UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Farmers’ political belief systems Skogstad, Grace Darlene 1976

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1977_A1 S46.pdf [ 19.65MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094315.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094315-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094315-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094315-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094315-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094315-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094315-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094315-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094315.ris

Full Text

FARMERS' POLITICAL BELIEF SYSTEMS by GRACE DARLENE SKOGSTAD M.A.,  U n i v e r s i t y o f A l b e r t a , 1971  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY  in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department o f P o l i t i c a l S c i e n c e ) We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s as conforming t o the r e q u i r e d  standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA F a l l , 1976  Grace Darlene Skogstad, 1976  In presenting this thesis in partial  fulfilment of the requirements for  an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library  shall make it freely available for  reference and study.  I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this  thesis  for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives.  It  is understood that copying or publication  of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.  Department of The University of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5  Date  /Idlj-t^J^y  ^  /lit?  TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1  PAGE  INTRODUCTION  1  T h e o r e t i c a l Underpinnings  2  3  The S p e c i f i c Study of Farmers' P o l i t i c a l B e l i e f Systems  12  Chapter Contents  19  Notes to Chapter 1  23  AGRICULTURAL POLICY AS AN OBJECT OF FARMERS'  POLITICAL  BELIEF SYSTEMS  3  4  25  The Federal Government and A g r i c u l t u r a l P o l i c y  26  Provincial Agricultural Policy  37  A Framework f o r Mapping Farmers' P o l i t i c a l Attitudes  39  Notes to Chapter 2  51  THE STUDY GROUPS  55  Selection o f the Study Groups  56  Comparability o f Study Groups  65  Notes to Chapter 3  70  COGNITIVE BELIEFS: HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS The Perceived Locus o f Control D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Influence i n the P o l i t i c a l System  5  71 72 91  Class Structure of Society  101  The Structure o f Cognitive B e l i e f s  104  Notes to Chapter 4  115  EVALUATIVE BELIEFS: HOW THE SYSTEM OUGHT TO WORK  120  Evaluative B e l i e f s Regarding Regulation o f A g r i c u l t u r a l Production, P r i c i n g , and Marketing  120  Values and Goals  145  Notes to Chapter 5  165  iv  CHAPTER 6  PAGE  THE STRUCTURE OF FARMERS' BELIEF SYSTEMS AND A TYPOLOGY OF ACTIVITY AND BELIEF  7  8  9  169  Structure of B e l i e f Systems  170  Consensual and P a r t i c u l a r i s t i c B e l i e f Sets i n the Two Study Groups A Typology o f the Congruence of B e l i e f and A c t i v i t y  183 192  Notes to Chapter 6  199  CORRELATES OF BELIEF AND ACTIVITY  200  Antecedent A t t r i b u t e s  201  P o l i t i c a l A l i e n a t i o n and the Four Farmer Types  224  Behavioral Implications  246  Notes to Chapter 7  256  THE PATHS TO IDEOLOGY AND ACTION  260  The Links with B e l i e f Adherence  261  The Links to NFU Membership  278  Notes to Chapter 8  291  CONCLUSION  293  Farmers' P o l i t i c a l B e l i e f Systems  293  Farmers' P o l i t i c a l A c t i v i t y  300  Research Implications  304  Notes to Chapter 9  307  APPENDIX A  INTER-ITEM ASSOCIATION OF LOCUS OF CONTROL MEASURES  B  PROGRAMS OF BENEFIT, HARMFUL PROGRAMS,  308  315 MEDIAN AND IMPORTANCE RANKINGS OF EDMONTON SAMPLE 318 C  CONSTRUCTION OF MEASURES  D  ROKEACH VALUE PROFILES OF FOUR FARMER TYPES  E  CANONICAL CORRELATION ANALYSES  F  CORRELATION MATRICES OF PREDICTOR VARIABLES  324 325 332 341  SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY  v  LIST OF TABLES TABLE  PAGE  2.1  Government Assistance Programs  29  3.1  A Comparison of Census D i v i s i o n 13 and the Province as a Whole  60-61  3.2  A Comparison o f the Interview and Mail Groups  66  3.3  Mean Market Value, Income, Farm Size, Years o f School and Age of NFU, Non-NFU, Interview and M a i l Questionnaire Groups  66  3.4  Comparison of NFU and Non-NFU Study Groups  68  4.1  Individual versus Systemic Blame Regarding the Cost-Price Squeeze: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  76  A t t r i b u t i o n of Blame f o r the Disappearance o f the Family Farm: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  77  A t t r i b u t i o n o f Blame f o r Farmers' Relative Lack of Success with Governments: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  78  I n d i v i d u a l i s t versus C o l l e c t i v i s t Action on the Cost-Price Squeeze: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  80  A b i l i t y o f Farmers to Organize as a P o l i t i c a l Group: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  81  4.2 4.3  4.4 4.5  4.6  Perceived Locus o f Control over Farm P r i c e s : NFU and Non-NFU Groups  86  4.7  Locus of Control over Input Supplies Costs  87  4.8  Perceived Beneficiary o f the Open Marketing System: NFU and Non-NFU Groups Mean Influence Ratings of Selected P o l i t i c a l Actors: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  93-94  Assessments of Appropriateness of D i s t r i b u t i o n of P o l i t i c a l Influence: NFU and Non-NFU Groups (%'s)  97  4.9  4.10 4.11  90  The F i r s t Factor o f the Unrotated Matrix of P o t e n t i a l P o l i t i c a l Actors: NFU and Non-NFU Groups (Factor Loadings) 99 vi  TABLE 4.13  4.14  4.15 4.16 4.17 5.1  5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6  PAGE Summary Indices of Appropriateness o f P o l i t i c a l Influence D i s t r i b u t i o n : NFU and Non-NFU Groups  101  Perception and Appropriateness of Class Nature of Canadian Society: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  103  Ideological Perspective on Class Nature of Canadian Society: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  103  Inter-Item Association (Pearson r) o f Locus of Control Measures: NFU Group  107  Inter-Item Association ( Pearson r) of Locus of Control Measures: Non-NFU Group  108  Recommendations Regarding Governmental Production Roles: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  123  Types o f B e n e f i c i a l Programs Mentioned: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  130  Types of Harmful Programs Mentioned: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  131  Regulation o f Farm Size and Ownership: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  135  P r i c i n g Controls on Farm Produce and Input Supplies: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  136  Body Recommended to Set Price Controls: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  137  5.7  Preferred Type of Marketing: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  138  5.8  Inter-Item Association of Evaluative B e l i e f s : NFU Group (N=37) Inter-Item Association o f Evaluative B e l i e f s : Non-NFU Group (N=96)  5.9  5.10  141 143  Median Value, Importance and Consensus Rankings of the 18 Terminal Values: NFU and Non-NFU Differences  151  5.11  Desirable Aspects o f Farming: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  154  5.12  Reasons f o r D i s l i k i n g the Disappearance o f the Family Farm: NFU and Non-NFU Groups Gamma Measure o f Association Between Cognitive B e l i e f s Regarding the P r i c i n g and Marketing Sectors and Evaluations Regarding the P r i c i n g , Marketing, and Production Sectors: NFU  6.1  vii  161  173  TABLE 6.2  PAGE Class Structure View and Evaluations Regarding the P r i c i n g , Marketing, and Production Sectors: NFU %'s  174  Pearson Correlations o f D i s t r i b u t i o n o f DecisionMaking Influence and Radical Class View with Evaluations Regarding P r i c i n g , Marketing, and Production Sectors: NFU  174  Gamma Measure of Association Between Cognitive B e l i e f s Regarding the P r i c i n g and Marketing Sectors and Evaluations Regarding the P r i c i n g , Marketing, and Production Sectors: Non-NFU  179  Class Structure View and Evaluations Regarding the P r i c i n g , Marketing, and Production Sectors: Non-NFU %'s  180  Pearson Correlations o f D i s t r i b u t i o n o f DecisionMaking Influence and Radical Class View with Evaluations Regarding P r i c i n g , Marketing, and Production Sectors: Non-NFU  180  Incidence of J o i n t Occurrence of Cognitive and Evaluative B e l i e f Elements Regarding the P r i c i n g , Marketing and Production Sectors: %'s  184  6.8  Consensual B e l i e f s o f NFU and Non-NFU Farmers  187  6.9  Item-Test Correlations o f NFU B e l i e f Index Components  194  6.10  NFU B e l i e f Index and P r o b a b i l i t y of NFU Membership  195  6.11  Farmer Types and Subjective Measures o f I d e o l o g i c a l Perspective: %'s  198  S i t u a t i o n a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the Four Farmer Types: %'s  217  Standard Scores'of Four Farmer Types on Situational Characteristics  218-219  Personality and Background C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Four Farmer Types: %'s  223  6.3  6.4  6.5  6.6  6.7  7.1  7.2  7.3  7.4  Standard Scores of Four Farmer Types on Personality and Background C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  223  7.5  P o l i t i c a l A l i e n a t i o n and the Four Farmer Types: %'s  234-235  7.6  P o l i t i c a l A l i e n a t i o n and Farmer Types: Standard Scores viii  236  TABLE 7.7  PAGE Reality-Testing and P o l i t i c a l A l i e n a t i o n Among the Four Farmer Types: %'s  239  7.8  Behavioral A t t r i b u t e s o f the Four Farmer Types:%'s  247  7.9  Behavioral A t t r i b u t e s o f the Four Farmer Types: Standard Scores Regression of NFU B e l i e f Index on Independent Variables  248 264  Regression o f Powerlessness on Predictor Variables Including Other A l i e n a t i o n Measures  269  Regression o f Powerlessness on Predictor Variables Minus A l i e n a t i o n Measures  270  Pearson r ' s o f Predictor Variables with Powerlessness and the NFU B e l i e f Index  275  Regression o f Present Unfair Return on Predictor Variables with Economic Discontent Variables  277  Regression o f Present Unfair Return on Predictor Variables Minus Economic Discontent Variables  277  Regression o f NFU Membership Among Believers on Predictor Variables  282  Regression o f NFU Membership Among Non-Believers on Predictor Variables  285  Pearson Correlations of Selected Rokeach Values and P o l i t i c a l A l i e n a t i o n and Economic Discontent  288  8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 8.8  8.9  ix  L I S T OF CHARTS AND  DIAGRAMS  C h a r t 2.1  L e f t , R i g h t and Centre P o s i t i o n s on S c a l e and E x t e n t o f Government P l a n n i n g and C o n t r o l  Diagram 3.1  The G e o g r a p h i c a l L o c a t i o n o f Census D i v i s i o n 13 and NFU D i s t r i c t 3  Diagram 8.1  The H y p o t h e s i z e d L i n k s Between Independent and Dependent V a r i a b l e s  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  The  a s s i s t a n c e o f a number o f p e o p l e i n t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h i s  d i s s e r t a t i o n i s g r a t e f u l l y acknowledged.  Firstly,  t h e c o n s t r u c t i v e and  i n c i s i v e comments o f Donald E. B l a k e , D a v i d J . E l k i n s , and A l a n C. C a i r n s on e a r l y d r a f t s o f t h e t h e s i s were i n v a l u a b l e . C o u n c i l and I z a a k Walton K i l l a m F o u n d a t i o n d u r i n g t h e d o c t o r a l study p e r i o d . supported groups.  S e c o n d l y , t h e Canada  provided  f i n a n c i a l assistance  The Canada C o u n c i l F o u n d a t i o n a l s o  t h e t r a v e l expenses i n c u r r e d i n t h e i n t e r v i e w s w i t h T h i r d l y , I should  the study  l i k e t o thank t h e A l b e r t a farmers who comprise  groups i n t h e d i s s e r t a t i o n .  Their cooperation  to p r o c e e d ; t h e i r generous h o s p i t a l i t y made t h e p r o c e s s  enabled  debt t o members o f my f a m i l y .  one.  labour,  conclusion.  two i n d i v i d u a l s made v i t a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s to t h e p r e p a r a t i o n  of t h e f i n a l m a n u s c r i p t . was  Fourthly,  Their voluntary  a d v i c e , and encouragement throughout have h a s t e n e d t h e t h e s i s ' Above a l l ,  t h e study  of gathering  the data upon which t h e d i s s e r t a t i o n i s based an e n j o y a b l e I owe an important  t h e study  Sharon S u t h e r l a n d ' s  c r i t i c a l i n the analyses  the r e s e a r c h e r  of the data.  Her e x c e l l e n t a d v i c e  c l e a r o f innumerable p i t f a l l s .  s i n g u l a r l y important  contribution.  xi  steered  One o t h e r p e r s o n made a  My husband, R i c h a r d ,  h i s f a i t h and c o n s t r u c t i v e i n h i s c r i t i c i s m , q u a l i t y of the d i s s e r t a t i o n .  enthusiasm and c o o p e r a t i o n  unflagging i n  improved s i g n i f i c a n t l y t h e  Chapter 1 Introduction  The p o l i t i c a l m o b i l i z a t i o n o f p r a i r i e farmers i n the h a l f of t h i s c e n t u r y i n a c t i v i t y since. together  i s i n stark contrast to t h e i r r e l a t i v e  In A l b e r t a , Saskatchewan, and Manitoba,  over the p e r i o d  1900 - 1950  first political  farmers  united  t o o b t a i n a more e q u i t a b l e m a r k e t i n g  system and g e n e r a l l y a g r e a t e r say i n the i m p o r t a n t d e c i s i o n s a f f e c t i n g them.  T h e i r c o l l e c t i v e s t r e n g t h e n a b l e d them to e l e c t and d e f e a t  ments: the U n i t e d Farmers  o f A l b e r t a and S o c i a l C r e d i t  govern-  administrations  i n A l b e r t a and the CCF government i n Saskatchewan were a l l farmer-based. T h i s p e r i o d was  thus one when farmer p o l i t i c a l  to o b t a i n s p e c i f i c p o l i c y  a c t i v i t y enabled, f a r m e r s  successes.  In c o n t r a s t , a l t h o u g h the s t r u c t u r e o f the a g r i c u l t u r a l economy has undergone massive post-1950  changes i n the second h a l f o f t h i s c e n t u r y ,  p e r i o d has been one o f r e l a t i v e p o l i t i c a l  p a r t of p r a i r i e farmers.  the  q u i e s c e n c e on the  I n t e n s i v e c a p i t a l i z a t i o n o f a g r i c u l t u r e has  meant l a r g e r farms, fewer f a r m e r s , and l e s s i n t e r a c t i o n among them. Growing economic d i s p a r i t i e s s e p a r a t e farmers who c a p i t a l i n t e n s i v e a g r i c u l t u r e from t h o s e who the p e n e t r a t i o n o f a g r i b u s i n e s s  have.  have n o t engaged i n A t t h e same time,  i n t o the a g r i c u l t u r a l s e c t o r has  severely  l i m i t e d the economic c o n t r o l of the farmer o v e r t h e p r i c e s o f b o t h a g r i c u l t u r a l s u p p l i e s and commodities. population  The c o n t i n u i n g  s h i f t o f the  from r u r a l t o urban c e n t e r s , a l r e a d y underway by  1950,  meant a concomitant d e c l i n e o f farmers as a p r o p o r t i o n of the These  has  population.  f a r - r e a c h i n g changes i n a g r i c u l t u r e have been unaccompanied by  any  2.  major p o l i t i c a l mobilization of farmers.  C o l l e c t i v e farmer demonstrations  and protestations have been the exception rather than the r u l e .  Since 1969,  however, when a national farmers union committed to procuring a larger v o i c e for farmers i n the p o l i t i c a l and economic decisions a f f e c t i n g them was formed, the p o s s i b i l i t y has existed that t h i s period of i n a c t i v i t y might be ending.  The National Farmers Union has engaged i n a number of a c t i v i t i e s  reminiscent of the populism of farmers i n the early years of t h i s century. However, membership i n the National Farmers Union remains today l i m i t e d to a small minority of farmers.  Hence, while the presence.of the NFU  ensures  the a v a i l a b i l i t y of a v e h i c l e f o r c o l l e c t i v e p o l i t i c a l action by farmers, i t s l i m i t e d membership base suggests the reluctance of most farmers to u t i l i z e t h i s channel.  