Cultivating Greater Well-being: The Benefits Thai ...

Cultivating Greater Well-being: The Benefits Thai Organic Farmers Experience from Adopting Buddhist Eco-spirituality Alexander Harrow Kaufman & Jeremiah Mock

Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics ISSN 1187-7863 J Agric Environ Ethics DOI 10.1007/s10806-014-9500-4

1 23

Your article is protected by copyright and all rights are held exclusively by Springer Science +Business Media Dordrecht. This e-offprint is for personal use only and shall not be selfarchived in electronic repositories. If you wish to self-archive your article, please use the accepted manuscript version for posting on your own website. You may further deposit the accepted manuscript version in any repository, provided it is only made publicly available 12 months after official publication or later and provided acknowledgement is given to the original source of publication and a link is inserted to the published article on Springer's website. The link must be accompanied by the following text: "The final publication is available at link.springer.com”.

1 23

Author's personal copy J Agric Environ Ethics DOI 10.1007/s10806-014-9500-4 ARTICLES

Cultivating Greater Well-being: The Benefits Thai Organic Farmers Experience from Adopting Buddhist Eco-spirituality Alexander Harrow Kaufman • Jeremiah Mock

Accepted: 25 February 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Abstract Organic farming is spreading throughout Asia, including in Thailand. Little is known about whether farmers’ values change as they make the shift from conventional farming to organic farming. The benefits farmers perceive from making the shift have also scarcely been studied. We investigated these factors in Northeastern Thailand by conducting observations, key informant interviews, semistructured interviews and questionnaire interviews. We found that as Thai farmers adopted organic methods, they developed an eco-consciousness. In comparing members of a Buddhist temple-based organic farmer support group with members of a non-profit organic agriculture support group, we found that the temple-based group adopted deeper Buddhist eco-spiritual values while the non-profit group remained more commercially oriented. Farmers who adopted Buddhist eco-spiritual values enjoyed greater financial and health benefits from making the organic shift. A higher proportion of the temple-based group eliminated their debts after making the shift (p [ 0.001). Additionally, a higher proportion of members in the temple-based group felt that their physical health improved after becoming an organic farmer (p = 0.003). Interestingly, the less debt farmers carried, the healthier they felt (p [ 0.001). Participants believed that eliminating the use of agro-chemicals, using organic fertilizers, consuming organic food, and increasing biodiversity on their farms also contributed to improving their health. We conclude that for Thai farmers who are devoutly committed to Buddhism, temple-based organic support programs A. H. Kaufman (&) Research Group on Wellbeing and Sustainable Development, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Khon Kaen University, 123 Mitraparb Road, Muang District, Khon Kaen Province 40002, Thailand e-mail: [email protected] J. Mock Center for the Study of Communication-Design, Osaka University, Machikaneyama-chou 1-16, Toyonaka City, Osaka 560-0043, Japan e-mail: [email protected]

123

Author's personal copy A. H. Kaufman, J. Mock

provided an effective pathway to improving their finances, health and well-being. For Thai farmers generally, a fundamental adoption of eco-conscious values is integral to experiencing deeper non-commercial benefits from organic farming. Findings suggest that the expansion of organic farming systems depends on changing perspectives about well-being. Keywords Organic agriculture Health Debt Thailand Buddhism Ecological values Spirituality

Introduction Over the past two decades, farmers around the world have become aware that ‘‘conventional farming,’’ that is, farming that relies heavily on synthetic agrochemicals, causes serious health problems and death for farmers and their families, and causes long-term negative environmental impacts (IPM-DANIDA 2004; Pretty 2003; Schreinemachers et al. 2012). Over the same two decades, opponents of conventional farming have been promoting organic agriculture as a safer alternative that builds farmer self-sufficiency and restores biodiversity (Hecht 1987; McNeely and Scherr 2003). Proponents of organic agriculture have attempted to persuade farmers to switch to organic methods by showing that organic systems can be highly productive (Drinkwater et al. 1995; Pimentel et al. 2005) and that there are potential markets made up of consumers who are concerned about the health hazards of conventional farming products (Roitner-Schobesberger et al. 2008; Lotter 2003). In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), organic agriculture experts have introduced programs with an aim to reduce farmers’ debts and raise farmers’ incomes (Samerpak 2006; Pretty 2003). Despite these efforts, worldwide just 0.9 % of arable land is currently farmed organically (Willer et al. 2013). Although approximately one-third of the world’s agricultural land is in LMICs, over 80 percent of the world’s farmers are in LMICs (1.5 million). The large majority of farmers in LMICs are small holders (ibid). These facts show that the vast majority of farmers in LMICs have not adopted organic farming. We can assume that they have not been convinced that organic farming will produce greater benefits than conventional farming for themselves, their families and their farms. We can also assume that farmers who recognize the potential benefits of organic farming but have not switched, do not believe that organic farming is feasible. The situation in Thailand is much the same; in 2011 only 0.18 % of agricultural land was farmed organically. This represents a small increase from 10 years earlier when it was a scant 0.02 % (Willer and Yussefi 2004). From 2002 to 2011, the number of organic producers in Thailand increased over five-fold from 1,154 to 7,405 (Willer and Yussefi, 2004; Willer et al. 2013). During the latter part of this period, the Thai government decided to lend support to organic farmers through the establishment of the National Organic Agriculture Agenda (Thongtawee 2006). Still, a small minority of Thai smallholder farmers has made the switch. In research terms, such individuals have been described as ‘‘innovators’’ (Rogers and

123

Author's personal copy Cultivating Greater Well-being

Shoemaker 1971) or ‘‘positive deviants’’ (Wishik and Van der Vynckt 1976). People within the organic agriculture movement have also adopted these terms. From the perspective of advocating the adoption of organic farming, it is important to know why some farmers switch to organic farming. This raises three questions. What influences farmers to shift to organic farming? What benefits do organic farmers perceive from making the shift? What types of farmers perceive the greatest benefits from shifting to organic farming? Since Northeastern Thailand is a region where governmental and non-governmental organizations have been promoting organic agriculture over the last decade, we designed this study to explore these three questions in this region.

Background Studies have shown that farmers’ religious beliefs and values are a factor in their decisions to adopt sustainable agriculture methods (Baconguis and Cruz 2005; Curry 2000). Some studies have shown that organic farmers are more environmentally conscious than conventional farmers (Beus and Dunlap 1991; Duram 2000; Sullivan et al. 1996). Scholars also have developed theories about the social benefits of a shift to organic agriculture (Allen 2004; Pretty 2003). In Thailand, little is known about the benefits of organic agriculture outside of the financial advantages (Samerpak 2006). Few studies touch upon the role of Thai farmers’ beliefs and values as a factor in sustaining and realizing the benefits of organic agriculture (Hutanawat and Hutanawat 2006; Jitsanguan 2001). The people of Northeastern Thailand share a distinctive culture and language called Issan (Panya 2003). Issan farmers in Yasothon Province where we conducted this study have been challenged for generations by unfavorable conditions for farming (e.g., poor soil quality, infrequent precipitation and uneven terrain) (Boonman and Anpim 2006). Consequently, household incomes in Issan are the lowest in the country (National Statistics Office 2011). Poverty levels have led to outward labor migration and the disintegration of rural-based social safety nets (Funahashi 1996; Jitsanguan 2001). Low household incomes in this area have raised concerns from government agencies and civil society (National Statistics Office 2011). To alleviate poverty, government agencies have undertaken strategies to channel funding to agricultural cooperatives (Ratanamalai 1999). To compensate for falling productivity, farmers have increased their use of chemical fertilizers (Panya 2003). However, an increase in production levels through the use of chemical fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides has damaged farmland and contributed to a loss in biodiversity that has degraded natural resources in the region (Hardwick et al. 2004; Lovelace et al. 1998). Farmers in Issan have suffered health problems from using agro-chemicals. IPMDANIDA (2004) research in Northeast Thailand showed that many conventional farmers have high blood toxicity levels. Blood tests facilitated by the Rice Soul Foundation in Central Thailand found that farmers reduced their blood toxicity levels after they eliminated the use of agro-chemicals in their rice fields (Thongtawee 2006). Still, although some Thai farmers understand the health risks of some agro-

