outcome. In addition, factors correlated with farmers’ health were usually psychological, social, financial, and agricultural. This review of literature encourages further research in this area, particularly on developing agricultural models.
Several scientists have shown the importance of mitigating global warming and have highlighted a need for major social change, particularly when it comes to meat consumption and collective engagement. In the present study (N = 486), we conducted a cross-sectional study to test the mismatch model, which aims at explaining what motivates individuals to participate in normative change. This model stipulates that perceiving a self—other difference in pro-environmental attitudes is the starting point and can motivate people to have high pro-environmental intentions. This mismatch effect is explained by participants’ willingness to participate in normative and social change: people that perceive a gap between their personal attitude and the social norm should be more willing to participate in normative change. This should then motivate them to have high pro-environmental intentions on an individual and group level. The results confirm the hypothesized model on an individual and group level and explain how people can be motivated to participate in normative change. Implications of these findings and the need for further studies are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.