The dual phenomena of the existence of the organiza-  t i o n and i t s r e s t r i c t e d membership base provide the s p e c i f i c impetus f o r the research reported i n this thesis. why  Both i n e v i t a b l y stimulate c u r i o s i t y as to  some farmers should, i n the h i s t o r i c a l t r a d i t i o n of Canadian agrarian  p o l i t i c s , be c o l l e c t i v e l y engaging i n p o l i t i c a l action while others are not.  In seeking to s a t i s f y that c u r i o s i t y , the research here focuses  upon farmers' p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f  systems.  More p r e c i s e l y , the thesis i s an empirical study of the p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f systems of two groups of Alberta farmers: the one, members of the National Farmers Union; the other, non-members of that organization. Two objectives guide the research. d e s c r i p t i v e one.  The f i r s t goal i s an e s s e n t i a l l y  I t i s to inquire into the content, structure, and context  of Alberta farmers' p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f systems. seeks answers to questions l i k e the following.  At this stage, the research F i r s t l y , how do the two  groups of farmers perceive and appraise the p o l i t i c a l and economic systems  3.  i n which they f u n c t i o n ? t i o n s and  evaluations inter-related?  p e r c e p t i o n s and said  Secondly, how  Are  the  belief  p o l i t i c a l attitudes  systems i n the  l e a s t some of the  of  the  two  i s to examine the  At  t h i s l e v e l , the  that  r o l e of f a r m e r s '  intent  i n c l u d e s members of  be  the  groups of farmers?  The  political  i s to s p e c i f y  the at  beliefs  A sampling d e s i g n  that  the N a t i o n a l Farmers U n i o n makes t h i s  possible.  the  r e s e a r c h and  indicated.  their application  theoretical  underpinnings  t o s e c t i o n s of the  More s p e c i f i c a l l y , a concept of a t t i t u d e  dissertation and  formation i s outlined;  a t h e o r y of b e h a v i o r which p l a c e s an  on  i s stressed;  situational factors  f o r what f o l l o w s i n the Theoretical  focus  reader i s g e n e r a l l y prepared  a t t i t u d i n a l formation, a t t i t u d i n a l  r o l e of a t t i t u d e s  " p o l i t i c a l attitude are  important  dissertation.  i n behavior.  t h e s e a s p e c t s , i t should be  t i o n as  the  study of p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f systems r e s t s  t h e o r y of a t t i t u d e s , the  and  attitudinal  Underpinnings The  and  they can  t h i r d l y , what a r e  c o n d i t i o n s under w h i c h f a r m e r s ' p o l i t i c a l  In t h i s i n t r o d u c t o r y c h a p t e r , the  are  And  congruent w i t h t h e i r p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t y .  task  d i f f e r e n t measures of  s p e c i f i c p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t y of b e l o n g i n g to  N a t i o n a l Farmers Union.  deliberately  those p e r c e p -  evaluations s u f f i c i e n t l y i n t e r - r e l a t e d  second r e s e a r c h o b j e c t i v e  of  the  to be measuring p o l i t i c a l a t t i t u d e s ?  bases of  are  ( i f at a l l ) are  noted that  system" a r e  Prior  upon a  constraint,  t o examining each of  " p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f system"  i n t e r c h a n g e a b l e terms i n the  " p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f s " and  particular  " p o l i t i c a l attitudes".  and  dissertaPolitical  4. b e l i e f systems are constellations of p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f s 1.  (attitudes).  What are b e l i e f s / a t t i t u d e s ? A b e l i e f or a t t i t u d e i s defined here as the p r o b a b i l i t y of  c e r t a i n responses recurring with respect to c e r t a i n objects. and Westie, 1963; Campbell,  1963; Bern, 1968)  An attitude i s thus  a consistent predisposition to respond i n a c e r t a i n way s p e c i f i c object or s i t u a t i o n .  (DeFleur  toward a  Although the primary i n t e r e s t i s i n  the attitudes or b e l i e f s which constitute farmers' ideologies, the evidence from which we i n f e r these attitudes consists e n t i r e l y of statements i n an interview s i t u a t i o n .  The inferences from such s t a t e -  ments to attitudes must meet c e r t a i n scholarly c r i t e r i a of r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y .  These matters w i l l be dealt with at appropriate points  throughout the thesis.  In t h i s chapter, however, phrases such as  "verbal behavior", "verbal responses", and "questionnaire responses" should be understood as r e f e r r i n g to the underlying b e l i e f s . p o l i t i c a l behavior may,  Since  of course, be verbal, one kind of v e r b a l  behavior i s used to predict another kind of v e r b a l behavior.  It is  hoped, however, that the type of v e r b a l behavior w i l l be clear from the context. Given a p r o b a b i l i s t i c conceptualization of attitude, the researcher interested i n p o l i t i c a l attitudes looks f o r response consistency across behaviors over time.  "Response consistency across  behaviors over time" e n t a i l s that the term " a t t i t u d e " be r e s t r i c t e d to statements which reveal enduring assessments with respect to a certain object.  This d e f i n i t i o n focuses the search f o r attitudes  a  5.  outside the i n d i v i d u a l to h i s environment.  A reified  motivating the i n d i v i d u a l to respond i n a given way  'inner mechanism'  to a s p e c i f i c  stimulus need not be postulated.*" 2.  How  are b e l i e f s / a t t i t u d e s formed? There are two questions here.  an i n d i v i d u a l ' s b e l i e f s (attitudes)?  One, what i s the source of Two,  how  does the i n d i v i d u a l  make those b e l i e f s known to the researcher? F i r s t l y , the source of an i n d i v i d u a l ' s attitudes l i e s i n his past experiences; h i s attitudes and the verbal statements from 2 which we i n f e r them r e f l e c t h i s environmental h i s t o r y .  The  s t i c d e f i n i t i o n of a t t i t u d e embraces a generally recognized  probabiliprinciple  of human behavior: an i n d i v i d u a l ' s current pattern of behavior a c e r t a i n object i s shaped by h i s past behavior  toward  toward that object.  Accordingly, responses which have been p o s i t i v e l y reinforced i n the past w i l l tend to recur i n the future; those which have been negatively reinforced w i l l not.  Consistent reinforcements  should also r e s u l t i n  a p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n between questionnaire behavior and  behavior  i n other s e t t i n g s . The suggestion that "residues of experience" with respect to an object guide future behavior  (Campbell,  1963)  towards that object  e n t a i l s the conclusion that the more frequent and more consistent an i n d i v i d u a l ' s contact with a given object, the more probable h i s behavior  towards that object w i l l e x h i b i t a recurring pattern.  An  i n d i v i d u a l i s , therefore, more l i k e l y to have a t t i t u d e s toward objects i n h i s environment with which he has had frequent i n t e r a c t i o n .  This  p r o p o s i t i o n leads the researcher of p o l i t i c a l the p o l i t i c a l the  a t t i t u d e s t o f o c u s on  obj e c t s w i t h which t h e i n d i v i d u a l has i n t e r a c t e d i n  past. Secondly,  an i n d i v i d u a l makes h i s a t t i t u d e s known t o o t h e r s  as w e l l as t o h i m s e l f by r e f l e c t i n g upon and e v a l u a t i n g h i s p a s t  3 behavior.  Typically,  the r e s e a r c h e r a c q u i r e s knowledge o f an i n d i v i -  d u a l ' s a t t i t u d e s by a s k i n g t h e i n d i v i d u a l what they a r e . to his  In replying  t h e r e s e a r c h e r , t h e respondent r e l a t e s h i s " s e l f - e v a l u a t i o n s o f own b e h a v i o r " - " o b s e r v a t i o n s o f h i s own o v e r t b e h a v i o r  s t i m u l u s c o n d i t i o n s under which i t o c c u r s " .  and t h e  (Bern, 1968: 204)  In  s h o r t , t h e i n d i v i d u a l "knows" h i s a t t i t u d e s towards a g i v e n o b j e c t by  4 looking at h i s past behavior  toward t h a t o b j e c t .  The a b i l i t y  of the  i n d i v i d u a l t o make h i s b e l i e f s and a t t i t u d e s known t o t h e r e s e a r c h e r i s thus of  c o n t i n g e n t upon a t l e a s t  h i s own b e h a v i o r  and thoughts;  thoughts t o another allowed 3.  to c l a r i f y  person;  t h r e e f a c t o r s : one, h i s awareness two, h i s c a p a c i t y t o r e l a t e h i s  and t h r e e , t h e e x t e n t  and e l a b o r a t e upon h i s  thoughts.  How a r e c o n s t e l l a t i o n s o f b e l i e f s / a t t i t u d e s The  concern  i n political belief  t o which he i s  structured?  system r e s e a r c h  extends  beyond i s o l a t i n g d i s c r e t e p o l i t i c a l a t t i t u d e s t o u n c o v e r i n g t h e s t r u c t u r i n g among c o n s t e l l a t i o n s o f p o l i t i c a l a t t i t u d e s .  W h i l e an  a t t i t u d e by d e f i n i t i o n i m p l i e s a degree o f s t r u c t u r i n g among a s s e s s ments w i t h r e s p e c t t o a c e r t a i n o b j e c t , t h e s t r u c t u r a l c h a r a c t e r o f a belief  system i s an e m p i r i c a l q u e s t i o n n o t a d e f i n i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c . While i n i t i a l research i n t o p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f  systems tended  7.  to s e a r c h  f o r one  political beliefs, not  so simply  s i n g l e dimension t h a t c o n s t r a i n e d i t i s now  structured.  a r e complex and  assumed t h a t p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f s e t s  I t i s a c c e p t e d t h a t most b e l i e f  multi-dimensional.  What a r e some of the  upon which mass p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f s a r e s t r u c t u r e d ? a r e such dimensions l i k e l y Firstly,  an i n d i v i d u a l ' s are  clusters  dimensions  Under what  conditions  to occur?  empirical research  has  revealed  the r a r i t y  of  l o g i c a l c o n s t r a i n t s among most i n d i v i d u a l ' s p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f s .  Early  i n the study of p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f systems, P h i l i p Converse (1964) suggested t h a t l o g i c a l l y c o n s i s t e n t s e t s of b e l i e f s were c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of o n l y  the b e t t e r educated and  politically  aware.  Secondly, the assumption of a t t i t u d e s as " r e s i d u e s  of  exper-  i e n c e " means t h a t c o n s i s t e n c y  of c o n s t e l l a t i o n s of a t t i t u d e s i s i n p a r t  a f u n c t i o n of the c o n s i s t e n c y  of i n d i v i d u a l s ' e n v i r o n m e n t a l h i s t o r i e s .  When c o n s i s t e n t messages from s e v e r a l a s p e c t s of an i n d i v i d u a l ' s ment r e i n f o r c e one more l i k e l y  to be  environ-  a n o t h e r , h i s a t t i t u d e s toward d i f f e r e n t o b j e c t s integrated  than when h i s e x p e r i e n c e s have  are  left  c o n f l i c t i n g messages. T h i r d l y , l i b e r a l and may  conservative  co-occur w i t h i n a g i v e n b e l i e f  happens, the principle.  system.  ( l e f t and To  right) attitudes  the e x t e n t  l e f t - r i g h t dimension i s not a s i g n i f i c a n t  that  organizing  I n a c l u s t e r a n a l y s i s of r e s p o n s e s of Americans to  p o l i c y statements, Robert A x e l r o d d i s t i n c t c l u s t e r s , one  of which he  the c l u s t e r i n t h e s e terms:  (1967: 57-59) d i s c e r n e d l a b e l l e d "Populism".  "Agreement w i t h the f i r s t  r e f l e c t s a l i b e r a l a t t i t u d e on the w e l f a r e  this  sixteen  three He  three  described items  s c a l e , w h i l e agreement w i t h  8.  the second t h r e e r e f l e c t s what i s c u r r e n t l y r e g a r d e d as a c o n s e r v a t i v e position.  Thus t h e s c a l e measures something v e r y d i f f e r e n t from t h e  l e f t - r i g h t d i m e n s i o n t h a t i s so f r e q u e n t l y used i n commentary on t h e s t r u c t u r e of American p u b l i c o p i n i o n . " according  (1973: 57)  Furthermore,  to A x e l r o d , t h e l e f t - r i g h t d i m e n s i o n i s t h e s o l e  organizing  p r i n c i p l e f o r n e i t h e r t h e uneducated and uninformed nor t h e i n f o r m e d and educated. I n a d d i t i o n , i n t e r v i e w s w i t h over one hundred American b l u e c o l l a r workers l e d L i t w a k e t a l . (1973) t o c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e predominant i d e o l o g y o f t h e group, which they d e s c r i b e d as " M i d d l e American", a " n o n c o r r e l a t e d m u l t i - c a u s a l ideology"."* a u t h o r s , does not f i t  the v e r y poor.  T h i s i d e o l o g y , suggest t h e  a l o n g t h e l i b e r a l - c o n s e r v a t i v e continuum  as t h e M i d d l e American i d e o l o g y i s opposed  was  insofar  to b o t h the v e r y r i c h  and  They argue t h a t a n o n c o r r e l a t e d m u l t i - c a u s a l b e l i e f  system i s n o t i n t r i n s i c a l l y response t o c o n f l i c t i n g And f i n a l l y ,  i r r a t i o n a l because i t may  elements i n t h e p o l i t i c a l  be a r a t i o n a l  system.  a r e c e n t s m a l l e s t space a n a l y s i s by G e r a l d  Hikel  of t h e " i d e o l o g i c a l " and " s t y l i s t i c " a s p e c t s o f b e l i e f systems l e d t o the c o n c l u s i o n t h a t "... the d a t a do n o t appear t o s u p p o r t t h e assumpt i o n o f a l i b e r a l i s m - c o n s e r v a t i s m d i m e n s i o n f o r i d e o l o g u e s any more than f o r n o n i d e o l o g u e s " g i v e n t h a t "... s o c i a l w e l f a r e and c i v i l a t t i t u d e s a r e p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e d f o r b o t h groups".  rights  (1973:  E m p i r i c a l e v i d e n c e thus s u g g e s t s t h e n a t u r e of t h e m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l s t r u c t u r i n g of mass b e l i e f systems.  In l i g h t  of t h e s e  f i n d i n g s , t h e assumption throughout t h i s r e s e a r c h i s t h a t f a r m e r s '  80)  p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f systems w i l l be structured i n a r e l a t i v e l y complex fashion. 4.  What kinds of b e l i e f s are relevant to action? Empirical and t h e o r e t i c a l research suggests important  lessons f o r the researcher  intent on e l i c i t i n g statements which  adequately reveal stable orientations toward p a r t i c u l a r objects. Such verbal responses have a high p r o b a b i l i t y of recurring when the search i s for s p e c i f i c a t t i t u d e s towards s p e c i f i c objects i n issue areas defined by the respondent as s a l i e n t and i n c r i s i s s i t u a t i o n s when those responses are being challenged.  Attitudes and  a t t i t u d i n a l constraint are more noticeable when there i s a heightened salience of p o l i t i c s i n the system as a whole.  Each of these conditions  w i l l be dealt with i n turn. DeFleur and Westie (1968: 30) emphasize that attitudes must be defined as " s p e c i f i c forms of response to s p e c i f i c s o c i a l objects, or s p e c i f i c classes of s o c i a l objects".  In a s i m i l a r vein, E h r l i c h  prescribes that i f we are ever to i s o l a t e verbal responses that are consistent across behaviors,  the search must be f o r verbal and behav-  i o r a l responses j o i n t l y towards s p e c i f i c objects: "... either we measure an a t t i t u d e toward a s p e c i f i c person and then p r e d i c t a subject's behavior toward that person, or we measure attitudes towards a c l a s s of people and predict a subject's behavior to some (perhaps phenomenol o g i c a l l y ) representative sample of that c l a s s " .  (1972: 497) The  merit of the f i r s t strategy E h r l i c h suggests i s seen i n Crespi's a b i l i t y to improve predictions of behavior from " s p e c i f i c dimensions  10.  