123


chemicals, very few have pursued less hazardous alternatives (Schreinemachers et al. 2012). While governmental support for agricultural cooperatives has provided access to conventional agro-technologies, a rise in personal loans has locked many Issan farmers into a vicious debt cycle. To improve their financial situation, many people in Issan have migrated to Bangkok and other more prosperous regions of Thailand and even overseas. Rising income levels in the region have mainly been due to remittances from Issan workers employed in urban areas and abroad (Grandstaff et al. 2008). The continual outmigration has left behind an aging population in rural areas who work the farms and care for children (Funahashi 1996). Since organic farming requires intensive labor inputs to sustain production levels, it has been difficult for most Issan farmers to shift to organic farming (Becchetti et al. 2010). Nevertheless, domestic and international demand for organic food products has attracted some Issan smallholder farmers to organic agriculture (RoitnerSchobesberger et al. 2008). While many smallholder farmers are challenged by national level agricultural policies skewed towards conventional agriculture, some agencies under the Thai Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives have provided funds to help farmers meet the stringent requirements of organic certification (Thongtawee 2006). Moreover, agencies under the King of Thailand’s royal patronage have lent support through technical expertise and provided funds to support the exchange of knowledge between organic farmers (Jitsanguan 2001). Local non-profit organizations have offered training programs and marketing channels for organic products (Setboonsarng and Gilman 1999). Many of these programs have emphasized the value of cultivating rice through traditional rather than conventional agriculture methods. As in many regions of Southeast Asia, Issan’s culture is tied deeply to the cultivation of rice. For thousands of years, Issan farmers cross-bred tasteful and resilient strains of Oryza officinalis (wild rice) according to natural cycles and at subsistence levels (Tanabe 1994; Thongtawee 2006; White 1994). The cultivation and consumption of rice has been laden with socio-cultural values. For generations, the spiritual and religious practices of Issan farmers have been bound up with the process of rice cultivation. In Issan, animist and Brahmanic rituals1 have been an integral part of community life along with the practice of Theravada Buddhism (Wyatt 1982). Before the widespread adoption of conventional Green Revolution agriculture, Issan communities practiced rituals for specific deities during the plowing, transplanting, harvesting, and threshing of rice (Falvey 2000). Farmers used to pay reverence to Khwan Khao (Rice Soul), Mae Phosop (Rice Mother), Mae Thoranee (Earth Mother), Mae Khongka (River Mother). Until the widespread adoption of tractors, water buffaloes were venerated for their contribution in plowing and fertilizing paddy. Buddhist monks blessed water buffalos in the rite of Su Khwan Kwai (healing the spirit of the buffalo) (Thongdee 1990). During transplanting, a ritual was performed to venerate the reincarnation of the Rice 1

Thewadas (angels) and pii or ghosts were said to inhabit certain forests, mountains, bodies of water (Kabilsingh 2010). In fact, many large old trees, such as the ironwood and sala are venerated by Buddhists. The Bodhi or fig tree (ficus religiosia) is considered particularly auspicious, as the Buddha was reported to have attained enlightenment under its branches (de Silva 1994; ibid).

123


Mother by planting a cluster of seven stalks of rice (or rice souls) in the paddy. Prior to the harvest, another ritual was performed to appease the Rice Mother and avoid frightening the Rice Soul. At the beginning of the harvest Issan rice farmers celebrated, ‘‘… pong khao which literally means to invite the Rice Goddess down to the floor for threshing’’ (Sirisai 1990: 171). In the final ceremony before milling the rice, ‘‘boiled egg, rice cake, liquor and banana were offered and the seven rice plants were taken as they symbolized the Rice Soul’’ (ibid: 172). The value of these rituals in agrarian Issan society has been a subject of interpretation. Rambo (1983) inferred that animist beliefs about the natural environment arose from a fear of its power and uncertainty. Falvey (2000) explained that the ritual practices of early agrarian societies were an attempt to control the unpredictability of the natural environment. However, Tanabe (1994) has argued that until the early twentieth century, Thai rice farmers respected and understood their place in the natural environment from a Buddhist perspective. In the Thai Buddhist sense, Issan farmers believed that by making offerings to the Rice Mother, they protected their harvest and earned merit for future lives. Thailand’s organic agriculture movement has drawn upon spiritual narratives to attract rural farmers to their cause. In a seminal study, Panya and Sirisai (2003) found that the religious values and beliefs of Issan rural folk have contributed to a ‘‘collective eco-consciousness.’’ Organizations such as the Rice Soul Foundation incorporate the rituals of early rice farmers into their extension programs to elicit a change in farmers’ environmental values. Other Thai organic extension organizations emphasize that traditional (organic) farming methods reduce costs and make farms more ecologically resilient (Thongtawee 2006; Samerpak 2006). Some Buddhist monks and scholars have argued that Buddhist teachings (the Dharma) support the use of organic farming methods (Rigg 1997). Proponents of organic agriculture have focused on Buddhism’s core Five Precepts: (1) not to kill any living being (often interpreted as ‘not to harm’), (2) not to take what is not freely given by the owner (stealing), (3) not to indulge in sexual misconduct, (4) not to lie; and (5) not to consume intoxicants that lead to carelessness (Henning 2002: 37). In particular, proponents have invoked the First Precept. Kabilsingh (2010) asserts that the teachings of the First Precept are not simply about refraining from killing, but also about radiating metta or loving-kindness to all living creatures. The venerated Thai monk Buddhadassa Bhikkhu preached what he called the ‘‘AgriDharma,’’ a form of agriculture based on Buddhist scriptures. In his AgriDharma teachings, he spoke about the reduced social status of farmers in Thailand’s newly industrializing economy and he argued that through moral farming, the farmer has the potential to reach nirvana or ‘‘a state of absolute calm or enlightenment’’ (Falvey 2002: 11). At the community level, different organizations have attempted to put ‘‘Buddhist agriculture’’ methods into practice (Essen 2005; Wasi 1988). The most well known of these is the Thai religious sect Santi Asoke. Hutanawat and Hutanawat’s (2006: 19) study of an organic agriculture cooperative in Yasothon Province found that farmers’ ability to ‘‘change their beliefs and ways of thinking’’ were critical to sustaining organic farms. Not everyone is in favor of these modern interpretations of the Dharma. Some Buddhist scholars have criticized loose interpretations as being a product of Western scholarship (Falvey 2000; Rigg 1997).

