Farm Parents' Attitudes Towards Farm Safety Experts*

Abstract

Using both qualitative and quantitative data, this article analyzes farm parents' attitudes towards the trustworthiness, usefulness, and use of advice from farm safety experts. The article evaluates four different perspectives on trust in expert: the Validity of Knowledge perspective, the Salient Values Similarity perspective, the Diffusion of Innovation perspective, and the Local Knowledge perspective. Among other factors, the results show that negative attitudes towards experts are strongly influenced by attitudes towards the validity of scientific knowledge vs. farm experience. They also show that experts who are more involved in farm production have higher levels of trust and usefulness. While all of the perspectives receive some degree of support, the results suggest that local knowledge and culture are critical in shaping attitudes towards experts. Attitudes towards experts are shaped not solely by expert characteristics but by the meanings and significance they assume in specific socio-cultural contexts.

Attitudes, experience and knowledge among farmers to recycling of sludge

“…The concepts of trust are well proved within the survey where the agricultural extension services deserve the most trust from the farmers, both users and non-users. This coincides with research from Neufield and Cinnamon (2004) which shows that the disseminators of safety information are associated with higher levels of trust than the conductors of the research. This indicates that the agricultural extension service should be the most reliable sources for dissemination of knowledge of risk related issues, whom are shown in our survey to be the most trust worthy.…”

Trust in Scientific Experts on Obesity: Implications for Awareness and Behavior Change

“…In other words, trust can be understood as a form of “faith,” which functions to reduce complexity about difficult issues. Evaluative judgments commonly associated with trust include: fairness, competence, objectivity, perceptions of familiarity with the issue, and goodwill of those responsible for communicating a given message (9, 10, 11, 12, 13). Lack of credibility is often linked to incompetence, poor performance, dishonesty, withholding of information, obscure or hidden decision‐making processes, denial of obvious problems, and denial of vested interests (12).…”

“…For this paper, we are most interested in the evidence suggesting that trust in information sources is a critical factor for understanding public perception and acceptance of risk information (10, 12, 13), as well as behavior change (21, 23). In addition, previous literature suggests that female gender, white race, higher levels of education, and Democratic party affiliation may be predictors of trust in scientific experts (9, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32).…”

Farmer knowledge and a priori risk analysis: pre-release evaluation of genetically modified Roundup Ready wheat across the Canadian prairies

“…While the general public often employs trust in decisionmaking, this is especially important when there is a lack of direct information or experience regarding these technologies (Siegrist and Cvetkovich 2000). In contrast, farmer attitudes toward risk, trust, and experts regarding agriculture is highly influenced by their rich-lived expertise of these agroecosystems and the socio-cultural factors embedded in rural communities (Neufeld and Cinnamon 2004). The holistic nature of these knowledge systems was further emphasized by the importance of environment and community (i.e., social) concerns in determining heightened perceptions of risk associated with RRW, showing that environmental, social, and economic risks are inextricably intertwined.…”