of a t t i t u d e s w i t h r e s p e c t with a high (1971:  to a s p e c i f i c p o i n t i n time among p e r s o n s  l i k e l i h o o d of h a v i n g to make a b e h a v i o r a l  decision  333) Searching  for s p e c i f i c questionnaire  towards p a r t i c u l a r o b j e c t s  or i n t e r v i e w  responses  i n a r e a s i m p o r t a n t to the i n d i v i d u a l  f u r t h e r maximizes the chances of i s o l a t i n g a t t i t u d e s .  M c K e n n e l l argues  t h a t the s a l i e n c e of an a r e a must be  respondent  determined by  s i n c e what i s r e l e v a n t f o r the i n v e s t i g a t o r may ent: ants".  "the  d e f i n i t i o n of r e l e v a n c e  (1974: 207)  When o p i n i o n s  the  n o t be  f o r the  respond-  rests at l e a s t i n part with  inform-  a r e s o l i c i t e d on m a t t e r s of p u b l i c  a f f a i r s s a l i e n t to them, i t has been shown t h a t members of the p u b l i c have b e l i e f systems c h a r a c t e r i z e d by organization.  substantial informational  (Litwak et a l . , 1973)  support  Moreover, t h e i r a b i l i t y  a r t i c u l a t e i d e a s about s a l i e n t i s s u e s i s a l s o h i g h .  Luttbeg  and  to  (1968),  i n a f a c t o r a n a l y s i s of t e n s p e c i f i c i s s u e s of c o n c e r n i n a two  to  t h r e e y e a r p e r i o d p r i o r to h i s s t u d y , found t h a t the b e l i e f systems of the mass p u b l i c were o n l y s l i g h t l y l e s s c o n s t r a i n e d their leaders. the v o t e r  Through the use  " t o d e f i n e h i s own  were most s a l i e n t t o him"  of open-ended q u e s t i o n s , w h i c h a l l o w e d  i s s u e space by naming the i s s u e s (1971: 391),  RePass d i s c l o s e d t h a t  i s s u e s were almost as s i g n i f i c a n t a f a c t o r as p a r t y predicting voting  than t h o s e of  salient  identification in  choice.  Heightened p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t y i n the system i t s e l f to f o s t e r a t t i t u d i n a l c o n s t r a i n t .  F i e l d and  more p e o p l e made i d e o l o g i c a l e v a l u a t i o n s c a n d i d a t e s i n the  that  1964  appears  Anderson (1969) found  that  of the p a r t i e s and p r e s i d e n t i a l  campaign which Senator-Goldwater c o n t e s t e d  as  11.  a P r e s i d e n t i a l c a n d i d a t e than they d i d i n 1960.  They c o n c l u d e  the d a t a s u p p o r t " t h e r e l e v a n c e o f t h e environment" i d e o l o g i c a l t h i n k i n g on t h e p a r t o f the p u b l i c . (1974),  examining  that  (1969: 396) t o  N i e and Andersen  i n c r e a s e s i n l e v e l s o f a t t i t u d e c o n s i s t e n c y over  a s i x t e e n y e a r p e r i o d , reached a s i m i l a r c o n c l u s i o n : " i n h e r e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the mass p u b l i c a r e l e s s important as d e t e r m i n a n t s of mass i d e o l o g y than a r e v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e n a t u r e and s a l i e n c e o f political  stimuli". And  (1974: 544)  lastly,  t h e r e i s some e v i d e n c e t h a t v e r b a l and  b e h a v i o r a l r e s p o n s e s w i l l be more c o n s i s t e n t w i t h each o t h e r i n a s i t u a t i o n which t h r e a t e n s t h e b e l i e f . importance act  (Holsti et a l . ,  1964)  The  of a c r i s i s s i t u a t i o n f o r m o t i v a t i n g i n d i v i d u a l s to  on t h e i r b e l i e f s i s w e l l known t o s t u d e n t s o f mass movements.  1962).  The l a t t e r  (Smelser,  two o p t i m a l measurement c o n d i t i o n s - a c r i s i s  s i t u a t i o n and/or h e i g h t e n e d p o l i t i c a l  a c t i v i t y i n t h e system - a r e  g e n e r a l l y o u t s i d e the r e s e a r c h e r ' s c o n t r o l b u t c o n s t i t u t e  circumstances  to be e x p l o i t e d i f p o s s i b l e . 5.  What a r e t h e l i n k s between p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f s and p o l i t i c a l  behavior?  While a p r o p e r answer t o t h e above q u e s t i o n e n t a i l s a t h e o r y of  human b e h a v i o r and a d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f t h e r o l e o f p o l i t i c a l  i n t h a t t h e o r y , i t i s p o s s i b l e h e r e t o suggest  beliefs  some f a c t o r s t h a t need  to be c o n s i d e r e d i n p o s t u l a t i n g l i n k s between p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f s and political  activity. As a g e n e r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n , an i n d i v i d u a l ' s b e h a v i o r i s a  f u n c t i o n of h i s s i t u a t i o n a l c o n t e x t .  B e h a v i o r always o c c u r s w i t h i n a  12.  p a r t i c u l a r s i t u a t i o n a l c o n t e x t c h a r a c t e r i z e d by s o c i a l norms and constraints.  Jeanne Knutson h y p o t h e s i z e s t h a t "under u s u a l c o n d i t i o n s "  as much as h a l f t h e v a r i a n c e i n b e h a v i o r i s accounted actual f i e l d situation.  (1973: 38)  f o r by t h e  Hunt, s u g g e s t i n g t h a t t h e f i g u r e  would v a r y depending upon t h e i n d i v i d u a l and t h e s i t u a t i o n , ^ the p r o p o r t i o n t o about one t h i r d .  reduces  (1965: 83)  From t h e p e r s p e c t i v e o f drawing l i n k s between p o l i t i c a l and p o l i t i c a l b e h a v i o r , are important.  two a s p e c t s o f t h e p o l i t i c a l  The f i r s t  or s o c i a l  beliefs  setting  of these i s the o p p o r t u n i t y the s e t t i n g  a f f o r d s f o r a t t i t u d e s t o be e x p r e s s e d b e h a v i o r a l l y . Whether an a t t i t u d e has b e h a v i o r a l consequences w i l l act  on t h a t a t t i t u d e .  The second  depend i n p a r t upon o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o important  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the  political  or s o c i a l s e t t i n g i s t h e o p p o r t u n i t y i t a l l o w s f o r a c t i o n  congruent  with a t t i t u d e s .  F o r example, a s i t u a t i o n where h a b i t s o r  norms govern what i s a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r i n h i b i t s t h e t r a n s l a t i o n of  non-modal a t t i t u d e s i n t o p o l i t i c a l b e h a v i o r .  Hence, t h e r e may  be good reasons n o t t o expect a s t r o n g l i n k between b e l i e f s and b e h a v i o r . However, i f t h e r e s e a r c h c a n be conducted  i n a manner and a t a time  when t h e s i t u a t i o n does p r o v i d e an o p p o r t u n i t y f o r a c t i o n , l i n k s a r e more l i k e l y . can be tapped  Specifically,  these  i f farmers' p o l i t i c a l  a t a time when t h o s e a t t i t u d e s can be a c t e d upon,  i t may be p o s s i b l e t o a r r i v e a t some u n d e r s t a n d i n g  S p e c i f i c Study o f Farmers' P o l i t i c a l The  Belief  then  of the l i n k s - i f  any - between f a r m e r s ' p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f s and t h e i r p o l i t i c a l The  attitudes  activity.  Systems  foregoing c o n s i d e r a t i o n s guide the e m p i r i c a l i n q u i r y  13.  i n t o the c o n t e n t , s t r u c t u r e , and and  s o u r c e of f a r m e r s ' p o l i t i c a l  attitudes,  the i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h e s e a t t i t u d e s f o r membership i n the N a t i o n a l  Farmers Union.  More s p e c i f i c a l l y ,  they have d i r e c t e d t h i s r e s e a r c h  i n t o f a r m e r s ' b e l i e f s i n t h r e e ways: f i r s t l y , of r e s p o n s e s a r e tapped; them; and  i n terms of what k i n d s  s e c o n d l y , r e g a r d i n g the s t r a t e g y used  to tap  t h i r d l y , by d e t e r m i n i n g what a d d i t i o n a l f a c t o r s a r e c o n s i d e r e d  i n e f f o r t s to l i n k b e l i e f s w i t h behavior.  Both the d a t a - g a t h e r i n g  and d a t a a n a l y s e s s t a g e s have been a f f e c t e d by t h e s e d i r e c t i v e s . g e n e r a l e f f e c t s w i l l be o u t l i n e d , f o l l o w e d by a more d e t a i l e d With r e g a r d t o the k i n d s o f r e s p o n s e s  specific  towards s p e c i f i c o b j e c t s o r i s s u e s s a l i e n t t o the respondent,  or i s s u e s .  to l e s s s p e c i f i c and  responses  rather  less relevant objects  A major t h r u s t of the d a t a a n a l y s e s i s d i r e c t e d t o e n s u r i n g  the e n d u r i n g n a t u r e of t h e s e The  discussion.  tapped, a t the d a t a  g a t h e r i n g l e v e l the concern has been to i s o l a t e f a i r l y  than g e n e r a l responses  The  responses.  s e a r c h f o r s a l i e n t e n d u r i n g responses has e n t a i l e d  r e s e a r c h s t r a t e g y d e s i g n e d to e l i c i t  s a l i e n t r e s p o n s e s and  a  to p r o c u r e  i n f o r m a t i o n n e c e s s a r y t o uncover the meaning of t h e s e r e s p o n s e s . the l e v e l o f d a t a g a t h e r i n g , the respondent  At  i s g i v e n great l a t i t u d e to  d e f i n e the r e l e v a n t p o l i t i c a l a t t i t u d e domain.  Aspects of h i s e n v i r o n -  m e n t a l h i s t o r y t h a t have r e s u l t e d i n those a t t i t u d e s a r e e l i c i t e d .  The  d a t a a n a l y s e s i n c l u d e a t h r e e s t e p p r o c e s s w h i c h f o c u s e s i n t u r n upon p e r c e p t i o n s , e v a l u a t i o n s , and  the c o g n i t i v e bases of e v a l u a t i v e j u d g e -  ments to uncover the "meaning" o f p o l i t i c a l  beliefs.  A major f o c u s of the t h e s i s i s on d e s c r i b i n g the p a s t p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n a l c o n t e x t of the farmer.  and  The q u e s t i o n n a i r e e l i c i t s  14.  i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e s e a s p e c t s ; the a n a l y s e s d i r e c t paramount a t t e n t i o n t o c o n t e x t u a l a s p e c t s i n drawing b e l i e f s and p o l i t i c a l  l i n k s between p o l i t i c a l  activity.  A more d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n of the d a t a g a t h e r i n g and analyses procedures  clarifies  data  the t h e o r e t i c a l u n d e r p i n n i n g s o f the  dissertation. 1.  Data  Gathering Both the t i m i n g and method o f d a t a g a t h e r i n g were d e s i g n e d  t o e x p l o i t and maximize o p t i m a l c o n d i t i o n s f o r t a p p i n g s a l i e n t t i c a l b e l i e f s and  f o r uncovering t h e i r underlying s t r u c t u r e .  t i m i n g o f the study c o i n c i d e s w i t h a c r i s i s  i n the w e s t e r n  f a r m i n g community and hence w i t h a p e r i o d w h e r e i n s a l i e n t to farmers.  The  The  Canadian  politics  s h o u l d be  r e s e a r c h method a f f o r d s respondents  scope t o d e f i n e the r e l e v a n t p o l i t i c a l a t t i t u d e domain by  poli-  ample  relying  e x t e n s i v e l y upon open-ended q u e s t i o n s . Data were c o l l e c t e d a t a time when a number o f A l b e r t a were f a c i n g a c o s t - p r i c e squeeze.  I t was  farmers  a l s o a time when farmers were  f a c i n g the p r o s p e c t of the d e c l i n e of the f a m i l y farm as the major u n i t of a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t i o n i n Canada. The s i g n i f i c a n c e of the c o s t - p r i c e squeeze i s b e s t statistically.  Over the p e r i o d 1962  t o 1969,  illustrated  the t o t a l cash r e c e i p t s of  p r a i r i e farmers i n c r e a s e d by 32% w h i l e t h e i r o p e r a t i n g and d e p r e c i a t i o n c o s t s climbed by 76%.  (Bronson:  p r i c e squeeze meant t h a t i n 1969  124)  I n more s t a r k terms,  a p p r o x i m a t e l y o n e - t h i r d of  farmers were e s t i m a t e d t o be below the p o v e r t y l i n e —  this  cost-  Canadian  that i s , earning  15.  l e s s t h a n $3,000 a n n u a l l y . Translated netted  (Canadian A g r i c u l t u r e i n the S e v e n t i e s :  i n t o terms of a weekly income, i n 1970  an average income of $66.00 per week.  an average composite i n d u s t r i a l wage and (Bronson: 124)  Over the p e r i o d  1966  -  the Canadian farmer  This contrasted  18)  I n 1974,  1971,  the average n e t  not  improved and may  Between 1962 r a t e of  1,000  1972,  per month.  1940.  of the t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n ;  e s t i m a t e d t h a t by  1990  and  l a r g e commercial farms.  constituted  i n 1966,  i t comprised 9.8%.  (Canadian  6)  The  F e d e r a l Task F o r c e on A g r i c u l t u r e  9)  The  province  3 or 4%.  numbered 345,222; i n 1971,  (Canadian  of A l b e r t a has  not  In 1951,  the  i t t o t a l l e d 237,924.  the  t h i s trend.  The  (The  to  F e d e r a l Task F o r c e on A g r i c u l t u r e approved of  c u r r e n t d e c l i n e of the farm p o p u l a t i o n  f a m i l y farms, and  Alberta  18)  T h e r e appears to be no move on the government's p a r t stop  been  the farm p o p u l a t i o n  escaped the n a t i o n a l p a t t e r n of r u r a l d e p o p u l a t i o n .  F a m i l y Farm, 1974:  has  the  I n 1939,  the f i g u r e w i l l be  A g r i c u l t u r e i n the S e v e n t i e s :  farm p o p u l a t i o n  had  situation.  T h i s p r o c e s s of r u r a l d e p o p u l a t i o n  A g r i c u l t u r e i n the S e v e n t i e s : has  1971  f a r m e r s i n Canada were l e a v i n g the l a n d a t  underway s i n c e a t l e a s t 31.7%  than g r a i n  to a growing t r e n d whereby the f a m i l y farm i s  r e p l a c e d by a g r i b u s i n e s s  and  situation  farm incomes f o r many farmers have p a r a l l e l e d  i n part, contributed  gradually being  other  w e l l have d e t e r i o r a t e d from the  D e c l i n i n g net and  were p r o d u c i n g a n y t h i n g  income  F a m i l y Farm,  a t the time the d a t a were g a t h e r e d , the  of f a r m e r s i n A l b e r t a who  with  s a l a r y of $126.77 per week.  of an A l b e r t a farmer d e c l i n e d from $5,600 t o $5,000. (The 1974:  7)  and  the e x i s t e n c e  of  welcomed the development of farm mergers and  fewer consoli-  16.  dations.  I t p r o j e c t e d t h a t s i n g l e o p e r a t o r farms  be phased  out "as a h i g h and r i s i n g  would become "employees working the  ( f a m i l y farms) would  p r o p o r t i o n " o f p r e s e n t farm o p e r a t o r s  f o r s a l a r i e s and wages", (p. 9)  If  p r o j e c t i o n s of the Task F o r c e a r e c o r r e c t , the farmer as an i n d e p e n -  dent e n t r e p r e n e u r , f a r m i n g h i s l a n d w i t h l i t t l e  e x t e r n a l h e l p save t h e  v o l u n t a r y l a b o u r of members o f h i s f a m i l y , w i l l be a r a r e phenomenon by  1990. The p r e s e n t economic s i t u a t i o n which Canadian farmers as a  whole f a c e i s one w i t h which A l b e r t a f a r m e r s i n p a r t i c u l a r a r e a l s o grappling.  L i k e farmers throughout the c o u n t r y , the g o a l s and  s t y l e of a number o f A l b e r t a farmers a r e t h r e a t e n e d . are  most s a l i e n t when b e i n g c h a l l e n g e d , i t appears  life  Given that  to be an  beliefs  opportune  time t o i n v e s t i g a t e the f a r m e r ' s a t t i t u d i n a l and b e h a v i o r a l r e s p o n s e to  this  "crisis". If  the  the t i m i n g of the s t u d y i s more f o r t u i t o u s than c o n t r i v e d ,  method of r e s e a r c h has been d e l i b e r a t e l y d e s i g n e d to l o c a t e  political activity.  a t t i t u d e s and  political  format.  A stratified  the  t h e i r l i n k s w i t h one form of  T h i s a p p l i e s w i t h r e s p e c t t o b o t h the sampling d e s i g n and  questionnaire  of  to uncover  salient  sampling d e s i g n was  chosen to a l l o w t h e i n c l u s i o n  two groups o f f a r m e r s : one, members o f the N a t i o n a l Farmers  Union;  other,non-members o f t h i s n a t i o n a l farm p r o t e s t o r g a n i z a t i o n .  Both  study groups i n c l u d e farmers r e c r u i t e d from the same g e o g r a p h i c a l a r e a i n o r d e r t h a t the f i e l d s i t u a t i o n o f the farmers might be to  some e x t e n t .  