123


In Yasothon Province, Thai organic farmer support groups have aimed at building the capacity of village-based collectives. A small group of farmers at the Dharma Garden Temple created an organic rice program based on the Five Precepts (Kaufman 2012). In the 1980s, Dharma Garden Temple established a training center under the direction of the resident abbot in collaboration with local experts in organic farming. At the time of this study, the Temple’s grounds covered a vast expanse of farmlands, a third of which were designated for religious activities, the remainder for agriculture and food production. Staff members included 15 resident volunteers, 10 monks and various laypersons who resided at the Temple for different periods of time. Registries show that in 2012, Dharma Garden Temple had 400 organic farmer members, and over 2,000 people subscribed to the social welfare fund. Dharma Garden Temple facilities included Buddhist temples, residence halls, rice paddies, vegetable gardens, a mill, a fertilizer center, a learning center, a cooperative store, a rice bank and a radio station. The Temple served as the Center for Local Wisdom in Yasothon Province. In 2010, the Temple joined the global communications network with a website connected to their radio station. The radio broadcasted Buddhist sermons, news, music, and advertises training programs. To promote their way of life, the Dharma Garden Temple has offered specialized trainings programs on organic agriculture methods and self-sufficiency skills with the support of various partnering organizations. Programs have included participatory learning, team building, detoxification, vegetarian cooking, producing effective microorganisms (‘‘EM’’ concentrated liquid fertilizer) and organic fertilizer (dry) production. The Temple has been a registered foundation under the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives. In recent years, the Temple has received funds from the Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives (BAAC) to train farmers with excessive debt. Programs aim to reduce farmer debts, improve (spiritual and physical) health, and raise community food security. Temple elders recently started a new initiative as an alternative to global certification standards based on the Five Precepts known as the ‘‘Moral Rice’’ program. The mission of Moral Rice members is to impart Buddhist teachings, expand organic agriculture, encourage the consumption of vegetarian food, and build self-sufficiency. Moral Rice farmers have followed organic agriculture methods, worked in closely-knit groups, and monitored each others’ progress in living according to the Five Precepts. At the same time, Moral Rice farmers also have been encouraged to conform to international organic standards. Moral Rice farmers have taken advantage of an increased demand for organic produce in Thailand and overseas to expand their production. In 2009, the Dharma Garden Temple initiated some changes in their marketing strategy through an alliance with TV Burabha (a Thai television production company) which has helped to market their organic rice products through four key channels: (1) Symbiosis program, (2) special events, (3) specialty stores, and (4) sales to large supermarkets and shopping mall outlets. Under the ‘‘Symbiosis’’ program, rice products have been shipped to Bangkok-based consumers in what resembles a ‘‘farm-to-table’’ scheme. The objective has been to go beyond a ‘‘producer–consumer’’ relationship by bringing farmers and consumers closer together. A large quantity of un-milled organic rice also has been sold to the

123


Songdeur Corporation, a Thai health foods brand that exports packaged rice-based products to Hong Kong and Singapore. The remainder of Dharma Garden Temple rice products have been sold through their Dharma Garden Shop and the Farmer Shop at Kasetsart University, a major agriculture research center. Hence, Moral Rice is more than a brand name. It is a community comprised of farmers, monks, partner organizations and urban residents. Other organic extension organizations have supported Yasothon’s farmers’ shift to organic agriculture mainly by offering higher purchase prices through European and North American fair trade schemes and through training on certification requirements (Od-ompanich et al. 2007). Significantly, partnerships with domestic health food retailers and a few select government agencies have created a stable marketplace for organic food products (Roitner-Schobesberger et al. 2008). Throughout Thailand, including Issan, Green Net Cooperative/Earth Net Foundation (Green Net) has provided assistance to organic farmers with the following objectives: Green Net Cooperative serves as a marketing channel for small-scale organic farmers, incorporating fair-trade principles in its marketing activities by combining organic agriculture and fair-trade as its core policies. The [Earth Net] Foundation’s main objective is to promote and support initiatives related to production, processing, marketing and consumption of organic food, natural products and ecological handicrafts (Green Net Cooperative and Earth Net Foundation 2013). Kiatsuphimol (2002) uncovered some of the benefits of Green Net assistance programs for organic farmers in Yasothon Province through a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats analysis. Another study of Green Net’s collaboration with organic farmers in Yasothon Province showed that participants achieved a substantial increase in net profits (Samerpak 2006). However, Becchetti et al. (2010) concluded that despite a rise in per capita income, Green Net organic farmers in Yasothon Province experienced low levels of productivity due to high person-labor hours. Boonman and Anpim’s (2006) study in Yasothon Province suggested that rural farmers would stand to benefit from organic rice production methods aided by agricultural chemicals. Despite the contributions of these studies, little is known about whether and how Thailand’s organic farmers experience a change in values that contributes to their shift to organic farming. Similar to Curry (2000), this study suggests that participants’ religious values influenced their farming practices and their perceptions of the natural environment.

Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study of smallholder organic farmers in Issan to examine what they experienced during their shift to organic farming. We selected Yasothon Province as the field site because governmental and non-governmental organizations had been actively promoting organic agriculture in this province for over a decade. We selected three districts (Kudchum, Patiew and Mahachanachai)

123


because they are known to have a high concentration of organic farmers. Additionally, we included a few participants in the qualitative phase from Lerngnoktha District. The farmers we recruited to participate in the study were members of one of two organic farming support networks: the Dharma Garden Temple or Green Net. Farmers in these two groups mainly produced organic rice, cassava, fruit (e.g., bananas, coconut, mangos) and vegetables. We gathered data in three phases: (1) key informant interviews, (2) semi-structured interviews with organic farmers, and (3) structured questions through an agricultural profile and a dynamic questionnaire in which questions posed were based on answers to previous questions. Throughout these three phases, we collected observational data by attending training courses, visiting farms, and staying briefly at key informants’ homes. In semi-structured one-to-one interviews (Phases 1 and 2), we asked farmers open-ended questions about changes farmers went through prior to and throughout the adoption of organic farming methods. We also asked them about their key concerns in making the shift to organic farming. Initially, we tried to recruit conventional farmers to participate in the first part of this study as a comparison group, but conventional farmers were reluctant to respond to questions about their environmental values and their decisions to not farm organically. Thus, it was not possible to include conventional farmers in this study. In Phase 3, we asked participants structured questions about organic farmers’ environmental values, spirituality and organic farming practices. Instead of using a traditional questionnaire, each question was printed on an A4-sized bulletin board. For multiple-choice questions, participants placed paper stars beside answers they thought were the most correct. For Likert scale questions, participants were asked to rank responses by writing a number (1–5) in front of each statement printed on the cards. We recorded responses on an answer sheet. To measure the degree to which the participants’ values and beliefs were related to Buddhist eco-spirituality, we constructed a composite Buddhist Eco-spiritual Values Scale (Table 1) based on four indicators: (1) adherence to the Five Precepts of Buddhism; (2) devotion to Buddhism; (3) benefits of organic fertilizer; (4) reasons for using organic fertilizer. We recruited organic farmers through chain referral sampling (Semaan et al. 2002). For qualitative interviews, we determined the sample size based on the grounded theory principle of theoretical saturation, that is, ending recruitment when responses become repetitive and analysis yielded no new information. (Glaser 1978; Cresswell 1998). This approach resulted in a sample of 50 organic farmers for the qualitative interviews in Phase 2. To determine whether our sample size in Phase 3 would be adequate for statistical tests, we conducted a post hoc power analysis of the sample (75 participants) using G*Power 3 software (Faul et al. 2007; Onwuegbuzie and Leech 2004). Our analysis showed a power coefficient of 0.75 with a level of significance set at p B 0.05. This showed that our sample size was adequate for conducting statistical tests that would complement the qualitative part of our analysis. We conducted an integrated analysis of quantitative and qualitative data collected throughout all three phases of the study. We analyzed quantitative data generated in the study with SPSS v.16. We identified significant correlations among ordinal/