field  "equalized"  The e x i s t e n c e o f the farm o r g a n i z a t i o n means t h a t  s i t u a t i o n does o f f e r the o p p o r t u n i t y f o r p o l i t i c a l  attitudes  the conducive  to the g o a l s and expressed  o b j e c t i v e s of the N a t i o n a l Farmers U n i o n to be  i n p o l i t i c a l behavior.  N a t i o n a l Farmers U n i o n was two  study groups.  The  The  a v a i l a b l e f o r over h a l f  stratified  sampling  of the c o n d i t i o n s under which f a r m e r s ' membership a r e The  o r g a n i z a t i o n a l channel  of  the farmers  the i n the  design allows a d e l i n e a t i o n  a t t i t u d e s and  their organization  congruent.  data gathering technique  u t i l i z e d here represents  a  compromise between M c K e n n e l l ' s p l e a f o r " i n t e n s i v e q u a l i t a t i v e exploration"  (1974: 206)  and  the g e n e r a l p r a c t i c e of u s i n g c l o s e d -  ended s c a l e s i n s t a n d a r d i z e d i n t e r v i e w s c h e d u l e s . suggests  that  Aubrey M c K e n n e l l  ideally  Informants must be g i v e n maximum o p p o r t u n i t y f o r r e v e a l i n g the 'reasons' u n d e r l y i n g t h e i r e v a l u a t i o n s , f o r s a y i n g what, i n t h e i r view, i s r e l a t e d to what i n the a t t i t u d e domain. ... the work s h o u l d be b o t h thorough y e t conducted i n a way t h a t the elements t h a t i n f o r m a n t s i n t r o d u c e stem n a t u r a l l y from t h e i r own a t t i t u d e s . S t a n d a r d i s e d schedules p r e s e n t i n g questions w i t h f i x e d choice a l t e r n a t i v e s m i n i m i s e the o p p o r t u n i t y f o r such c o n t r i b u t i o n s by i n f o r m a n t s , and a r e t h e r e f o r e t o t a l l y u n s u i t e d f o r t h i s i n i t i a l phase of e x p l o r a t i o n . N o n d i r e c t e d approaches which do not r e l y on a f i x e d s c h e d u l e of q u e s t i o n s i s ( s i c ) what i s r e q u i r e d . (1974:  222)  F i n a n c i a l c o n s t r a i n t s n e c e s s i t a t e d a r e t r e a t from t h i s i d e a l of mapping an a t t i t u d e domain by r e l y i n g upon the respondent's d e f i n i t i o n of c o g n i t i o n s and  e v a l u a t i o n s i n t h a t domain.  The  compromise which has  s t r u c k h e r e i s an e x t e n s i v e r e l i a n c e upon open-ended items c o g n i t i v e and  evaluative orientations i n specific  the respondent's everyday l i f e . ^  Thus, w h i l e  salient been  i n tapping  i s s u e areas  that  the respondent i s not  touch  18.  completely  f r e e to d e f i n e what i s r e l e v a n t c o g n i t i v e l y f o r him,  open-ended item does a l l o w a c e r t a i n f l e x i b i l i t y p o i n t u n a n t i c i p a t e d by the r e s e a r c h e r .  the  f o r p r e s e n t i n g a view-  The hope i s t h a t , i n b e i n g  free  to r e f l e c t upon h i s b e h a v i o r w i t h r e s p e c t to a c e r t a i n o b j e c t , the i n d i v i d u a l h i m s e l f can d e s c r i b e h i s p r o b a b l e response 2.  Data  toward t h a t o b j e c t .  Analyses The  d a t a a n a l y s e s a r e guided by a t t i t u d i n a l t h e o r y  e a r l i e r i n t h r e e ways: f i r s t l y , s t a b l e responses; environmental  i n the emphasis p l a c e d upon i s o l a t i n g  s e c o n d l y , i n t r a c i n g those responses  h i s t o r y ; and  presented  to the  t h i r d l y , i n the f o c u s on the  f a c t o r i n accounting for. p o l i t i c a l behavior.  A broad  respondent's  situational  overview  of  form of the d i s s e r t a t i o n f o l l o w e d by a more d e t a i l e d examination  the of  the c h a p t e r c o n t e n t s i n d i c a t e s t h i s more c l e a r l y . The  thesis i s i n three p a r t s .  The  f i r s t p a r t , Chapters  3, l a y s the groundwork f o r the a n a l y s e s t h a t f o l l o w . t u r a l P o l i c y as an O b j e c t o f Farmers' P o l i t i c a l B e l i e f  Chapter  2,  2 and "Agricul-  Systems",  p r o v i d e s the b a s i s f o r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of subsequent t h e s i s f i n d i n g s .  It  reviews Canadian a g r i c u l t u r a l p o l i c y f o r the purpose of summarizing some a s p e c t s of the h i s t o r y of i n t e r a c t i o n of farmers w i t h f e d e r a l provincial authorities. undertaken and  The  and  c h a p t e r i n d i c a t e s t h a t governments have  a l i b e r a l p o l i c y w i t h r e s p e c t to a g r i c u l t u r e .  f e d e r a l governments have r e s t r i c t e d  t h e i r involvement  Provincial i n agriculture  to f i n d i n g markets, l e a v i n g the p r i c i n g and p r o d u c t i o n s e c t o r s g e n e r a l l y unregulated  except  f o r p e r i o d i c e f f o r t s to shore up f a r m e r s ' incomes i n  emergency s i t u a t i o n s .  Given  the u n d e r l y i n g premise  that  farmers'  19.  political  a t t i t u d e s are "residues" of t h e i r experiences, t h i s  p r o v i d e s a benchmark by which f a r m e r s ' p e r c e p t i o n s o f the r e c o r d w i t h r e s p e c t to a g r i c u l t u r e can be Chapter  3,  "The  governmental  checked.  Study Groups", d e s c r i b e s the  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the two  chapter  aggregate  study groups and a s s e s s e s the e x t e n t t o  which they a r e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f farmers i n the p r o v i n c e as a whole. The c h a p t e r i n d i c a t e s t h a t the group o f NFU  members o p e r a t e s  l e s s p r o f i t a b l e farms than the non-NFU f a r m e r s . Eastern-European they may  born and more orthodox  be more s o c i a l l y The  c o n s i s t e n t p e r c e p t i o n s and between the two and The  Chapter d e s c r i b e s how and  i n their religious  second p a r t o f the t h e s i s i s e s s e n t i a l l y  groups o f f a r m e r s .  judgements.  However, b e i n g  affiliation,  descriptive.  s t r u c t u r e o f the p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f s o f I t i s guided by two  e v a l u a t i o n s ; two,  c o n c e r n s : one,  t o determine  to i s o l a t e  the a s s o c i a t i o n  thereby the c o g n i t i v e bases o f f a r m e r s ' e v a l u a t i v e  r e l e v a n t d i s s e r t a t i o n c h a p t e r s a r e 4, 4,  less  i n the mainstream.  I t documents the c o n t e n t and the two  slightly  " C o g n i t i v e B e l i e f s : How  5, and  the System Works",  farmers p e r c e i v e the o p e r a t i o n o f a s p e c t s o f the  economic systems.  Chapter  5,  6.  " E v a l u a t i v e B e l i e f s : How  political  the System  Ought to Work", t r a c e s the manner i n which farmers e v a l u a t e the o p e r a t i o n of  a s p e c t s o f those systems.  e s t a b l i s h i n g the s t a b i l i t y  In both c h a p t e r s , the importance  of f a r m e r s ' r e s p o n s e s  of  e n t a i l s examining  the  c o v a r i a t i o n among d i f f e r e n t measures o f a g i v e n b e l i e f .  In Chapter  "The  of A c t i v i t y  S t r u c t u r e o f Farmers' B e l i e f Systems and a Typology  and B e l i e f " , the i n t e r - i t e m a s s o c i a t i o n o f c o g n i t i v e and e v a l u a t i v e  6,  20.  elements  i s examined i n o r d e r to determine  a t t i t u d e s are held. suggestions of  These a n a l y s e s b u t t r e s s respondent v o l u n t e e r e d  system i n shaping the p o l i t i c a l  Chapter 4,  " C o g n i t i v e B e l i e f s : How  e s t a b l i s h e s the s t a b i l i t y economic systems.  political  evaluations.  the System Works",  of two p e r c e p t i o n s o f the p o l i t i c a l  Farmers  and  i n both groups view the e x t e r n a l w o r l d as  to t h e i r l i v e s and a s s e s s t h e i r p o s i t i o n i n the p r i c i n g  and  systems as l a c k i n g any a p p r e c i a b l e degree o f c o n t r o l over  either sector. governmental  Both groups view power c o n c e n t r a t e d i n a few top  officials  and i n an economic s e c t o r which  l a r g e c o r p o r a t i o n s and middlemen^  includes  Farmers' u n i o n s and e l e c t e d r e p -  r e s e n t a t i v e s a r e e x c l u d e d from t h i s c i r c l e . two  which  ( i n open ended q u e s t i o n s ) as to the f o r m a t i v e c h a r a c t e r  the p o l i t i c a l  relevant  the view o f r e a l i t y on  groups o f farmers a r e a p p a r e n t .  NFU  D i f f e r e n c e s between the  farmers a r e more e n t h u s i a s t i c  about the p o s s i b i l i t y o f c o l l e c t i v e farmer a c t i o n to a c h i e v e t h e i r g o a l s , and t h e i r a p p r a i s a l o f the p o l i t i c a l more i n t e g r a t e d a l o n g r a d i c a l  lines.  Chapter 5, " E v a l u a t i v e B e l i e f s : How r e v e a l s t h a t b o t h NFU mental the  and economic s e c t o r s i s  the System Ought to Work",  and non-NFU farmers a r e opposed  to more g o v e r n -  involvement i n p r o d u c t i o n , but w i l l i n g t o have c o n t r o l s over  p r i c i n g sector.  NFU  members are more i n f a v o r o f r e g u l a t i n g  m a r k e t i n g system and the s i z e and ownership  o f farms.  groups v a l u e a c o m b i n a t i o n of p e r s o n a l and a l t r u i s t i c s t r u c t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s emerge: NFU  Farmers goals.  "The  i n both Again  members a r e more c o n s i s t e n t i n  recommending r e g u l a t i o n o f both the p r i c i n g and m a r k e t i n g Chapter 6,  the  S t r u c t u r e o f Farmers-' B e l i e f  sectors.  Systems and a  21.  Typology  o f A c t i v i t y and B e l i e f " , shows t h a t t h e e v a l u a t i o n s o f both  NFU and non-NFU farmers f o r r e g u l a t i n g  the p r i c i n g , m a r k e t i n g , and  p r o d u c t i o n s e c t o r s a r e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h p e r c e p t i o n s o f c o n t r o l i n one o r more o f t h e p r i c i n g , m a r k e t i n g , as e x t e r n a l i z e d from f a r m e r s .  and p o l i t i c a l d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g s e c t o r s  The c o n s e n s u a l b e l i e f s o f t h e two groups  o f farmers i n c l u d e a m i x t u r e o f r a d i c a l and c o n s e r v a t i v e b e l i e f w i t h t h e b i a s toward  radicalism.  The m a j o r i t y o f NFU members  s u b s c r i b e t o a more p a r t i c u l a r i s t i c labelled  "populist".  elements  s e t o f b e l i e f s which i s p r o p e r l y  Four t y p e s o f farmers a r e a n a l y t i c a l l y d e f i n e d  i n terms o f t h e two c r i t e r i a o f b e l i e f and a c t i v i t y .  Farmers whose  p o l i t i c a l behavior i s c o n s i s t e n t with t h e i r i n t e r v i e w responses comprise  two o f t h e farmer t y p e s , and farmers whose b e l i e f s and b e h a v i o r  (membership o r non-membership i n the N a t i o n a l Farmers Union) d i f f e r comprise  the o t h e r two t y p e s . The  third  s e c t i o n o f t h e t h e s i s i s more e x p l a n a t o r y .  7 and 8 a s s e s s the r o l e o f f a r m e r s ' p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f s  i n f o s t e r i n g or  t h w a r t i n g membership i n the N a t i o n a l Farmers Union and o t h e r activities.  The s e a r c h f o r the source o f both f a r m e r s '  b e l i e f s and p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t y  Chapters  political  political  f o c u s e s upon the f a r m e r s ' p a s t and  immediate s i t u a t i o n a l c o n t e x t . Chapter  7, e n t i t l e d  e s t a b l i s h e s t h e importance  "The C o r r e l a t e s o f B e l i e f and A c t i v i t y " ,  of the immediate s i t u a t i o n and o f a l i e n a t i o n  r o o t e d i n more d i s t a n t s i t u a t i o n a l f a c t o r s f o r r e c r u i t m e n t to the N a t i o n a l Farmers U n i o n . w i t h a disadvantageous  The d a t a i n d i c a t e t h a t a l o n g e r e x p e r i e n c e f a r m i n g s i t u a t i o n promotes p r o t e s t  and a l e f t - w i n g i d e o l o g y ; s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h f a r m i n g and  politics governmental  22.  performance i s associated with non-protest conservative In Chapter 8, "The  politics.  Paths to Ideology and Action", m u l t i -  v a r i a t e analyses reinforce the findings of Chapter 7. with one's current f i n a n c i a l return and occupation,  Frustration  combined with  a b e l i e f i n the v i a b i l i t y of j o i n t farmer action are shown to foster membership i n a protest organization i n the absence of conducive beliefs.  The importance of the immediate s i t u a t i o n to p o l i t i c a l  a c t i v i t y i s thus established.  At the same time, the independent  e f f e c t of b e l i e f s on a c t i v i t y i s r e i t e r a t e d . of the NFU  The close association  B e l i e f Cluster, p o l i t i c a l a l i e n a t i o n , and general economic  discontent confirm that most farmers' understanding of t h e i r place i n the p o l i t i c a l and economic system i s grounded i n their experiences as farmers functioning i n that system. The concluding  chapter, Chapter 9, r e i t e r a t e s the necessity  to examine s i t u a t i o n a l and environmental factors i n seeking to understand both p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f s and  activity.  23.  Notes t o Chapter  1  1  D e F l e u r and Westie (1963) r e v i e w the l i t e r a t u r e which d e s c r i b e s an a t t i t u d e as a ' l a t e n t p r o c e s s ' and o u t l i n e the d i s t i n c t i o n s between t h i s c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f a t t i t u d e and the p r o b a b i l i s t i c notion.  2  B.F. S k i n n e r i s the foremost proponent o f the i d e a t h a t an i n d i v i d u a l ' s e n v i r o n m e n t a l h i s t o r y (and g e n e t i c h i s t o r y ) c o n t r o l h i s current behavior: "A s c i e n t i f i c a n a l y s i s o f b e h a v i o r must, I b e l i e v e , assume t h a t a person's b e h a v i o r i s c o n t r o l l e d by h i s g e n e t i c and e n v i r o n m e n t a l h i s t o r i e s r a t h e r than by the p e r s o n h i m s e l f as an i m i t a t i n g , c r e a t i v e agent, (1974: 189) S k i n n e r argues t h a t e x p r e s s i o n s r e f e r r i n g to "the i n t e l l e c t u a l s i d e o f the l i f e of the mind - ... one's i n t e n t i o n s , purposes, i d e a s " a l l r e f e r t o " a s p e c t s o f human b e h a v i o r a t t r i b u t a b l e to c o n t i n g e n c i e s of r e i n f o r c e m e n t - o r , ... to the s u b t l e and complex r e l a t i o n s among t h r e e t h i n g s : the s i t u a t i o n i n which b e h a v i o r o c c u r s , the b e h a v i o r i t s e l f , and i t s consequences". (1974: 148)  3  The i d e a t h a t an i n d i v i d u a l knows what he t h i n k s by r e f l e c t i n g upon h i s b e h a v i o r i s found i n the work o f the a t t r i b u t i o n t h e o r i s t s . See Jones and D a v i s (1965), Bern (1965, 1968, 1970), and S u t h e r l a n d (1975); the f i r s t two f o r the theory i t s e l f ; the l a t t e r , f o r an a d a p t a t i o n of a t t r i b u t i o n t h e o r y to a t t i t u d i n a l measurement.  4  S k i n n e r (1953, 1957) d i s c u s s e s the r o l e of s t i m u l u s g e n e r a l i z a t i o n and metaphor i n e n a b l i n g the i n d i v i d u a l to develop response p a t t e r n s towards o b j e c t s w i t h which he has had no p r e v i o u s e n c o u n t e r . An i n d i v i d u a l r e a c t i n g t o a s t i m u l u s on the b a s i s of h i s p a s t e n c o u n t e r s w i t h " s i m i l a r " s t i m u l i w i l l "waste" responses u n t i l one i s r e i n forced. B e h a v i o r shaped by " d e s c r i p t i o n s " of c o n t i n g e n c i e s r a t h e r than the c o n t i n g e n c i e s themselves i s r u l e governed b e h a v i o r and i s l e s s under c o n t r o l than c o n t i n g e n c y shaped b e h a v i o r . (1969: 144-146)  5  A " n o n c o r r e l a t e d m u l t i c a u s a l i d e o l o g y " appears to be any m u l t i c a u s a l e x p l a n t i o n . See page 324 e s p e c i a l l y of L i t w a k et_ a l .  