123

Author's personal copy Cultivating Greater Well-being Table 1 Buddhist eco-spiritual values scale Measures

Response (codes)

1. How do you practice the five precepts?

2 = I practice when I have time

1 = I rarely follow the precepts 3 = I only follow one precept 4 = Do my best to follow all five precepts

2. Do you consider yourself a devout Buddhist?

1 = Have faith in Buddhism, but rarely practice formally 2 = I follow the teachings when I have problems 3 = I consider myself Buddhist as I follow the teachings and make merit regularly 4 = I depend on the teachings of Buddhism as a way of life

3. What is the benefit of organic fertilizer?a

1 = I want to obtain a high price 2 = I want to grow bountiful amounts of rice 3 = I want to sell healthy rice

4. Why do you use organic fertilizer?a

1 = It costs less than chemical fertilizer 2 = Chemical fertilizer is hazardous to our health 3 = I want to support life in the soil

a

Recoded/collapsed for use in Spearman’s q tests

ranked variables using Spearman’s q (Elliot and Woodward 2007; Easterby-Smith et al. 2008). We identified differences between the members of the Dharma Garden Temple group and the Green Net group using a chi squared test. We analyzed qualitative data using theoretical coding based on grounded theory methods (Charmaz 2006; Glaser 1978; Onwuegbuzie and Collins 2007). Our approach involved the process of coding, categorizing and comparing strands of interview text. Our qualitative analysis strategy also contributed in our development of structured instruments for collecting quantitative data in Phase 3. A total sample of 75 organic farmers participated in the structured phase of this study (Table 2). The age distributions of the two samples were nearly identical. There was a significant difference in the gender composition of the two samples. Among the Dharma Garden Temple members, we obtained a larger sample of men because fewer men had seasonal jobs away from their homes. Among Green Net members, we obtained a larger sample of women because they were available to participate while most male members were too busy. Nearly all participants were married and all were Buddhist. Participants were evenly distributed in the three districts. All participants in this sample were smallholders (\50 rai = 8 hectares). There was no statistical difference in land owned/rented between Dharma Garden Temple and Green Net farmers. Our sample did not include more than one member from a household, seasonal workers who were away, and people who were otherwise occupied or reluctant to participate. The qualitative sample of 50 participants was a subset of this larger sample with a similar distribution of demographic characteristics. Using sampling methods based on grounded theory, theoretical saturation was reached after analysis of in-depth interviews 50 farmers (45 organic rice farmers and five conventional rice farmers). The mean age of

123

Author's personal copy A. H. Kaufman, J. Mock Table 2 Demographics of sample of organic farmers in Yasothon Province

Green net

Dharma Garden Temple

Total sample

39

36

75

21–30

0

1

1

31–40

5

5

10

41–50

16

14

30

51–60

13

14

27

5

2

7

34

20

54

5

16

21

39

36

75

N Age (ranges)

61? Gender Female Male Religion Buddhist Marital status Married

35

2

69

Single

1

2

3

Widow

3

0

3

Location Mahachanachai

22

1

23

0

23

23

17

12

29

Rent

31

29

60

Own

8

7

15

Patiew Kudchum Holdings

participants was 50 years old. Participants were predominantly female (29 of 50), but were representative of a household.

Findings Making the shift to organic farming was not an easy undertaking for farmers in Yasothon Province. Indeed, relatively few attempted to do it. Key informants explained that government subsidies and marketing from aggressive agro-supply companies were the main forces that influenced many Thai farmers to continue conventional agricultural practices. Additionally, most farmers were unfamiliar with how Thai farmers grew rice organically prior to the Green Revolution. We identified some overall patterns among the participants regardless of whether they belonged to Dharma Garden Temple or Green Net. Nearly all participants valued membership in their local collective as a way to gain access to low-cost fertilizer, equipment and for make friends. We also found that governmental agricultural policies and fluctuations in global rice markets influenced nearly all participants’ decision-making. Farmers in both groups were attracted to a higher

123


farm gate prices and the marketing channels linked to organic rice certification schemes. Organic farmers and their families sought to exploit the benefits of participation in a global economy. The pressures of raising a family in the 21st century were substantial among organic farmers, particularly their concerns about educating their children, the purchase of modern comforts, and the acquisition of farm technology (Rigg 1997). Furthermore, participants purchased many consumable and nonconsumable goods outside their village. Participants purchased motorcycles and pick-up trucks as a business investment, and for some as a status symbol. Urbanbased jobs helped some participants to pay for these goods, and reduced traditional work exchange programs that once were found in many rural Thai villages (Tanabe 1994). As a result of the changing socio-economic conditions in rural Thai villages generally, the organic farmers in our study faced many challenges in sustaining their way of life. Some participants were influenced by fluctuations in the market price of nonorganic rice during the course of our study. Many farmers from Mahachanachai District who participated in the qualitative phase of this study opted to quit the organic agriculture group supported by Green Net due to substantial increases in the price of non-organic rice during the harvest of 2009. In one village, 23 of 27 organic farmer households made a shift back to na prang (second rice crop) through the use of agro-chemicals. It was unlikely that these farmers would revert back to organic methods due to the 3-year transition period necessary to regain organic certification. Benefits of Shifting to Organic Farming Nearly all organic farmers we interviewed reported that the main reasons they shifted to organic farming were to improve their health and to get out of debt. Many farmers reported that they had become interested in organic farming because over time they had learned about Buddhist ecological values. Generally, they experienced a shift in values that greatly influenced the basis for their sense of well-being. Participants linked the enhancement of biodiversity on their farm to multiple aspects of well-being. We found that participants used different terms to describe their wellbeing. Some described changes in their sense of well-being primarily in spiritual terms, while others referred to improvements in their physical health and financial security. Participants from both groups expressed the importance of eliminating manufactured agricultural chemicals from their farms to improve their financial status and recover their health. Most participants believed that their health and financial status improved after a shift to organic farming. Changes in Debt Burden The large majority of farmers in our sample shifted to organic farming to escape the heavy burden of chronic indebtedness that is common and serious among conventional farmers. Participants discussed the importance of the BAAC as their most common source of loans. BAAC was active in Yasothon Province and it has made funds readily available to both organic and conventional farmers (Boonman