6  Hunt's s t a t i s t i c i s based upon c l i n i c a l experiments which examined b e h a v i o r as a f u n c t i o n of p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s , the s i t u a t i o n , and ( p h y s i o l o g i c a l ) modes-of-response. H i s c o n c l u s i o n i s t h a t "... i t i s n e i t h e r the i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s among s u b j e c t s , per se, nor the v a r i a t i o n s among s i t u a t i o n s , per se, t h a t produce the v a r i a t i o n s i n b e h a v i o r . I t i s , r a t h e r , the i n t e r a c t i o n s among these which a r e i m p o r t a n t . " (1965: 83) He recommends t h a t s t u d e n t s o f b e h a v i o r develop and use i n s t r u m e n t s t h a t c l a s s i f y p e o p l e a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r responses i n v a r i o u s c a t e g o r i e s of s i t u a t i o n s . .  24.  M c K e n n e l l recommends a more " e x t e n s i v e i n i t i a l e x p l o r a t o r y phase" t h a t would e n t a i l "a s e r i e s o f f r e e - r a n g i n g , u n s t r u c t u r e d i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r v i e w s i n c l u d i n g perhaps o t h e r n o n - d i r e c t i v e t e c h n i q u e s , t h e m a t e r i a l from which i s c o n t e n t - a n a l y s e d t o p r o v i d e a s o u r c e o f hypotheses and q u e s t i o n n a i r e items phrased i n ' n a t u r a l p o p u l a t i o n language'. (1974: 206) T h i s recommendation e n t a i l s a p r i o r step to the a c t u a l c o l l e c t i o n of t h e d a t a f o r a n a l y s e s .  Chapter  A g r i c u l t u r a l P o l i c y as an O b j e c t Belief  25.  2 o f Farmers"  Political  Systems  I n o r d e r t o map an a t t i t u d e as an e v a l u a t i v e - b e l i e f s t r u c t u r e . . . . w e are n o t i n t e r e s t e d i n sampling from a n y t h i n g and e v e r y t h i n g t h a t might be s a i d about the a t t i t u d e o b j e c t , b u t o n l y from t h o s e a s p e c t s t h a t are s a l i e n t i n d e t e r m i n i n g the e v a l u a t i o n p l a c e d upon i t ; we are i n t e r e s t e d i n s a m p l i n g . . . . n o t any c o g n i t i o n s but o n l y the "hot c o g n i t i o n s " . (McKennell, 197^:221) The  t h e o r e t i c a l and  e m p i r i c a l framework p o s t u l a t e d here  i n w h i c h f a r m e r s ' b e l i e f s e t s w i l l be sense. previous and  Two  indeed  examined i s e x p l o r a t o r y i n e v e r y  factors necessitate t h i s . F i r s t l y ,  empirical research o f any  systematic  i n the absence o f  any  i n t o the p o l i t i c a l a t t i t u d e s o f farmers documentation o f the i d e o l o g i c a l d i s p o s i t i o n s  o f Canadian c i t i z e n s as a whole"'' - t h e r e are no s c a l e s c a p a b l e of b e i n g  with-  adapted t o t h i s  r e l i a b l e measures have been d e v e l o p e d by  available attitudinal  s t u d y group.  Secondly,  social scientists  American p u b l i c a t t i t u d e s , the r e s e a r c h e r ' s  while  studying  s k e p t i c i s m of the  utility  o f a d o p t i n g w h o l e s a l e American a t t i t u d i n a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l measures t o the Canadian c o n t e x t i n the b e l i e f t h a t t h e r e Canada and  precludes  t h e i r use.  This reluctance  i s grounded  are i m p o r t a n t c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s between  the U n i t e d S t a t e s ; a c c o r d i n g l y , measures p r e d i c a t e d  assumptions r e g a r d i n g American c u l t u r a l p a t t e r n s would n o t be i n a c o n t e x t where t h o s e assumptions may all.  reliable  be weakly.adhered t o o r n o t  at  2  There are t h e r e f o r e few where t o b e g i n t o map and  on  evaluations.  t a n g i b l e g u i d e l i n e s as t o how  e m p i r i c a l l y farmers' s a l i e n t p o l i t i c a l  and  cognitions  I t thus becomes n e c e s s a r y t o e x t r a p o l a t e from t h e o r e t i c a l  26.  g u i d e l i n e s l a i d down by p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f system r e s e a r c h  generally  the p a r t i c u l a r e m p i r i c a l study o f f a r m e r s ' b e l i e f s e t s .  As  i n the  i n t r o d u c t o r y chapter,  i n d i v i d u a l ' s conceptual opinions  i n issue relevant areas.  chances of t a p p i n g  or i n d i r e c t l y describe  i s for stable  f a r m i n g must s u r e l y demarcate r e l e v a n t  i s s u e s i n a r e a s i n which a g r i c u l t u r e and enhance the  search  the way  impinge upon one  s a l i e n t opinions  i t w i l l t h e n be  another  himself  I t i s therefore  contemporary s t a n c e o f C a n a d i a n  f e d e r a l governments w i t h r e g a r d t o the a g r i c u l t u r a l s e c t o r . a r e a s o f i n t e r f a c e o f farmers and  and  that either d i r e c t j y  farmer o r i e n t s  economic systems.  i m p o r t a n t t o peruse the h i s t o r i c a l and  issues.  r e a c t i o n s t o problems  politics  i n w h i c h the  i d e o l o g i c a l l y t o the p o l i t i c a l and  an  I n t h e case o f f a r m e r s , m a t t e r s  A p r i m a r y f o c u s upon f a r m e r s ' a p p r a i s a l s and  should  outlined  the p o s s i b i l i t y of s u c c e s s f u l l y mapping  arena i s maximized when the  r e l a t e d t o a g r i c u l t u r e and  to  Once t h e  the p o l i t i c a l system have been  delineated,  p o s s i b l e t o p o s i t an i d e o l o g i c a l framework w i t h i n w h i c h t o  examine the a p p r o p r i a t e  o r g a n i z a t i o n of the f a r m i n g and a g r i c u l t u r a l  sectors. I.  The A.  Federal  Government and A g r i c u l t u r a l P o l i c y ^  A g r i c u l t u r a l P o l i c y i n the Pre-1970 P e r i o d The  t a t e d by  d i s c u s s i o n o f f e d e r a l a g r i c u l t u r a l p o l i c y w i l l be  examining s e p a r a t e l y  produce and  i n the p r o d u c t i o n  generalization recurs apply  discussion:  i t s r o l e i n the m a r k e t i n g o f a g r i c u l t u r a l of f o o d s t u f f s .  so f r e q u e n t l y i n the  e q u a l l y t o the two  facili-  However, the  l i t e r a t u r e and  s e c t o r s as t o p r o v i d e  following appears t o  the theme f o r  the  27.  Canadian farm policy since 1930...has been largely one of providing expedient measures to meet crises of depression, drought, war inflation and surpluses .... There is l i t t l e evidence that Canada has had any overall national policy based on clear thinking and economic and sociological research facts. (Hurd, i960) 1.  The Marketing Sector Federal agricultural policy u n t i l 1970 can be characterized  as one consonant with a liberal economic philosophy. 1972:82; Fowke and Powke, 1968:289)  (Crown and Heady,  Rather than attempting to regulate  domestic marketing, the federal government's record i n the marketing of foodstuffs included a concern with transportation costs; a response to farmers' demands i n the early 1900's to operate terminal elevator f a c i l i t i e s ; the establishment  of the Canadian Wheat Board; market  promotion; and grading and inspection duties including controlling handling, storage, and processing of export grains and foodstuffs. The one exception to a general policy of non-interference with the "free market of supply and demand" has, of course, been the Canadian Wheat Board, the exclusive marketing agency for wheat, and until recently for barley and oats.  The Canadian Wheat Board, established as a mono-  poly in the marketing of Canadian Wheat i n 19^3>  i-  3a  clear  anomaly i n  an otherwise consistent policy of non-interference with the free market and the grain exchange system of pricing i n which prices float daily (hourly, indeed by the minute) in response to "demand". It is an intervention i n at least two senses:  one, i t i s a compulsory board -  the sole agency to which wheat growers may s e l l ; and two, i t establishes delivery quotas which equalize the amount of-and opportunities for sales.  28. Vernon Powke contends, as do v i r t u a l l y a l l o t h e r a n a l y s t s , t h a t the F e d e r a l Government p e r m i t t e d t h e Canadian Wheat B o a r d t o c o n t i n u e a f t e r 1939  o n l y "under d i r e c t and i n d i r e c t p o l i t i c a l p r e s s u r e  r a t h e r t h a n out o f government c o n v i c t i o n . "  And,  i n 19^3>  when t h e  Canadian Wheat Board became the monopoly agency f o r the s a l e o f wheat, i t was prices.  i n o r d e r t o ensure a c o n t i n u o u s s u p p l y o f wheat a t n o n - i n f l a t i o n a r y (Fowke,  1957: 94-5) 2  Hence, i t was  n o t out o f v o l i t i o n b u t o f  p o l i t i c a l n e c e s s i t y t h a t the Canadian Wheat B o a r d was In  born.  s h o r t , w i t h the e x c e p t i o n o f the Canadian Wheat Board,  f e d e r a l governments have a b s t a i n e d from r e g u l a t i o n o f the m a r k e t i n g  of  foodstuffs. 2.  The P r o d u c t i o n S e c t o r I f f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e were t a k e n as an i n d i c a t o r o f  of  degree  government i n v o l v e m e n t i n the p r o d u c t i o n o f f o o d s t u f f s , t h e n t h e  Canadian governments' i n v o l v e m e n t would be e x t e n s i v e . i s undertaken,  When an  examination  however, o f the n a t u r e o f the f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e ,  then,  once a g a i n , i t must be c o n c l u d e d t h a t f e d e r a l governments have been e x t r e m e l y • l o a t h t o d e p a r t from t h e assumptions  o f economic  liberalism.  The major t h r u s t o f f i n a n c i a l s u p p o r t i n t h e p r o d u c t i o n sphere has been to  enable the farmer t o i n c r e a s e h i s p r o d u c t i v i t y and e f f i c i e n c y ,  assumption  "the  b e i n g , a p p a r e n t l y , t h a t i f a g r i c u l t u r a l output c o u l d b u t be  d o u b l e d the farmer would be t w i c e as w e l l o f f as b e f o r e . "  (Fowke,1957:  292) A study commissioned to  by the F e d e r a l T a s k F o r c e on A g r i c u l t u r e  a p p r a i s e government i n v o l v e m e n t i n a g r i c u l t u r e proposed the  tripartite  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f government a s s i s t a n c e programs:  following a) t h o s e •  29.  i n t e n d e d t o f a c i l i t a t e t h e p r o d u c t i o n and m a r k e t i n g o f farm  products;  b) t h o s e whose g o a l was t o s u p p o r t  farm income;  and  c) r e s e a r c h , e d u c a t i o n ,  1968:  336)  T a b l e 2.1  f a r m p r i c e s and m a i n t a i n  and e x t e n s i o n programs•.  ( G a r l a n d and Hudson,  l i s t s v a r i o u s government programs under each o f  the three broad headings:  p r o d u c t i o n a s s i s t a n c e ; p r i c e and income main-  tenance; and r e s e a r c h , e d u c a t i o n and e x t e n s i o n . T a b l e 2.1 A.  Production Assistance 1.  L i v e s t o c k improvement - q u a l i t y  2.  Crop improvement - d i s e a s e and p e s t c o n t r o l ; r e s e a r c h i n t o new v a r i e t i e s ; i n f o r m a t i o n a l e f f o r t s t o i n c r e a s e p r o d u c t i v i t y by e n c o u r a g i n g new p r a c t i c e s and t e c h n i q u e s Grants t o a g r i c u l t u r a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s , f a i r s and e x h i b i t i o n s Resource development - programs t o i n c r e a s e number o f a c r e s o f f a r m l a n d and r e h a b i l i t a t e u n p r o d u c t i v e farms e.g. PFRA (1935) ARDA (1966) FRED (1966) P r a i r i e G r a i n Advance Payments (1957-62) Farm C r e d i t - Farm C r e d i t C o r p o r a t i o n (1959) Farm Improvement Loans (1944) A g r i c u l t u r a l manpower  3. 4.  5. 6. B.  Government A s s i s t a n c e Programs  improvement  P r i c e and Income Maintenance Producer marketing operations - cooperatives; producer marketing b o a r d s , s t a t u t o r y m a r k e t i n g b o a r d s (Canadian Wheat Board) 2. P r i c e s u p p o r t programs - A g r i c u l t u r a l P r i c e s S u p p o r t B o a r d (1944-1958) A g r i c u l t u r a l P r o d u c t s B o a r d (1947-1951) A g r i c u l t u r a l S t a b i l i z a t i o n B o a r d (1958) C a n a d i a n D a i r y Commission (1966- ) 3. Supplementary income a s s i s t a n c e - c r o p i n s u r a n c e ; f r e i g h t and s t o r a g e s u b s i d i e s ; d i s a s t e r a i d s ; acreage payments (1957-62) 1.  C.  Research, E d u c a t i o n and E x t e n s i o n  I t i s the a r e a o f p r i c e and income maintenance t h a t has r e c e i v e d the b u l k o f government money. I n 1966-67 more money was c h a n n e l l e d i n t o t h i s s e c t o r t h a n i n t o programs d i r e c t e d toward an expansion o f a g r i c u l t u r a l output. ( G a r l a n d and Hudson, 1968: T a b l e 82, 3l8) I t i s important t o examine more c l o s e l y t h e s e programs t o see j u s t how much t h e y meant an e f f o r t t o c o n t r o l production.  30.  Programs which r e p r e s e n t the g r e a t e s t o p p o r t u n i t y f o r g o v e r n mental  c o n t r o l i n c l u d e those r e l a t e d t o r e s o u r c e development  p r o d u c e r m a r k e t i n g boards  (A4),  ( B l ) , and p r i c e s u p p o r t programs (B2).  The  P r a i r i e Farm A s s i s t a n c e A d m i n i s t r a t i o n (PFAA) and the P r a i r i e Farm R e h a b i l i t a t i o n A d m i n i s t r a t i o n (PFRA) were programs e s t a b l i s h e d i n the 1930's, t h e former an income maintenance scheme w h i c h p r o t e c t e d f a r m e r s a g a i n s t l o s s e s from t o t a l c r o p d i s a s t e r s t h r o u g h minimum acreage the l a t t e r ,  a c o n s e r v a t i o n and r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o f l a n d p r o j e c t .  payments; I n 1960-1,  the f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l governments agreed t o cooperate i n ARDA ( A g r i c u l t u r a l and R u r a l Development A c t ) , a scheme t o a t t a c k r u r a l p o v e r t y on a r e g i o n a l b a s i s and t h e r e b y s e c u r e a more e q u i t a b l e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f income w i t h i n the farm s e c t o r . Economic Development), was  A second program, FRED (Fund f o r R e g i o n a l  s p e c i f i c a l l y concerned w i t h the f a r m  poor.  There has been much c o n t r o v e r s y c o n c e r n i n g the e f f i c a c y o f b o t h programs. ( B u c k l e y and T i h a n y i ,  1967)  P r i c e s u p p o r t programs were begun i n the e a r l y war the f e d e r a l government t o s t i m u l a t e war  production.  s e t up i n 19kk,  s u p p o r t i n g base p r i c e s on e l e v e n farm commodities, b u y i n g farm products  (where t h e r e was  market w i t h w r i t t e n guarantees  by  These programs  e s t a b l i s h e d c e i l i n g as w e l l as f l o o r p r i c e s on f o o d p r o d u c t s . A g r i c u l t u r a l P r i c e s Support Board,  years  was  The  empowered w i t h  e i t h e r by  directly  a s u r p l u s ) o r by u n d e r w r i t i n g t h e  t o s u p p o r t the p r i c e s .  demand, the p r i c e s u p p o r t s c o n t i n u e d i n t h e p o s t war  Because o f era.  In  farmer  1958,  p u r s u a n t t o campaign promises by the P r o g r e s s i v e C o n s e r v a t i v e P a r t y and John D i e f e n b a k e r , the A g r i c u l t u r a l S t a b i l i z a t i o n B o a r d r e p l a c e d the A g r i c u l t u r a l P r i c e s Support Board.  The new  b o a r d made p r i c e  support  31. mandatory f o r n i n e key commodities; t h e p r i c e s o f t h e s e  commodities  would be s u p p o r t e d a t 8c$ o f t h e average p r i c e r e c e i v e d  during the  preceding t e n year period. was  In the period  from  1958-59  to  1967-68,  t h e d a i r y i n d u s t r y w h i c h was t h e p r i m a r y b e n e f i c i a r y o f p r i c e  programs.  Receiving  support  about &0% o f f e d e r a l e x p e n d i t u r e s on p r i c e and  income maintenance schemes, i t became one o f t h e most c l o s e l y sectors  i t  regulated  o f t h e domestic a g r i c u l t u r a l economy. The  d e c i s i o n o f t h e government t o guarantee f l o o r p r i c e s i s  a d e c i s i o n t o i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e p r i c e system. i n i t i a l l y made i n 19^1,  When t h e d e c i s i o n was  t h e o b j e c t i v e was i n c r e a s e d  p r o d u c t i v i t y f o r the  p r o m o t i o n o f t h e war e f f o r t (hence f l o o r p r i c e s ) and t h e f o r e s t a l l i n g o f domestic i n f l a t i o n  (hence c e i l i n g p r i c e s ) .  