123


and Anpim 2006). Participants reported that recently BAAC has supported some training programs on organic farming methods conducted by experts from the Dharma Garden Temple and Green Net. Some participants said they took out loans through the One Village One Million Baht project under Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s Administration (1999–2004). Despite the merits of providing access to capital, the many farmers were unable to pay back these loans. This led to a series of government-supported debt relief programs. Several organic farmer-leaders suggested that easy access to loans through the BAAC contributed more to raising debt rather than raising income. One farmer stated that it was important to borrow money on a yearly basis to avoid the complicated procedures necessary to re-enter government loan programs. Additionally, both Dharma Garden Temple and Green Net farmers reported that they took out personal loans from the BAAC to support their families. We found that as compared to members of Green Net, the members of Dharma Garden Temple generally reported being more successful at reducing their farm debt or becoming debt free. A significantly higher proportion of members of Dharma Garden Temple had become debt free after shifting to organic farming (Tables 3, 4). Significantly more Green Net members reported that after shifting to organic farming, they were still carrying medium to high levels of debt. Several Dharma Garden Temple members and a few Green Net members reported an improvement in their financial condition because they had been able to reduce their overall cost of chemical inputs (e.g., synthetic fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides) while increasing their use of organic fertilizers made in collectives. For many farmers who made the shift, over time their changes in farming practices resulted in decreased debt and in some cases increased savings. I reduced the investment and now I have a higher savings rate and lowered expenses because I have everything to eat in my property. Soon I will pay off all my debts (Dharma Garden Temple farmer). It is better to be an organic farmer because my land is totally without chemicals and that helps to reduce my investment (Green Net farmer). In speaking about their ability to reduce debt through a shift to organic farming, some farmers believed that they also increased their production levels through the use of organic methods. As conventional farmers we had high debts. The learning curve is a changeover stage of one to three years. There was even higher investment because the land needed to adjust that is to redo the size of the rice field, water management, learning to make fertilizer. Less investment, debt and so on. I achieved higher yields after I changed to organic farming and it took about three to four years after the change (Dharma Garden Temple farmer). Although many organic farmers reported that they decreased their expenses and farm debt after their shift to organic farming, some participants attributed organic farmers’ continued reliance on debt to underlying problems with land tenure. Since

123

Author's personal copy Cultivating Greater Well-being Table 3 Differences between members of organic farmer support groups (n = 75)

Green net (%) (n = 36)

Dharma Garden Temple (%) (n = 39)

1. Have debt

67.3

32.7

2. No debt

17.4

82.6

1. High or medium

84.2

15.8

2. Low or none

41.1

58.9

Debt status

Level of debt burden

Level of Buddhist ecological values 1. Low

65.0

35.0

2. Medium

63.0

37.0

3. High

32.1

67.9

Health status 1. Same or better

76.0

24.0

2. Much better

40.0

60.0

Table 4 Test of differences between members of two organic farmer support groups Factors

v2 Values

Degrees of freedom

Asymptotic significances

Debt status

15.919

1

0.001

Level of debt burden

10.577

1

0.001

Level of Buddhist ecological values

7.078

2

0.029

Health status

8.654

1

0.003

many farmers had limited land holdings, they were unable to increase their rice production levels without incurring additional debt from renting land. The problem for farmers in Thailand is that they inherit land from their family, separate the land into small plots to give to children and then the plots are too small to do mixed agriculture and each plot cannot produce enough to feed the family. This also leads to more renting of farmland and increases debt! (Green Net farmer). We found that despite shifting to organic farming, many organic farmers relied on technology to sustain rice production. Dharma Garden Temple and Green Net farmers continued to take out loans to purchase agricultural equipment (i.e., tractors, harvesters and rice milling machines). Very few organic farmers in the two groups were still using traditional farming practices. Only one participant out of 75 was still using water buffalos to plow and fertilize his rice fields. Hiring contract labor was another important expense for organic farmers. In Issan, there is a long established pattern of family members migrating to Bangkok and other regions of Thailand to work in the construction industry, factories, small businesses and in commercial agriculture. Many organic farmers reported that their

123


family members did not help on the farm so they had to employ contract workers at various stages of rice production. While leaders at the Dharma Garden Temple spoke about the traditional practice of exchanging labor in the community (long khek), their use of contract labor did not differ from Green Net or even conventional rice farmers in Thailand. A female participant discussed the challenges of finding sufficient labor given that her family members were working in other regions of Thailand: My son comes back home during harvest season and other important seasons to help out in the farm, but my husband only comes back two to three times a year. In planting season, I hire six to seven people for three days. During harvest time, I rent a machine for two days on one property and on another property I hire eighteen people for three days (Green Net farmer). Cultivation of Buddhist Ecological Values Although many organic farmers felt that improvements in their financial condition were important benefits of the shift to organic farming, most felt that their shift gave them other important benefits. Most participants expressed a great concern for producing healthy food for society rather than just striving to increase their income through conventional or organic farming methods. Organic farmers believed that they gained merit (in the Thai Buddhist sense) by providing safe food to their families, communities and consumers. Through our analysis, we discovered that low levels of indebtedness were associated with holding strong Buddhist ecological values. To explore factors associated with Buddhist ecological values, we constructed a composite measure of four different closed-end questions: (1) adherence to the Five Precepts, (2) devotion to Buddhism, (3) benefits of organic fertilizer, and (4) why organic fertilizer. Analysis showed that membership in the Dharma Garden Temple was positively associated with having stronger Buddhist eco-spiritual values rather than having commercially-oriented values, which was more typical among members of Green Net. In comparison to Green Net members, a significantly higher proportion of Dharma Garden Temple farmers reported that they held Buddhist eco-spiritual values which we classified as being of the highest level (Tables 3, 4). One of our main findings is that a higher proportion of members of the Dharma Garden Temple group linked improvements in their health and reduced debt to their adoption of Buddhist eco-spiritual values. Although many Green Net farmers considered themselves devout Buddhists, Dharma Garden Temple farmers mentioned Buddhism’s Five Precepts more frequently as a reason for adopting organic farming methods. One participant explained the importance of Buddhist values: Without the Five Precepts in a farmer’s heart, they can’t be a true organic farmer because they might easily break the rules (Dharma Garden Temple farmer).

123


In open-ended questions, we asked participants to explain the relationship between organic farming and the natural environment. Many Dharma Garden Temple farmers linked the Five Precepts to the use of organic farming methods: I believe organic farmers must believe in themselves to produce organic food in order to protect nature. The Five Precepts help farmers to be honest (Dharma Garden Temple farmer). When participants were asked why they switched over to organic fertilizers, many farmers made references to the First Precept (to not harm other living beings): I believe the Five Precepts are a good path for organic farmers because they do not kill other organisms (Dharma Garden Temple farmer). While Dharma Garden Temple farmers’ responses suggested they understood the concept of sustainable agriculture, their responses also revealed a spiritual connection to nature: Organic farmers love Mother Earth more than chemical farmers and we avoid killing other lives (Dharma Garden Temple farmer). The prominent role of Buddhist values in the decision-making of Dharma Garden Temple farmers also was influenced by elders based at the Temple. Elders at the Dharma Garden Temple reported that many organic farmers who were not part of their group were focused more on making a profit from organic products rather than changing their values. When we asked an elder member about the role of Buddhism in members’ lives, he explained that morality and rice cultivation were intertwined: Organics is part of good Buddhist practice, which is training by combining Buddhism and organics together, thus leading to Moral Rice. Elders explained that Moral Rice incorporated internationally recognized organic agriculture methods with an emphasis on the teachings of Buddhism. Several elders reported that Moral Rice was a free certification program designed to compete with external standards and expand the domestic market for organic produce. Among Dharma Garden Temple’s total membership of 2,000 individuals, 400 families were organic farmers, but of those only 119 families had fulfilled the rigid requirements of Moral Rice. A Dharma Garden Temple farmer-leader discussed the values he associated with the Moral Rice program: Moral Rice is a second stage objective of Dharma Garden Temple created through the Buddhist religion. Moral Rice also equals quality of food, plus the value of farmers’ efforts. Dharma helps to shape peoples’ lives and minds, and it serves as a tool to aid good people to live together in harmony, without fighting against each other for their own benefit. Most people do not look at morality as having an application to farm work, because they just want to make more money, with a focus on high production only. Our analysis showed that Dharma Garden Temple farmers viewed the natural environment from a Buddhist perspective. By contrast, Green Net farmers were more likely to report the use-value of nature:

123


The quality of life of organic farmers is better than chemical farmer because we have better health, a variety of natural food. In other seasons, chemical farmers come to buy from organic farmers or ask if they can come and collect for crab, fish, frog, shrimp and some wild vegetables [on our land] (Green Net farmer). Since we hypothesized that farmers with a devout commitment to Buddhist teachings would be more environmentally conscious, we asked participants to discuss the differences between themselves and conventional farmers in terms of their devotion to Buddhism. Dharma Garden Temple farmers explained the relationship between Buddhist practice and their environmental values: To be a devout Buddhist, Buddhists must live in harmony with other lives, protect the environment and microorganisms, to keep the environment in balance, so farmers can keep the rice field in balance (Dharma Garden Temple farmer). However, some farmers felt uncomfortable about making comparisons between themselves and conventional farmers: Buddhism teaches people to love nature, but that does not mean that chemical farmers are less devout (Green Net farmer). A Green Net farmer-leader explained that the differences between organic and conventional farmers extended beyond environmental concerns: [Organic farmers] are generous, ethical and moral. Chemical farmers are not good because they do not depend on themselves. They grow one crop, have to buy other kinds of food, their income comes from one product only. Their health is not good and they have chronic illnesses. [Conventional farmers] don’t care about nature (Green Net farmer). Although findings show that a higher proportion of Dharma Garden Temple farmers held a Buddhist perspective about the natural environment, Green Net farmers also were committed to building ecological diversity on their farms. Many participants believed that adopting organic methods brought them both spiritual and physical benefits. Self-Perceived Changes in Health Many participants reported that they had suffered from various ailments related to agro-chemical use. Many feared the effects of exposure to agro-chemicals. Indeed, during the course of this research one prominent organic farmer-leader passed away from the side effects of what was reported to be a condition caused by his long-term prior use of agro-chemicals. All of the participants aspired to improve their health by shifting to organic farming. The qualitative part of our analysis showed that participants perceived that their health improved after shifting to organic farming because of producing and consuming their own organic food. Farmers in both groups talked about their health status before switching over to organic farming:

123


When I did chemical farming I used all types [of chemicals] and I often got sick. Before I changed over I went for a complete physical, and they found chemicals in my blood. This worried me and this made me decide to change over [to organic farming] (Green Net farmer). My brother died because of chemicals in 1993. He was 38 years old. I passed out because of pesticides in 1995 and then I started to reduce the amount of chemicals on my farm. I went to see the doctor twice a month to take some medication that reduced toxins in my body. My wife convinced me to do organic farming because she was concerned about my health and our debts, as we had three kids to send to school. My wife was afraid I might die. And my father had ‘‘chemi’’ [chemical] related chest pains (Dharma Garden Temple farmer). Many participants reported that shifting to organic farming and reducing agrochemicals protected their family from health problems. Some farmers reported that they felt better soon after they shifted to organic farming: Life is much better than before because I was allergic to chemicals and I got rashes and itchiness from chemicals. Now I am healthy (Dharma Garden Temple farmer). It is better since I changed to be an organic farmer because my family is safe from chemicals (Dharma Garden Temple farmer). The quantitative part of our analysis revealed that a significantly higher proportion of members of Dharma Garden Temple felt that their physical health had improved after becoming an organic farmer as compared with Green Net members (Tables 2, 3). In open-ended questions, participants who expressed Buddhist ecospiritual values linked their well-being to perceived improvements in the ecological diversity on their farms. Participants from both groups associated the integrity of the natural environment with their own physical health, and they linked organic farming methods to ecological resilience and stable food production. Many participants from both groups reported that ecological diversity translated into the availability in their rice fields of natural and healthy food sources (i.e., frogs, fish, crabs and wild vegetables) for themselves and their family members. When we asked participants about the benefits of shifting to organic farming, some felt that their perceived feelings of financial security were intertwined with improvements in their health. Findings from our statistical analysis were consistent with their explanations. Interestingly, regardless of membership in Dharma Garden Temple or Green Net, the amount of debt the participants carried was significantly correlated with self-perceived improvements in health status after shifting to organic farming (Spearman’s q 0.46, p [ 0.001). We found that the less debt farmers carried over time, the healthier they felt. Many participants reported that cutting costs by producing their own natural fertilizers and thereby eliminating debt (they had previously undertaken to purchase agro-chemicals) led to improved sense of health:

123


My health is much better after a change to do organic farming. Fertilizer investment decreased. Chemical fertilizer is expensive, and organic fertilizer has a low cost (Green Net farmer). We can rely on ourselves. We have: better health, and better income because we have low investment – as we can sell rice and other products that we can produce on our farms (Green Net farmer). In this part of our analysis, we found that within the lived experience of the participants, there is an important synergistic relationship between financial health and physical health. As the participants regained a sense of self-reliance by being independent from lenders, they felt health benefits of eliminating debt not just psychologically, but physically as well. This is to say, farmers from both groups felt less stress as they reduced their debt burden.

Discussion Organic farmers in Yasothon Province perceived important benefits from shifting to organic farming. To some extent, all of the organic farmers in our study experienced a shift in values that encouraged them to sustain organic farming. Participants’ values changed based on the organizations they belonged to, their observations, their understanding of the natural environment, and their experiences with organic farming. Our findings suggest that participants from both groups benefited from producing organic fertilizers in collectives. In these collectives, organic farmers exchanged ideas and cultivated Buddhist ecological values from their friends and colleagues. Some participants’ values shifted in a more eco-spiritual direction rather than simply becoming focused on exploiting emerging opportunities in the organic market sector. Although most participants discussed Buddhist concepts of environmental stewardship, Dharma Garden Temple members generally had higher levels of eco-spiritual values because of the influence of monks and lay leaders who exposed them to Buddhist ecological values. Our quantitative analysis showed that having strong Buddhist eco-spiritual values similar to those described by Falvey (2000) translated into reduced debt levels and in some cases becoming debt free. Participants in our study learned that by replacing chemical fertilizers with organic fertilizers they were able to substantially reduce the costs of inputs, and thus reduce the amount of loans they had to take out. Participants found that after several years of using organic methods, their production levels were similar to or even higher than when they were using agro-chemicals. Thus, by becoming an organic farmer, they could generate sufficient income to reduce or eliminate debts they had incurred while practicing conventional farming and making the shift. The type of eco-spiritual values the participants adopted influenced their perceptions of their financial status and their goals. For many participants, organic farming was a lifeway choice that helped give them a buffer from fluctuations in the wider agro-food marketplace. Many participants adopted organic farming methods to gain access to a specialized marketplace and to obtain a premium price for their

123


products. Some farmers grew commodity crops and raised animals to increase their income levels. For others, increasing their level of household food security and eliminating chemical fertilizers became more important than improving their financial status. For participants in both groups, health concerns were their main motivation for shifting to organic farming. We found that the combination of adopting a Buddhist eco-spiritual worldview and using organic farming methods resulted directly in feelings of improved health. As participants in our study reduced their use of agrochemicals, their physical stamina improved. Moreover, the experience of reducing or even eliminating debt also contributed to feelings of improved health. Participants also believed that the consumption of organic foods contributed to better health. This suggests that organic farmers’ sense of ‘‘health’’ was actually very broad and nearly synonymous with the wide Thai sense of well-being (Mock 2000). Our analysis shows that some participants associated their increased spiritual and physical health with what they perceived to be an increase in biodiversity on their farms. Participants from both groups reported that an increase in the availability of natural foods in their rice fields was an added benefit from making the shift (Lovelace et al. 1998). As Samerpak (2006) found, many participants in our study reported that they used traditional forms of medical care and some grew medicinal herbs in their gardens. Some participants reduced their stress levels by reducing their debt burden (Drentea and Lavrakas 2000). A few participants perceived that their health improved as a result of their proximity to the natural environment (Mayer and Frantz 2004). In the words of one participant who switched to organic farming but later purportedly died of complications from exposure to agrochemicals during the time when he was a conventional farmer: I see nature all over my farm, green, animals, and it brings me peace and happiness. Our research is consistent with findings in Curry (2000) showing that participants’ preexisting spiritual values influenced the degree to which they were open to adopting organic agriculture methods, particularly among members of the Dharma Garden Temple. When prompted with questions about organic farming and the environment, farmer-leaders expressed themselves in a vernacular akin to ‘‘Buddhist agriculture’’ (Wasi 1988). Our findings are consistent with other work that reported the First Precept was used to promote organic agricultural practices (Falvey 2000; Rigg 1997). In the case of Dharma Garden Temple Moral Rice practitioners, many referred to the First Precept as a moral justification for being an organic farmer. They practiced a code of conduct embedded in their religious beliefs. Their spiritually motivated actions promoted biological diversity on their farms (Curry 2000). There are some limitations to our study. A cross-sectional design limited our ability to examine changes over time. However, a longitudinal study was not feasible because the farmers who participated in this study shifted to organic methods at different points in time. Since Buddhist teachings include many abstract concepts, it is possible that participants had difficulty responding to some closedended questions about their spirituality. For this reason, we also investigated

123


participants’ values using interviews with open-ended questions and observations of the ways they put their knowledge into practice. It is possible that some Dharma Garden Temple members did not openly express dissenting opinions to an outsider because they shared a common religious ideology. However, since the participants also answered questions in a paper-based activity, it is likely that they felt at ease to express themselves through that method.

Conclusion Eco-spiritual values are a foundation of the lifeway of Thai smallholder organic farmers. These values influence the way organic farmers in our study perceived their financial and health status. Adopting eco-spiritual values can influence farmers’ decision-making and changes their perceptions of the world in which they live. Our findings raise a question: Is it essential for Thai conventional farmers to adopt ecospiritual values to become organic farmers? If the answer is yes, then our study suggests that among Thai smallholder conventional farmers a lack of interest or resistance to adopting eco-spiritual values may be the main barrier that keeps them from considering a shift to organic farming. If this is the case, then it may be difficult for many Thai conventional farmers to enjoy the benefits of a reduction in debt and improved health that come with the shift to organic farming. The participants in our study were a group of conventional farmers who made the shift successfully. Our study shows that whether others make the shift will depend largely on the influence of organic farmer support groups like Dharma Garden Temple and Green Net. Both types of organizations appear to be making a substantial contribution to promoting a shift to organic agriculture on a wider scale across Thailand. For conventional farmers who want to gain access to the organic marketplace and supply organic products while reducing costs, organizations like Green Net may be the most effective resource for helping them make the shift. For conventional farmers who hold a devout sense of Buddhist spirituality, templebased programs that teach them how to make the shift while cultivating their spirituality may be more effective because such programs offer a pathway for a deep sense of improved health and well-being. Our findings suggest that the expansion of organic farming systems in Thailand depends on changing perspectives about the nature of well-being.

References Allen, P. (2004). Together at the table: Sustainability and sustenance in the American agrifood system. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press. Baconguis, R., & Cruz, F. (2005). Paradigmatic outlook of alternative and conventional rice farmers in southern Philippines. Philippines Scientist, 42, 15–39. Becchetti, L., Conzo, P., & Gianfreda, G. (2010). Market access, organic farming and productivity: The determinants of creation of economic value on a sample of fair trade affiliated Thai farmers. University of Rome (unpublished research).

123

Author's personal copy Cultivating Greater Well-being Beus, C. E., & Dunlap, R. E. (1991). Conventional versus organic agriculture: The paradigmatic roots of the debate. Rural Sociology, 55(4), 590–616. Boonman, C., & Anpim, U. (2006). The possibility of Homali rice production in organic farming systems as an alternative farming career with poverty alleviation potential for lower-northeastern farmers: A case study of Yasothon Province. Bangkok: Thai Research Foundation. (in Thai). Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory. London: Sage Publications. Cresswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions, quantitative, and mixed method approaches. London: Sage Publications. Curry, J. (2000). Community worldview and rural systems: A study of five communities in Iowa. Annals of American Geography, 90(4), 693–712. de Silva, L. (1994). The hills wherein my soul delights. In M. Bachelor & K. Brown (Eds.), Buddhism and ecology (pp. 18–30). New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. Drentea, P., & Lavrakas, P. (2000). Over the limit: The association among health, race and debt. Social Science and Medicine, 50(4), 517–529. Drinkwater, L. E., Letouneau, D., Workneh, F., van Bruggen, A. H. C., & Shennan, C. (1995). Fundamental differences between conventional and organic tomato agroecosystems in California. Ecological Applications, 5(4), 1098–1112. Duram, L. A. (2000). Agents’ perceptions of structure: How Illinois organic farmers view political, economic, social, and ecological factors. Agriculture and Human Values, 17, 35–48. Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., & Jackson, P. (2008). Management research (3rd ed.). London: Sage. Elliot, A. C., & Woodward, W. A. (2007). Statistical analysis quick reference guidebook with SPSS examples. California: Sage Publications. Essen, J. (2005). Right development: The Santi Asoke Buddhist reform movement of Thailand. Maryland: Lexington Books. Falvey, L. (2000). Thai agriculture: Golden cradle of millennia. Bangkok: Kasetsart Press. Falvey, L. (2002). AgriDhamma: The duty of professional agriculturalists. A lecture by Buddhahassa Bhikku to agricultural teachers and officials on 25 March 1991 at Suan Mokkhapharam, Chaiya, Surat Thani province, Thailand. South Australia: Institute for International Development. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. Funahashi, K. (1996). Farming by the older generation: The exodus of young labor in Yasothon Province. Southeast Asian Studies, 33(4), 625–639. Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. University of California: Sociology Press. Grandstaff, T., Grandstaff, S., Limpinuntana, V., & Suphanachanchaimat, N. (2008). Rain fed revolution in Northeast Thailand. Southeast Asian Studies, 46(3), 289–376. Green Net Cooperative and Earth Net Foundation. (2013). http://www.greennet.or.th/home. Accessed 7 April 2008. Hardwick, K., Heaey, J. R., Elliot, S., & Blakesley, D. (2004). Research needs for restoring seasonal tropical forests in Thailand: Accelerated natural regeneration. New Forests, 27, 285–302. Hecht, S. (1987). The evolution of agroecological thought. In M. Altieri (Ed.), The scientific basis of alternative agriculture (pp. 1–27). London: Intermediate Technology Publications. Henning, D. (2002). A manual for Buddhism and deep ecology. Bangkok: The World Buddhist University. Hutanawat, N., & Hutanawat, N. (2006). Sustainable agriculture: Vision process and indicators. Nonthaburi: Kledthai Company. (in Thai). IPM-DANIDA. (2004). Pesticide health surveys. Data from 606 farmers in Thailand. Report 62 by the IPM DANIDA Project: Strengthening farmers IPM in pesticide intensive areas from http://thailand. ipm-info.org/download_documents.htm. Accessed 10 Oct 2012. Jitsanguan, T. (2001). Sustainable agriculture systems for small scale farmers in Thailand: Implications for the environment. http://www.agnet.org/library/eb/509/html. Accessed 25 May 2011. Kabilsingh, C. (2010). Buddhism and conservation. Bangkok: Thai Tibet Center. Kaufman, A. (2012). Organic farmers’ connectedness with nature: Exploring Thailand’s alternative agriculture network. Worldviews, Global Religions, Culture and Ecology, 16, 154–178. Kiatsuphimol, J. (2002). A strategy for green net to promote and organic farming product in Bangkok, Thailand. Masters Thesis, Manila: Asian Institute of Management. Lotter, D. W. (2003). Organic agriculture. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 21(4), 59–128.

123

Author's personal copy A. H. Kaufman, J. Mock Lovelace, G., Subhadhira, S., & Simarks, S. (1998). Introduction. In G. Lovelace, S. Subhadhira, & S. Simarks (Eds.), Rapid rural appraisal in Northeast Thailand (pp. 3–19). Khon Khen: KKU-FORD Rural Systems Research Project. Mayer, F., & Frantz, C. (2004). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 503–515. McNeely, J., & Scherr, S. J. (2003). Ecoagriculture: Strategies to feed the world and save biodiversity. Washington, DC: Island Press. Mock, J. (2000). Thai views of wellness, sabaay, smoking, and Buddhist health promotion. Ph.D Dissertation. University of California, San Francisco. National Statistics Office. (2011). Statistical yearbook 2010. http://web.nso.go.th/eng/link/solink.htm. Accessed 1 Oct 2011. Od-ompanich, W., Kittsiri, A., & Thongchai, M. (2007). Organic and inorganic rice production: A case study in Yasothon Province, Northeastern Thailand. http://p7953.typo3server.info/uploads/media/ Thai_OIRice.pdf. Accessed 3 March 2014. Onwuegbuzie, A., & Collins, M. T. (2007). A typology of mixed methods sampling designs in social science research. The Qualitative Report, 12(2), 281–316. Onwuegbuzie, A., & Leech, N. L. (2004). Post hoc power: A concept whose time has come. Understanding Statistics, 3(4), 201. Panya, O. (2003). Community-first agriculture: A search for Thailand’s post-crisis sustainable transformation. In R. Doyle (Ed.), Strengthening community competence for social development: Asia-Pacific perspectives (pp. 219–235). Phitsanulok: Naresuan University. Panya, O., & Sirisai, S. (2003). Environmental consciousness in Thailand: Contesting maps of ecoconscious minds. Southeast Asian Studies, 41, 59–75. Pimentel, D., Hepperly, P., Hanson, J., Douds, D., & Seidel, R. (2005). Environmental, energetic, and economic comparisons of organic and conventional farming systems. BioScience, 7, 573–582. Pretty, J. (2003). Agri-culture: Reconnecting people, land and nature. London: Earthscan Publications. Rambo, T. (1983). Conceptual approaches to human ecology. Research Report 14. Hawaii: East–West Environmental and Policy Institute. Ratanamalai, A. (1999). Thailand cooperatives role in decentralized rural development for poverty alleviation and food security at the community level. Food and agriculture organization, decentralized rural development and the role of self help organizations. A regional workshop held from 4–6 Nov 1998, Chiang Mai, Thailand, Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific Bangkok. Rigg, J. (1997). Southeast Asia: The human landscape of modernization and development. London: Routledge. Rogers, E. M., & Shoemaker, F. F. (1971). Communication of innovations. New York: The Free Press. Roitner-Schobesberger, B., Darnhofer, I., Somsook, S., & Vogl, C. R. (2008). Consumer perceptions of organic foods in Bangkok. Food Policy, 33, 112–121. Samerpak, P. (2006). A strategy for sustainable agriculture system by Rak Thammachat Club in Kudchum district, Yasothon Province, Thailand. Unpublished Master Thesis, Manila: Asian Institute of Management. Schreinemachers, P., Schad, I., Tipraqsa, P., Williams, P. M., Neef, A., Riwthong, S., et al. (2012). Can public GAP standards reduce agricultural pesticide use? The case of fruit and vegetable farming in Northern Thailand. Agriculture and Human Values, 29, 519–529. Semaan, S., Lauby, J., & Liebman, J. (2002). Street and network sampling in evaluation studies of HIV risk-reduction interventions. AIDS Review, 4, 213–223. Setboonsarng, S. & Gilman, J. (1999). Alternative agriculture in Thailand and Japan, Asian Institute of Technology. www.solutions-site.org/cat11_sol85.htm. Accessed 11 Dec 2007. Sirisai, S. (1990). Rice goddess and rice farming in Thailand.In U. Kyaw Than & P. Ratanakul (Eds.). Development, modernization and tradition in South East Asia (pp 163–177). Salaya: Mahidol University. Sullivan, S., McCann, E., De Young, R., & Erickson, D. (1996). Farmers’ attitudes about farming and the environment: A survey of conventional and organic farmers. Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Ethics, 9(2), 123–143. Tanabe, S. (1994). Ecology and practical technology: Peasant farming systems in Thailand. Bangkok: White Lotus. Thongdee, I. (1990). Thai Farmers and Buffaloes a cultural interpretation. In U. Kyaw Than & P. Ratanakul (Eds.), Development, modernization and tradition in South East Asia (pp. 178–183). Salaya: Mahidol University.

123

Author's personal copy Cultivating Greater Well-being Thongtawee, C. (2006). Attractors in the paradigm shift process towards sustainable agriculture of farmers. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Nakhon Pathom: Mahidol University. Wasi, P. (1988). Buddhist agriculture and the tranquility of Thai society. In S. Phongphit & R. Bennoun (Eds.), Turning point of Thai farmers (pp. 1–43). Bangkok: Thai Institute for Rural Development. White, P. (1994). Rice: The essential harvest. National Geographic, 185(5), 48–79. Willer, H., Lernoud, J., & Kilcher, L. (Eds.). (2013). The world of organic agriculture. Statistics and emerging trends 2013. Bonn: Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Frick and International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM). http://www.organic-world. net/2413.html?&L=0. Accessed on 5 Jan 2014. Willer, H. & Yussefi, M. (Eds.). (2004). The world of organic agriculture—statistics and emerging trends 2004. Bonn: International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements. http://www.organicworld.net/former-editions.html?&L=0#c13 Accessed on 5 Jan 2014. Wishik, S. M., & Van der Vynckt, S. (1976). The use of nutritional ‘‘positive deviants’’ to identify approaches for modification of dietary practices. American Journal of Public Health, 66(1), 38–42. Wyatt, D. (1982). Thailand: A short history. Bangkok: Silkworm Books.

123