s e t low enough t o cause farm o r g a n i z a t i o n s were b e i n g f r o z e n e t a l . , 1966:  51)  with the objective  The c e i l i n g p r i c e s were  t o complain t h a t t h e i r p r i c e s  a t a l e v e l lower t h a n t h a t o f n o n - f o o d s t u f f s . I t has been argued t h a t of protecting  (Drummond  " t h e l e v e l o f s u p p o r t was s e t  producers against  serious  loss i n the  s h o r t r u n b u t n o t t o s u p p o r t p r i c e s above t h e normal, supply-demand relationship".  (Drummond e t al.:56.  My emphasis.)  theme, t h a t p r i c e s u p p o r t s a r e consumer s u b s i d i e s , has  been e s t a b l i s h e d e c o n o m e t r i c a l l y .  The v a l i d i t y o f t h i s not producer  (Crown and Heady:  subsidies,  C h a p t e r 2)  I n a d d i t i o n t o cash advances and s u b s i d y schemes, t h e o t h e r major t h r u s t o f governmental e f f o r t s t o shore up farm incomes has been i n t h e e x t e n s i o n o f a v a i l a b l e c r e d i t , u s u a l l y a t f a i r l y low i n t e r e s t rates.  The Farm Improvement Loans A c t  (19^4)  made a v a i l a b l e s h o r t and  i n t e r m e d i a t e term l o a n s t o f a r m e r s ; t h e V e t e r a n s Land A c t e n a b l e d  return-  i n g s o l d i e r s t o purchase farms; and t h e Farm C r e d i t C o r p o r a t i o n makes  32.  c r e d i t a v a i l a b l e on a l o n g term, w i t h s p e c i a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s farmers.  C l e a r l y t h e s e c r e d i t schemes are more p r o p e r l y  "developmental" (aimed a t expanding p r o d u c t i o n ) r a t h e r tenance schemes. This  (Crown and Heady:  conclusion  maintenance schemes denote an e f f o r t t o buoy up e i t h e r d i r e c t monetary payments ( s u b s i d i e s  B.  t h a n by  and  i n t e r f e r i n g w i t h the  A g r i c u l t u r a l P o l i c y i n the  Agriculture.  C a l l e d "the  p r i c e and  farmers' finances grants) or system.  1970's r e p r e s e n t s somewhat  The  guidelines  f o r these  recommendations o f the T a s k F o r c e R e p o r t blueprint  o f government p o l i c y " and  "the  ( l ) the need f o r a r e d u c t i o n (2)  an a f f i r m a t i o n  o f the  i n e v i t a b i l i t y and  the  a g r i c u l t u r e t o the  economy; (4)  utility' the  on most  several  o f d i r e c t government i n v o l v e m e n t  c o m p e t i t i o n among f a r m e r s ; (3) continental  new  .agriculture",  ( M i t c h e l l : l 4 9 ) the T a s k F o r c e R e p o r t i s a c l e a r e n u n c i a t i o n o f  in agriculture;  by  by•furthering  p o l i t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t statement i n the h i s t o r y o f Canadian  themes:  income  1970'3  f r o m pre-1970 i n i t i a t i v e s .  d i r e c t i o n s have been the  t h a n income main-  t h a t the  price  F e d e r a l a g r i c u l t u r a l p o l i c y i n the of a d e v i a t i o n  labelled  5-6)  overview s u p p o r t s the  credit, rather  to beginning  necessity  correctness  of  o f accommodating C a n a d i a n a r e j e c t i o n o f the  or s o c i a l i z e d concept o f a g r i c u l t u r e ; and  (5)  the  'public  advocation  of  concept o f s u p p l y management. Early i n t h e i r report,  the T a s k F o r c e , the  i n attempting to define  the  goals  of  commissioners make e x p l i c i t t h e i r l i b e r a l p h i l o s o p h y :  The T a s k F o r c e a c c e p t s the r a t i o n a l r e a l i z a t i o n o f each i n d i v i d u a l ' s p o t e n t i a l as the u l t i m a t e g o a l . . . . . i n the u l t i m a t e a n a l y s i s , i t i s i n d i v i d u a l s t h a t count, r a t h e r t h a n o r g a n i z a t i o n s governments e x i s t t o serve p e o p l e , not the o p p o s i t e . (Canadian A g r i c u l t u r e i n the Seventies:28)  33. They r e i t e r a t e t h i s sentiment l a t e r when t h e y are s k e t c h i n g a model o f the i d e a l p o l i t i c a l - e c o n o m i c - s o c i a l system:  "...a d e m o c r a t i c  system e n s u r i n g the h i g h e s t p r a c t i c a l degree  o f i n d i v i d u a l freedom  p r i m a r y importance  and  ...government and economic p l a n n i n g must be  d i t i o n e d by t h i s supreme p r i n c i p l e " . Seventies:  i s of con-  (Canadian A g r i c u l t u r e i n t h e  279) The  t h e freedom  o f t - r e i t e r a t e d assumption  o f the Task F o r c e members t h a t  o f t h e farmer i s a p r i o r i t y v a l u e o c c u r s a l o n g s i d e the b e l i e f  t h a t freedom  i s b e s t s a f e g u a r d e d by e n s u r i n g the c o n t i n u a t i o n o f t h e  c o m p e t i t i v e economic system.  (Canadian Agriculture...:290-291)  e n t e r p r i s e i s equated w i t h t h e c o m p e t i t i v e system. e s t freedom  political  Free  To ensure t h e g r e a t -  f o r the i n d i v i d u a l farmer, t h e T a s k F o r c e recommended an  e l i m i n a t i o n o f d i r e c t s u b s i d i e s (Canadian A g r i c u l t u r e . . . : 9 ) and. a r e d u c t i o n o f government d i r e c t i n v o l v e m e n t i n a g r i c u l t u r e : o f government s h o u l d be t o produce  "...the g e n e r a l r o l e  a f a v o r a b l e economic c l i m a t e f o r farmers  and a g r i b u s i n e s s b u t n o t t o attempt t o 'manage' o r d i r e c t (Canadian A g r i c u l t u r e . . . : 282)  A N o r t h American  agriculture".  f r e e t r a d e a r e a i n which  t a r i f f b a r r i e r s would be removed would a l s o ensure t h a t freedom. Agriculture...:59)  Canadian f o o d s t u f f s would compete w i t h American  (Canadian food-  s t u f f s f o r the same market. The f o r e g o i n g recommendations d i d n o t c a l l f o r any  radical  r e o r i e n t a t i o n o f the f e d e r a l government's approach t o a g r i c u l t u r e .  The  p o t e n t i a l l y most r a d i c a l p r o p o s a l s were t h o s e a d v o c a t i n g an e x t e n s i o n o f  5 the m a r k e t i n g b o a r d concept as a means o f s u p p l y management. t o enable,  Legislation  p r o d u c e r s t o e s t a b l i s h m a r k e t i n g boards r e p r e s e n t s , t h e o r e t i c -  a l l y , an even g r e a t e r p o s s i b i l i t y f o r meddling w i t h t h e concept o f the f r e e market e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f p r i c e s process)  ( t h r o u g h the normal  t h a n do p r i c e s u p p o r t schemes.  s u p p l y and demand  To be c l e a r about what  34.  m a r k e t i n g boards a r e , t h e y . a r e n o r m a l l y d e f i n e d i n terms the f o l l o w i n g :  "a p r o d u c e r - c o n t r o l l e d , compulsory,  i z a t i o n s a n c t i o n e d by governmental  similar to  horizontal  a u t h o r i t y t o perform s p e c i f i c  o p e r a t i o n s i n t h e i n t e r e s t s o f t h e p r o d u c e r s o f t h e commodity (Metcalf,  organmarketing  concerned."  1969:107) The f u n c t i o n and g o a l o f m a r k e t i n g boards i s t o  s t a b i l i z e and i n c r e a s e members' incomes and t o e s t a b l i s h an e q u a l p r i c e f o r an e q u a l p r o d u c t o f f e r e d .  They a c c o m p l i s h t h i s by t h e p o o l i n g o f  members' p r o d u c t s and s e l l i n g them t h r o u g h a s i n g l e agency.  The c o l l e c t -  i v e s e l l i n g o f t h e e n t i r e output o f a g i v e n commodity c o n s t i t u t e s a movement towards  o r d e r l y m a r k e t i n g and away from " f r e e " m a r k e t i n g .  Because o f t h e compulsory membership and t h e f r e q u e n t e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f quotas on what each i n d i v i d u a l p r o d u c e r can s e l l  ( i n order t o r e s t r i c t  t h e s u p p l y w h i c h f l o w s t o m a r k e t ) , i t r e p r e s e n t s , as w e l l , a t y p e o f s u p p l y management, and a c c o r d i n g l y some r e s t r i c t i o n s on p r i c e c o m p e t i t i o n . Eugene Whelan, F e d e r a l M i n i s t e r o f A g r i c u l t u r e s i n c e  1972,  extended t h e e n a b l i n g l e g i s l a t i o n t o p e r m i t t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f n a t i o n a l  7 m a r k e t i n g boards under t h e N a t i o n a l Farm P r o d u c t s M a r k e t i n g A c t i n 1972. Whelan's concerns a r e b o t h p r o d u c e r and consumer o r i e n t e d :  to stabilize  b o t h farm income and consumer p r i c e s , as w e l l as t o guarantee f u t u r e f o o d supplies.  The o p p o r t u n i t y t o o r g a n i z e m a r k e t i n g on a n a t i o n a l  level  c l e a r l y p r o v i d e s t h e means f o r a much g r e a t e r degree o f s u p p l y management than t h e r e t o f o r e e x i s t e d w i t h only p r o v i n c i a l boards.  Q Because o f t h e p r o l i f e r a t i o n o f m a r k e t i n g b o a r d s ,  i t i s important  t o examine t h e e x t e n t t o which t h e y a r e an e f f e c t i v e t o o l i n t h e g o a l o f s u p p l y management, and c o n s e q u e n t l y , i n c r e a s e d and s t a b l e  incomes.  35. M a r k e t i n g boards effectiveness.  i n Canada v a r y w i d e l y i n terms o f t h e i r power and  (197*0  H i s c o c k s and B e n n e t t  which t h e p r o v i n c i a l marketing boards  have a n a l y s e d t h e e x t e n t t o  i n Canada c a n c o n t r o l p r i c e s i n  terms o f t h e i r p r i c i n g powers i n f o u r t e e n d i f f e r e n t  areas.  Some o f t h e most i m p o r t a n t o f t h e s e areas i n c l u d e t h e a b i l i t y to  regulate the following:  t o s e t consumer o r w h o l e s a l e p r i c e s , t o  e s t a b l i s h a maximum o r minimum p r o d u c e r p r i c e , t o e s t a b l i s h and/or p r o d u c t i o n quotas  marketing  for' every producer, t o l i c e n s e producers, t o  r e g u l a t e i n t e r p r o v i n c i a l and e x p o r t t r a d e , t o c o n t r o l i m p o r t s , and t o purchase  and/or s e l l t h e r e g u l a t e d p r o d u c t .  the powers o f m a r k e t i n g boards (the  I n terms o f t h e s e  are severely r e s t r i c t e d .  criteria,  A l l but four  Canadian Egg M a r k e t i n g Agency, Canadian D a i r y Commission,  Canadian Wheat Board,  and t h e Canadian T u r k e y M a r k e t i n g Agency) a r e  p r o v i n c i a l i n scope.  C o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y , t h e y must be c r e a t e d and em-  powered b y p r o v i n c i a l governments.  This i s a serious l i m i t a t i o n to t h e i r  9 a b i l i t y t o c o n t r o l t h e s u p p l y o f p r o d u c t s coming t o market.  As w e l l ,  m a r k e t i n g boards  a r e o r g a n i z e d on t h e p r i n c i p l e o f a s e p a r a t e b o a r d f o r  e v e r y commodity.  E a c h commodity group i n each p r o v i n c e has a s e p a r a t e  marketing board  (save f o r t h e f o u r n a t i o n a l b o a r d s ) .  A more s e r i o u s  drawback t o e f f e c t i v e n e s s i n c o n t r o l l i n g s u p p l y i s t h e i r complete i n a b i l i t y to control  imports.  More s p e c i f i c a l l y , Bennett or  i n terms o f t h e c r i t e r i a H i s c o c k s and  s e t f o r t h , t h e most p o w e r f u l boards  commissions w h i c h do d i r e c t l y determine  quotas.  P o u l t r y m a r k e t i n g boards  a b i l i t y t o influence price levels.  are the f l u i d milk p r i c e s and e s t a b l i s h  boards marketing  rank second most p o w e r f u l i n t h e i r They c a n s e t m a r k e t i n g quotas and  36.  minimum s a l e s p r i c e s .  A t h i r d group o f boards may n e g o t i a t e p r i c e s w i t h  major b u y e r s b u t g e n e r a l l y t h e b u y e r s r a t h e r t h a n the b o a r d determine the s e l l i n g p r i c e . "it  C o n s e q u e n t l y , H i s c o c k s and B e n n e t t c o n c l u d e t h a t  i s d i f f i c u l t t o determine t h e e x t e n t t o which t h e s e boards  influence  t h e p r o d u c e r p r i c e beyond t h e b a s i c s u p p l y and demand s i t u a t i o n o r e x p e c t a t i o n s o f t h e s i t u a t i o n a t t h e time o f t h e n e g o t i a t i o n s " . Finally,  (1974:22)  a l a r g e number o f boards have no p r i c i n g powers o r i n f l u e n c e  beyond what an improved o r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e market s t e p p e d up p r o m o t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s  s e c u r e s , o r what  yield.  Accordingly, by extending marketing board l e g i s l a t i o n , the f e d e r a l government has i n t h e p r e s e n t decade  c r e a t e d the c o n d i t i o n s f o r  g r e a t e r p r o d u c e r p r o t e c t i o n from t h e v i c i s s i t u d e s o f t h e f r e e  market.  However, i t would c l e a r l y be an e x a g g e r a t i o n t o suggest t h a t t h i s i s tantamount t o p r o d u c e r o r (even more r e m o t e l y ) governmental c o n t r o l o f production.  I f a n y t h i n g i s needed t o d i s p e l t h e i m p r e s s i o n o f t h e  onment o f t h e f r e e market the i n t r o d u c t i o n i n  aband-  concept on t h e p a r t o f t h e F e d e r a l L i b e r a l  Party,  1973> b y O t t o Lang, M i n i s t e r i n charge o f t h e  C a n a d i a n Wheat Board, o f t h e F e e d G r a i n s - P o l i c y would s u f f i c e .  The F e e d  G r a i n s P o l i c y removed t h e Wheat B o a r d monopoly over i n t e r - p r o v i n c i a l t r a d e i n f e e d g r a i n s and p e r m i t t e d t h e c r e a t i o n o f an " o f f B o a r d "  selling  mechanism t o make room f o r f e e d g r a i n h a n d l i n g by p r i v a t e g r a i n  companies.  Farmers  feed  a r e now " f r e e " t o choose t o whom t h e y w i l l market t h e i r  grains. As an o v e r v i e w o f f e d e r a l a g r i c u l t u r a l p o l i c y , t h e r e may be no more f i t t i n g assessment t h a n t h a t o f t h e T a s k F o r c e on A g r i c u l t u r e . On a one hundred degree continuum where one hundred degrees r e p r e s e n t s  37.  the  g r e a t e s t e x t e n t and  scale  o f government p l a n n i n g and  Commissioners p l a c e d Canada between t w e n t y - f i v e and T h i s m e t r i c l o c a t i o n approximates the p o l i c y of p e r i o d i c p r i c i n g sectors II.  thirty  the  degrees.^  i d e o l o g i c a l p o s i t i o n of a  liberal  d e p a r t u r e from non-involvement i n the m a r k e t i n g  when emergency s i t u a t i o n s  Provincial Agricultural  o f p r o v i n c i a l governments i n the f e d e r a l government.  But  be  o f the  Social Credit  been d i r e c t e d  a g r i c u l t u r a l sector  because A l b e r t a  h e l p f u l t o p r o v i d e an and  arise.  has  w i t h a f e d e r a l Department o f A g r i c u l t u r e , i t may  and  Policy  Even l e s s s c h o l a r l y a t t e n t i o n  the  control,  but  t o the  role  than to that  of  farmers i n t e r a c t n o t a p r o v i n c i a l one  overview o f the  only  as  well,  agricultural policies  Progressive Conservative administrations  in  Alberta. Although agriculture and  f e d e r a l governments share c o n c u r r e n t l y , the  authority  over i n t e r - p r o v i n c i a l and  powers o f the concerns. advertise the  i s a j u r i s d i c t i o n which the federal  provincial  constitutional  e x p o r t t r a d e reduces the  p r o v i n c i a l governments t o t h o s e r e l a t e d t o  marketing  intra-provincial  Hence, save f o r powers t o e s t a b l i s h m a r k e t i n g boards and and  s e a r c h f o r domestic and  i n t e r n a t i o n a l markets, the  p r o v i n c i a l government i n a g r i c u l t u r e  p r o d u c t i o n and  p r i c i n g sectors.  i s confined mainly to  It is. primarily  a g r i c u l t u r a l p o l i c i e s o f the A l b e r t a  Social Credit  C o n s e r v a t i v e A d m i n i s t r a t i o n s w i l l be  contrasted.  I t i s p r o b a b l y f a i r t o say Conservative Party i n Alberta  i n 1971  that  the  role  the  Progressive  e l e c t i o n o f the  marked a t u r n i n g  of  the  i n t h e s e terms t h a t and  to  point  Progressive in provincial  38.  assistance to agriculture. t r a t i o n ' s involvement  the S o c i a l C r e d i t  adminis-  i n a g r i c u l t u r e had been c o n f i n e d , f o r the most  p a r t , t o supplementary (B3 i n T a b l e 2.1),  P r i o r t o 1971,  income a s s i s t a n c e i n the event o f n a t u r a l d i s a s t e r s '  t o d i s p e n s i n g r e s e a r c h i n f o r m a t i o n t h r o u g h the  District Agriculturalist's office e x h i b i t i o n s and f a i r s  (A3).  ( A l , A2),  and t o f i n a n c i n g  local  agricultural  None.of t h e s e t y p e s o f schemes meant s u b s t a n t -  i a l f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e t o the farmer o r i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h p r o d u c t i o n o r pricing. The New  M i n i s t e r o f A g r i c u l t u r e i n the P r o g r e s s i v e .Conservative  Government i n 1971,  Vr.  Hugh Horner, h i m s e l f a hobby farmer, was  much committed t o r e s o u r c e development programs.  (A4  very  i n T a b l e 2.1)  i n g w i t h an expanded budget, Dr. H o r n e r implemented new  Work-  schemes l i k e  the  A g r i c u l t u r a l Development C o r p o r a t i o n and the B e e f I n c e n t i v e Programs d e s i g n e d t o l o a n farmers t h e c a p i t a l n e c e s s a r y t o expand t h e i r o p e r a t i o n s . Loans t o purchase The  farm l a n d and c o n s t r u c t new  b u i l d i n g s were  forthcoming.  P r o g r e s s i v e C o n s e r v a t i v e government has been a c t i v e i n two  areas s i n c e 1971s produced  one, b o l s t e r i n g i n t e r n a t i o n a l s a l e s o f p r o v i n c i a l l y  f o o d s t u f f s ; and two,  supplementing  been t h e v i c t i m s o f n a t u r a l d i s a s t e r s . t o be q u a l i f i e d .  further  While  The  incomes o f farmers who  have  l a t t e r does, however, need  d i s a s t e r a s s i s t a n c e was  made a v a i l a b l e  p r e s s u r e i n i t i a l l y from the N a t i o n a l Farmers U n i o n and  (after  subsequently  another farm o r g a n i z a t i o n ) t o farmers whose crops were snowed under i n the F a l l of 1973, period  1974-6  extremely  t h i s same a d m i n i s t r a t i o n has n o t t a k e n a c t i o n d u r i n g the  t o p r o v i d e emergency s u p p o r t t o c o w - c a l f o p e r a t o r s  depressed  prices.  suffering  39.  I n b r o a d e r terms, p r o v i n c i a l a g r i c u l t u r a l p o l i c y , l i k e  federal  p o l i c y , has n o t e n t a i l e d any s u b s t a n t i a l encroachment i n t o t h e p r o d u c t i o n and  p r i c i n g sectors.  The A l b e r t a  farmer has been l e f t r e l a t i v e l y  of e i t h e r f e d e r a l o r p r o v i n c i a l r e g u l a t i o n of h i s e n t e r p r i s e . because t h e r e a r e s l i g h t d i f f e r e n c e s  towards each. the III.  However,  o f o r i e n t a t i o n -with r e s p e c t t o  p r o d u c t i o n and p r i c i n g , i t seems a d v i s a b l e i o n between t h e two s e c t o r s  free  t o make an a n a l y t i c a l d i s t i n c t -  f o r t h e purpose o f t a p p i n g farmers r e s p o n s e s  T h i s h o l d s as w e l l w i t h r e s p e c t  a r e a i n w h i c h t h e r e has been somewhat more  t o the marketing  sector,  regulation.  A Framework f o r Mapping Farmers' P o l i t i c a l  Attitudes  H a v i n g s u r v e y e d t h e p o l i c i e s and programs w i t h i n w h i c h t h e sampled farmers p r a c t i s e f a r m i n g , t h e parameters o f t h e domain o f f a r m i n g and  p o l i t i c s have been b r o a d l y mapped.  a c t i v i t y o r more a c c u r a t e l y , marketing sectors b e l i e f systems.  Farmers' r e a c t i o n s  t o governmental  p a s s i v i t y , i n t h e p r o d u c t i o n , p r i c i n g , and  should c o n s t i t u t e  s t a b l e and s a l i e n t r e s p o n s e s i n t h e i r  Because t h e i n t e r e s t i n b e l i e f system r e s e a r c h  i s not  o n l y w i t h t h e p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t o f d i s c r e t e a t t i t u d e s b u t as w e l l w i t h the b r o a d n a t u r e o f c o l l e c t i o n s o f a t t i t u d e s , i t becomes i m p e r a t i v e t o e s t a b l i s h some means by w h i c h t h e r e s e a r c h e r can g e t a t h e o r e t i c a l "handle" on r e s p o n d e n t s ' a t t i t u d e s . research,  T r a d i t i o n a l l y , i n p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f system  t h e framework u s e d t o do t h i s i s t h e l e f t - r i g h t i d e o l o g i c a l  continuum:  t h e d e s c r i p t i o n o f an i n d i v i d u a l ' s s e t o f a t t i t u d e s i s i n  terms o f t h e a t t i t u d e s as b e i n g "on t h e l e f t "  o r "on t h e r i g h t " ; o r more  frequently,  as c o n s e r v a t i v e ,  l i b e r a l or r a d i c a l / s o c i a l i s t .  the p u r s u i t  o f t h i s p r a c t i c e i n t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y and t o t h e r e b y p r o v i d e  a framework w i t h i n w h i c h farmers*  s p e c i f i c a t t i t u d e s towards  To f a c i l i t a t e  selected  4o. objects i n the p o l i t i c a l system can be i d e n t i f i e d i n i d e o l o g i c a l terms, Chart 2.1 i s included. Chart 2.1 defines l e f t , centre and r i g h t positions with respect to the extent and scale of government involvement advocated i n the p r i c i n g , production, and marketing sectors of a g r i c u l t u r e .  To  varying degrees the l e f t p o s i t i o n approximates a r a d i c a l / s o c i a l i s t  stance;  the centre, a l i b e r a l p o s i t i o n ; and the r i g h t , a conservative Liberalism and conservatism indicated below.  perspective.  i n the Canadian context vary s l i g h t l y , as i s  While the c r i t e r i a i n the chart are s e l e c t i v e and not  i n c l u s i v e of a l l - maybe not even the most s i g n i f i c a n t - aspects of a l e f t or r i g h t orientation, they nevertheless constitute a set of elements r e a d i l y recognizable as cognitive and evaluative components of  conservat-  ive, l i b e r a l , ' and s o c i a l i s t perspectives. As part of i t s view of the appropriate economic system, the 12 conservative perspective includes the following elements.  F i r s t l y , the  free market and a s t r i c t p o l i c y of l a i s s e z - f a i r e on the part of the government i s the appropriate economic structure and the source of p o l i t i c a l freedom.  This e n t a i l s free trade, no monopolies, no t a r i f f s , no subsidies.  The government should have no, or at best a minimal, r o l e i n the and management of the economy.  production  Secondly, the protection and ownership  of private property must be assured.  Only to the end of protecting  private property should the government intervene i n the economy. The  conservative p o s i t i o n , i n terms of Chart 2.1 i s one of non-  interference i n regulating input costs and producer prices and and type of foodstuffs produced.  quantity  I t encourages private ownership of land  and equipment with no l i m i t s as to who  can farm.  The p r i n c i p l e of the free  market, with prices established by the law of'supply and demand, i s affirmed.  Chart 2.1  Left, Right, and Centre Positions on Scale and Extent of Government Planning and Control Left  Centre  Right  P r i c i n g Control a)  regulation of prices and income  Production costs and some p r o f i t guaranteed - either by producers bargaining with buyers or gov't, established maximum and minimum prices; stabilized prices.  Emergency or continuous supports  open market (supply and demand)  b)  regulation of nature and cost of inputs  controlled by government  emergency controls  no controls  no l i m i t s  Production  Control  a)  c r i t e r i a as to who can farm  r e s t r i c t e d to licensed farmers  no  b)  structure of farm ownership  public ownership; land leased to individuals or c o l l e c t i v e ownership; regulation of size and integration  both public and private ownership  private ownership of land and equipment  c)  quantity and production regulations  production quotas on quantity and product  gov't, advice and d i r e c t i o n with subsidies and grants  no controls  limits  C h a r t 2.1  Continued  * Left  Marketing Control ~k~) mechanism whereby farm p r i c e s are established  m a r k e t i n g boards optional  open market ( s u p p l y and demand)  selective international t a r i f f s  no no  r e g u l a t i o n o f imports and/or i n t e r p r o v i n c i a l trade  tariffs imports  c)  transportation  p u b l i c l y owned and operated  regulate  both p u b l i c and p r i v a t e systems  *The g e n e s i s o f t h i s chart- i s T a b l e 4, "Major C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f Farming Systems i n t h e F i v e Stages o f Government Involvement", i n Canadian A g r i c u l t u r e i n t h e S e v e n t i e s  (1969:281).  Right  n a t i o n a l m a r k e t i n g boards f o r a l l commodities ( o r d e r l y marketing)  b)  policy  Centre  regulation, tariffs  p r i v a t e l y operated, p r i v a t e l y owned  43-  I n the Canadian c o n t e x t , c o n s e r v a t i s m may  include selective t a r i f f s  and  a p u b l i c l y - o w n e d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n system c o e x i s t i n g a l o n g s i d e p r i v a t e schemes.  The major t h r u s t o f a c o n s e r v a t i v e a g r i c u l t u r a l p o l i c y would  be d i r e c t e d towards f i n d i n g e x p o r t markets.  I n summary, t h e c o n s e r v a t i v e  p o s i t i o n i n Canada e n t a i l s a s t a n c e on the r i g h t of C h a r t 2.1 w i t h r e s p e c t t o p r i c i n g and p r o d u c t i o n and v e e r s toward the c e n t r e on L i b e r a l i s m , l i k e conservatism,  marketing.  s u p p o r t s f r e e e n t e r p r i s e and  13 the c a p i t a l i s t i c  system as t h e a p p r o p r i a t e economic arrangement.  However, i t advocates  a g r e a t e r governmental r o l e i n managing the economy  ( t o c r e a t e c o n d i t i o n s i n w h i c h p r i v a t e e n t e r p r i s e may p r i v a t e and p u b l i c e n t e r p r i s e are t o l e r a t e d .  flourish).  Both  I n the C a n a d i a n c o n t e x t ,  l i b e r a l i s m has tended t o be equated w i t h a g r e a t e r a d v o c a t i o n o f w e l f a r e schemes t h a n has  conservatism.  I n l i b e r a l terms, w e l f a r e schemes are  n e c e s s a r y t o a l l o w everyone t o compete e q u a l l y i n t h e f r e e and t i v e market.  And  finally,  competit-  l i b e r a l i s m lends a supportive r o l e t o b i g  b u s i n e s s b u t does n o t e n t a i l the same p r e o c c u p a t i o n w i t h p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y as does c o n s e r v a t i s m .  I t g e n e r a l l y does n o t advocate  the ownership o f  major i n d u s t r i e s , b u t r a t h e r r e c o g n i z e s the o c c a s i o n a l n e c e s s i t y f o r r e g u l a t i o n o f them. The " c e n t r e " and  l i b e r a l p o s i t i o n , i n terms o f C h a r t 2.1, " r i g h t " aspects.  i t puts no l i m i t s on who  includes both  L i k e c o n s e r v a t i s m i n the C a n a d i a n c o n t e x t  can farm, no  c o n t r o l s on i n p u t c o s t s , and  recommends the p r i v a t e ownership o f l a n d ( i n c l u d i n g the r i g h t o f i n d i v i d u a l s such as c o r p o r a t i o n s t o e n t e r i n t o f a r m i n g ) .  non-  Liberalism i s  i n c l i n e d towards emergency s u p p o r t programs and s p o r a d i c i n t e r f e r e n c e  44.  w i t h the  f r e e market by  p o s i t i o n may  be  imposing s h o r t - l i v e d t a r i f f s .  e i t h e r an advocacy o f the  c h o i c e between f r e e and  regulated  The  f r e e market a l o n e o r o f  m a r k e t i n g (hence, the  systems).  Broadly, then,  t i v e i n Canada o s c i l l a t e s between the respect  t o the  p r i c i n g and  r i g h t and  p r o d u c t i o n a r e a s and  the  a  o p t i o n a l i t y of  m a r k e t i n g b o a r d s , the p r o v i s i o n o f b o t h p u b l i c l y - o w n e d and operated t r a n s p o r t a t i o n  liberal  privately-  liberal  perspec-  centre p o s i t i o n s  with  s e t t l e s i n the' c e n t r e  concerning marketing. I n c l u d e d i n the b e l i e f s which f i r s t l y , and  the use  s o c i a l i s t perspective  is  a s e t of economic  advocate government i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the  o f s t a t e power and  p l a n n i n g t o secure p u b l i c  economy  ownership o f  the means o f p r o d u c t i o n o f the major n a t i o n a l i n d u s t r i e s , and  the  14 distribution, transportation, s o c i a l i s t s recommend the  and  communication s e c t o r s .  a b o l i t i o n o f p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y and  ment w i t h communal ownership.  Socialism,  Secondly its  as a t h i r d c r i t e r i o n ,  replaceincludes  a c r i t i q u e o f c a p i t a l i s m as n e c e s s a r i l y l e a d i n g t o economic i n e q u a l i t y and  ultimately to p o l i t i c a l inequality.  I n recommending the  abolition  of p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y , i t c o u n s e l s as w e l l an e q u i t a b l e  d i s t r i b u t i o n of  power among c l a s s e s .  t h i s t a k e s the  form  trade unions.  And  I n terms o f p r a c t i c a l p o l i t i c s ,  of a,sympathetic p o s t u r e towards the w o r k i n g c l a s s and f o u r t h l y , s o c i a l i s m may  a d v i s e the u t i l i t y  o f w e a l t h measures l i k e the  of i n t e r i m r e d i s t r i b u t i o n  s o c i a l w e l f a r e schemes l i b e r a l s  t o maximize e q u a l o p p o r t u n i t y f o r a l l . e q u a l i t y i n terms o f e q u a l s o c i a l  A  implement  s o c i a l i s t , however, would  conditions.  define  45.  The p o s i t i o n on the l e f t side of Chart 2.1 corresponds to some aspects of a r a d i c a l / s o c i a l i s t approach t o a g r i c u l t u r e .  Such an  approach presupposes the j o i n t occurrence of planning and controls and the  regulation of production, p r i c i n g , and marketing.  The structure of  land ownership advocated by a s o c i a l i s t d i f f e r s , as well, from that recommended by a l i b e r a l or conservative, being, of course, one of public rather than private land ownership. There i s a fourth set of b e l i e f s which also must be defined i n terms of Chart 2.1. This i s the o f f i c i a l ideology of the National Farmers Union, the organization to which one of the two study groups of farmers belongs. set  The NFU ideology, as i t i s outlined here, i s the  of b e l i e f s gleaned from a c a r e f u l scrutiny of p o l i c y statements  passed at Conventions of the National Farmers Union; from a r t i c l e s published i n t h e i r monthly p e r i o d i c a l , The Union Farmer, which a l l members receive; from t h e i r more frequent d i r e c t i v e s to NFU executive members i n the Newsletter; and from a r t i c l e s concerning the NFU i n an i n f l u e n t i a l farm newspaper, The Western Producer.  This set of b e l i e f s  i s now outlined. In terms of Chart 2.1, the NFU p o s i t i o n on the scale and extent of government planning and control advocated, i s as follows: P r i c i n g Controls a ) r e g u l a t i o n of prices and income:  I t i s the p o l i c y of the NFU  that farm p r i c e s and income should be continuously regulated by the process of c o l l e c t i v e bargaining wherein the c e r t i f i e d bargaining agent for producers (the NFU/authorized farm organization) would bargain with a government-appointed marketing commission "to determine the price that  46.  p r o d u c e r s would r e c e i v e f o r t h e i r p r o d u c t s " .  Once t h i s p r o c e s s o f  b a r g a i n i n g had t a k e n p l a c e , "The m a r k e t i n g commission the power t o f i x o r determine  t h e n would have  s e l l i n g prices, t o regulate d i s t r i b u t i o n  o f t h e p r o d u c t , t o f i x and c o l l e c t f e e s and t o s e i z e , remove, and d i s p o s e o f any o f the r e g u l a t e d p r o d u c t s k e p t o r marketed i n v i o l a t i o n o f any  15 orders o r r u l e s o f the The  commission".  c o l l e c t i v e b a r g a i n i n g p r o c e s s i s d e s i g n e d t o ensure a  p r i c e t o the p r o d u c e r e q u a l t o "the c o s t o f p r o d u c t i o n p l u s a r e a s o n a b l e p r o f i t on h i s investment, management and l a b o r . " (Union Farmer, J a n . , 1975:5)  I n t h e i n t e r i m , w h i l e a w a i t i n g governmental  a u t h o r i z a t i o n as  the c o l l e c t i v e b a r g a i n i n g agent f o r f a r m e r s , the NFU has demanded s t a b i l i z a t i o n programs b u t r e j e c t e d t h o s e o f the "emergency t y p e " w h i c h l e n d s h o r t term a s s i s t a n c e w i t h o u t s t a b i l i z i n g p r i c e s a t c o s t o f p r o d u c t ion plus levels. b)  (Union Farmer, A p r i l ,  1975:4)  c o n t r o l on n a t u r e and c o s t o f i n p u t s :  The NFU p o s i t i o n i s  16 t h a t i n p u t c o s t s be s u b j e c t t o c o n j o i n t governmental Production Controls a)  c r i t e r i a as t o who can farm:  and farmer  control.  ' A l t h o u g h t h e y have y e t t o a r r i v e  a t a d e f i n i t i o n o f "a f a r m e r " and t o s p e c i f y who s h o u l d be a b l e t o farm, the NFU Conventions have unanimously  endorsed the p r i n c i p l e t h a t t h e r e  s h o u l d be d e f i n i t e r e s t r i c t i o n s on who can farm and are o f a c c o r d i n s t i p u l a t i n g some o f t h o s e who s h o u l d n o t be a b l e t o . Agribusiness commercial  ( c h a i n f o o d s t o r e s , p a c k i n g p l a n t s , f e e d companies,  c o r p o r a t e e n t e r p r i s e s , and "producers engaged i n farm p r o d u c t -  i o n f o r 'hobby*, r e s e a r c h , o r t a x advantage") s h o u l d be r e s t r i c t e d  from  47.  farming.  Furthermore, c r i t e r i a as t o who can farm s h o u l d n o t be g u i d e d  by an "economic  d e t e r m i n i s m " p r i n c i p l e , b u t by a w i d e r c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e  l8 s o r t o f s o c i e t y and community i t i s d e s i r a b l e t o c r e a t e i n Canada. b)  s t r u c t u r e o f farm ownership:  when a Land Ownership  U n t i l t h e 1974 N a t i o n a l C o n v e n t i o n ,  P o l i c y was p u t f o r w a r d f o r d i s c u s s i o n t h a t  sug-  g e s t e d i t was time t o r e - e v a l u a t e "the p r i n c i p l e o f p r i v a t e l a n d compared t o p u b l i c ownership w i t h t e n u r e s e c u r e d by l e a s i n g arrangements" Farmer,  Jan.,  (Union  1975*8), t h e NFU had always endorsed " t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f  farm p r o d u c t i o n b a s e d on t h e i n d i v i d u a l management, ownership and c o n t r o l o f p r o d u c t i o n r e s o u r c e s by farm p e o p l e " . Statements 1974  o f Purpose endorsed by t h e 1973  Land Ownership  The l a t t e r was one o f t h e and 1974 C o n v e n t i o n s .  P o l i c y sparked s u f f i c i e n t c o n t r o v e r s y t o r e s u l t i n  t h e r e s i g n a t i o n o f one p r e s i d e n t o f an O n t a r i o l o c a l . endorsement  The  o f p u b l i c ownership  To d a t e , t h e  seems t o be c o n f i n e d t o t h e l e a d e r s h i p  l e v e l , w i t h t h e P r e s i d e n t o f t h e Union, Roy A t k i n s o n , h a v i n g argued i t s m e r i t s on d i f f e r e n t o c c a s i o n s .  (Union Farmer, August,  1974:12)  L e s s c o n t r o v e r s i a l have been t h e r e c o g n i t i o n -of t h e need f o r maximum farm s i z e l i m i t s and t h e p r o h i b i t i o n o f v e r t i c a l i n t e g r a t i o n and  19 contract farming. c)  q u a n t i t y and p r o d u c t r e g u l a t i o n s :  The NFU has endorsed p r o d -  u c t i o n c o n t r o l s as t o q u a n t i t y b u t n o t as t o p r o d u c t .  An upper  limit  t o egg p r o d u c t i o n quotas has been s p e c i f i e d and t h e p r i n c i p l e o f " s u p p l y  20 management" f o r l i v e s t o c k and l i v e s t o c k p r o d u c t s endorsed. "  'supply management' s h o u l d n o t be i n t e r p r e t e d  However,  as....recommending  o v e r l y r e s t r i c t i v e p r o d u c t i o n c o n t r o l s b u t s h o u l d be d e f i n e d as g e a r e d t o r e g u l a t e d expansion".  (Union Farmer,  J a n . , 1975*7)  Rather than the  48.  government alone  s t i p u l a t i n g upper p r o d u c t i o n  o t h e r f o o d s t u f f s , the NFU the establishment  asks t h a t f a r m e r s '  o f those c o n t r o l s .  a u t h o r i t y , f o r example, s h o u l d be and  a l l o c a t e import  and  l i m i t s on l i v e s t o c k and o r g a n i z a t i o n s have a say i n  A p r o d u c e r - c o n t r o l l e d n a t i o n a l meat  created.and  empowered t o manage s u p p l i e s  e x p o r t quotas on t h e b a s i s o f n e g o t i a t e d  ments w i t h domestic and  f o r e i g n buyers.  agree-  (Union Farmer, January,  1976)  Marketing Control a)  mechanism whereby farm p r i c e s a r e e s t a b l i s h e d :  o t h e r a r e a has  so p r e o c c u p i e d  the a t t e n t i o n o f the NFU  the a p p r o p r i a t e marketing, mechanism.  Probably as t h a t  no  concerning  I n the defence o f o r d e r l y m a r k e t i n g  and the Canadian Wheat B o a r d as the v e h i c l e t o ensure o r d e r l y g r a i n m a r k e t i n g , the NFU  has  l a u n c h e d a t t a c k a f t e r a t t a c k upon the F e d e r a l T a s k  F o r c e R e p o r t on A g r i c u l t u r e and the F e d e r a l Feed G r a i n s P o l i c y o f  Otto  21 Lang. s h o u l d be  The  c o n s i s t e n t NFU  assigned  p o s i t i o n i s t h a t the Canadian Wheat B o a r d  j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r m a r k e t i n g a l l g r a i n s and  i n t e r p r o v i n c i a l l y and  i n t r a p r o v i n e i a l l y i n Canada and  oilseeds  a l l export s a l e s ,  as w e l l as over the o p e r a t i o n and management o f a l l g r a i n - h a n d l i n g facilities.  (Union Farmer, Jan.,  1975)  I n an a r t i c l e e n t i t l e d "Our P r e s i d e n t , Roy  Atkinson,  P o l i c y Must Stand", the  NFU  r e j e c t e d the a l t e r n a t i v e t o o r d e r l y m a r k e t i n g ,  t h a t i s , s e l l i n g on the f r e e market. on the f r e e market t o d i s p e n s e  He  e q u i t y and  d r i v e i n the market economy and those  argued, "No  l o n g e r can we  justice....because  the b a s i c  i n t e r e s t s o p e r a t i n g i n the market  economy i s s e l f - i n t e r e s t based on maximized p r o f i t s f o r t h e i r own abuse".  (Union Farmer, D e c ,  o f t h e f r e e market system has  1974:2)  depend  T h i s judgment of the  use  or  injustice  l e d t o the c a l l f o r p r o d u c e r - c o n t r o l l e d  49.  n a t i o n a l marketing  a g e n c i e s concerned w i t h l i v e s t o c k and o t h e r f a r m  p r o d u c t s a b l e t o " n e g o t i a t e l o n g - t e r m agreements w i t h b u y e r s ,  domestic  and i n t o e x p o r t . . . . " (Union Parmer, J a n . , 1975:7) .To be a b l e t o r e g u l a t e the market i n t h i s manner, i t i s n e c e s s a r y t h a t t h e p r o d u c e r boards be n a t i o n a l l y organized, not p r o v i n c i a l l y . b)  ( N e w s l e t t e r , June 19,  r e g u l a t i o n o f imports and/or i n t e r p r o v i n c i a l t r a d e :  t o t h e v a c i l l a t i n g p o s t u r e o f t h e Canadian  1973) In contrast  Federation of Agriculture  and t h e Canadian C a t t l e m e n s ' A s s o c i a t i o n , t h e N a t i o n a l Farmers has  Union  c o n s i s t e n t l y recommended r e s t r i c t i o n s on t h e i m p o r t a t i o n ' o f f r u i t s  22 and v e g e t a b l e s ,  beef  (Western Producer, May 22, 1975)> and d a i r y  products. ^ 2  c)  transportation policy:  As p a r t o f i t s t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p o l i c y ,  t h e NFU recommends t h e n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n o f a l l forms o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , i n c l u d i n g t h e e x p r o p r i a t i o n o f Canadian with'Canadian  P a c i f i c L i m i t e d and i t s merger  N a t i o n a l . . (Union Farmer, J a n . ,  1975:6,8)  I n terms o f t h e f o r e g o i n g p o l i c y p o s i t i o n s , t h e NFU i d e o l o g y may be summarized as o c c u p y i n g t h e l e f t p o s i t i o n i n C h a r t 2.1 l a t i o n o f t h e p r i c i n g and m a r k e t i n g the r i g h t ,  on r e g u -  s e c t o r s and c o n t a i n i n g a s p e c t s o f  c e n t r e , and l e f t p o s i t i o n s w i t h r e s p e c t t o p r o d u c t i o n . S p e c i f i c c o g n i t i v e and e v a l u a t i v e p r e d i s p o s i t i o n s towards t h e  .three s e c t o r s o f p r i c i n g , p r o d u c t i o n , and m a r k e t i n g - p o t e n t i a l f o r t h e o v e r l a p o f p o l i t i c s and f a r m i n g dimension  c o n s t i t u t e one  fundamental  o f f a r m e r s ' p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f systems i n t h i s study.  t o t h e s e s p e c i f i c a t t i t u d e s , o t h e r more g e n e r a l b e l i e f s ,  areas  In addition  typically  r e g a r d e d as i m p o r t a n t components o f i d e o l o g i e s , a r e t a p p e d as w e l l .  50.  These i n c l u d e one,  b e l i e f s about "how  and p o l i t i c a l o r d e r o p e r a t e s " ; two, how  the p r e s e n t s o c i a l ,  economic  the v a l u e s and g o a l s t h a t d e f i n e  the s o c i a l and economic o r d e r ought t o be  s t r u c t u r e d ; and  three, 2  t h e t a c t i c a l p r e s c r i p t i o n f o r a c t i o n t o r e a l i z e t h o s e v a l u e s and  goals.  E l a b o r a t i o n o f the t h e o r e t i c a l and e m p i r i c a l c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f t h e s e dimensions o c c u r s as each e n t e r s the a n a l y s e s . g e n e r a l o r i e n t a t i o n s ensures  I n c l u s i o n o f more  the o p p o r t u n i t y t o u n c o v e r h i g h e r  f a c t o r s i n the farmers' b e l i e f sets should they  order  exist.  I n c o n c l u s i o n , a framework f o r mapping those  areas o f t h e  domain o f f a r m e r s ' b e l i e f systems o f i n t e r e s t i n t h i s r e s e a r c h has b r o a d l y o u t l i n e d . - As t h e e m p i r i c a l i n q u i r y proceeds, framework w i l l be more p r e c i s e l y f o r m u l a t e d .  was  o b t a i n e d must be p r o v i d e d .  That  components o f t h a t  Initially,  d e s c r i p t i o n o f the s t u d y groups and the procedure  been  however, a  by which the  i s the t a s k o f the n e x t  data  chapter.  51. Notes t o C h a p t e r 2  1  Gad H o r o w i t z ' s (1970:47-74) a p p l i c a t i o n o f the H a r t z i a n framework t o a c c o u n t f o r the r e l a t i v e i n c i d e n c e o f c o n s e r v a t i s m , l i b e r a l i s m , and s o c i a l i s m i n Canada has been t h e most a m b i t i o u s e f f o r t t o d e l i n e a t e the b e l i e f s and assumptions t h a t c h a r a c t e r i z e C a n a d i a n i d e o l o g i e s . T h i s work a s i d e , we a r e l e f t t o i n f e r the i d e o l o g i c a l d i s p o s i t i o n s o f Canadians from t h e i r p a t t e r n s o f p a r t i s a n s u p p o r t .  2  The f i v e i t e m p o l i t i c a l e f f i c a c y measure d e v e l o p e d by r e s e a r c h e r s a t the M i c h i g a n Survey R e s e a r c h C e n t r e i s an e x c e l l e n t example o f an American measure w i d e l y u s e d by Canadian r e s e a r c h e r s . (Campbell e t a l . . 1954:l87-l89) T h i s measure s t r e s s e s t h e e f f i c a c y o f i n d i v i d u a l o r i e n t a t i o n s i n t h e p o l i t i c a l a r e n a . And y e t one o f t h e p o i n t s about which t h e r e i s a marked consensus c o n c e r n i n g the Canadian p o l i t i c a l c u l t u r e i s t h a t of the r e l a t i v e l y stronger c o l l e c t i v i s t e t h i c i n t h i s c o u n t r y as compared w i t h t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s . The p o i n t t h e n i s how r e l i a b l e i s a measure p r e d i c a t e d on i n d i v i d u a l i s t assumptions i n a c o u n t r y where t h o s e assumptions a r e much more weakly adhered t o ? Support f o r t h e c o n t e n t i o n t h a t t h e SRC p o l i t i c a l e f f i c a c y s c a l e (and m i n i m a l l y adopted v a r i a t i o n s t h e r e o f ) i s p r e d i c a t e d on i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c assumptions i s found i n t h e d i s c o v e r y o f Simeon and E l k i n s (1974:406) t h a t e f f i c a c y f e e l i n g s a r e h i g h e s t o f a l l among r e s i d e n t s o f B r i t i s h Columbia, a p r o v i n c e o f w h i c h one subgroup o f t h e c i t i z e n r y has been d e s c r i b e d i n i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c t e r m s . ( R o b i n , 1972) In a d d i t i o n , , the a u t h o r s r e p o r t t h a t t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f Saskatchewan r e s i d e n t s w i t h h i g h f e e l i n g s o f e f f i c a c y i s r e l a t i v e l y low, a f i n d i n g most s u r p r i s i n g i n l i g h t o f t h e c o l l e c t i v i s t and c o o p e r a t i v e t r a d i t i o n o f t h a t p r o v i n c e , b u t one t h a t can be a t l e a s t p a r t i a l l y a c c o u n t e d f o r i f t h e e f f i c a c y items do i n d e e d have an i n d i v i d u a l i s t bias. There i s , as w e l l , some e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e SRC e f f i c a c y s c a l e does n o t "work" on a D u t c h sample. (Mokken, 1969) The s o l u t i o n would seem t o be t o b u t t r e s s the SRC measure w i t h items t h a t t a p a c o l l e c t i v i s t o r i e n t a t i o n , and/or d e v e l o p a new measure from v o l u n t e e r e d statements o f Canadian samples. D a v i d E l k i n s (1976:000) s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e SRC e f f i c a c y measure i s probably inadequate t o tapping e f f i c a c y o r i e n t a t i o n s i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s as w e l l s i n c e Almond and V e r b a (1963) found t h a t among t h e U.S. r e s p o n d e n t s , a number o f i n d i v i d u a l s v o i c e d a p r e f e r e n c e f o r group p o l i t i c a l a c t i o n over i n d i v i d u a l a c t i v i t y .  3  I t i s symptomatic o f t h e s p o r a d i c a t t e n t i o n t o t h e a g r i c u l t u r a l s e c t o r t h a t so few p o l i t i c a l economists and h i s t o r i a n s have deemed i t worth t h e i r w h i l e t o i n q u i r e i n t o governmental programs and p o l i c i e s r e g a r d i n g Canadian a g r i c u l t u r e . Vernon Fowke's work (1946, 1957: Fowke and Fowke, 1968) on t h e wheat economy was f o r many y e a r s t h e s o l e c o n t r i b u t i o n i n t h i s area. I n 1967» t h e f e d e r a l government commissioned a T a s k F o r c e on A g r i c u l t u r e f o r t h e purpose o f p r o j e c t i n g a g r i c u l t u r a l d i r e c t i o n s i n t h e 1970's and p r o p o s i n g p o l i c y i n i t i a t i v e s i n l i n e w i t h t h o s e p r o j e c t i o n s . As p a r t o f t h i s T a s k F o r c e , s e v e r a l r e s e a r c h papers  52.  appeared which examined h i s t o r i c a l l y the r o l e o f governments i n the a g r i c u l t u r a l economy. ( G a r l a n d and Hudson, 1968; T h e i r , 1968; C a n a d i a n A g r i c u l t u r e i n the S e v e n t i e s : 462-4) More r e c e n t l y , Don M i t c h e l l (1975) has a n a l y s e d the f o o d i n d u s t r y i n Canada and i n the p r o c e s s examined the f e d e r a l r o l e as r e g a r d s a g r i c u l t u r e . There i s a c c o r d i n g l y , n o t much l i t e r a t u r e upon which t o draw. Hence, the summary i n the t e x t r e l i e s , o f n e c e s s i t y , upon the work o f t h i s handf u l of s c h o l a r s . 4  G a r l a n d and Hudson s t a t e t h a t programs t h a t i n v o l v e d i r e c t payments t o o r on b e h a l f o f f a r m e r s a c c o u n t f o r 50% o f a l l governmental expendi t u r e s on a g r i c u l t u r e and 60% o f f e d e r a l governmental e x p e n d i t u r e s .  P. 343. 5  S u p p l y management " r e f e r s t o c e n t r a l i z e d c o n t r o l o v e r the q u a n t i t y and/or p r i c e o f one o r more commodities o f s p e c i f i e d ' q u a l i t y coming from a s p e c i f i e d group o f p r o d u c e r s t o a p a r t i c u l a r market o r markets, i n a given period." Canadian A g r i c u l t u r e i n the S e v e n t i e s : 312.  6  A n o t h e r d e f i n i t i o n o f m a r k e t i n g boards i s t h a t o f the C a n a d i a n A g r i c u l t u r a l Economics S o c i e t y which i n 1961 s u g g e s t e d t h a t the m a r k e t i n g board"may be d e f i n e d as a p r o d u c e r body o r g a n i z e d under s t a t u t e t o e x e r c i s e compulsory c o n t r o l over some o r a l l o f the s t a g e s i n the m a r k e t i n g o f a s p e c i f i e d commodity o r commodities". See Bob P h i l i p s , " M a r k e t i n g Boards A r e Meant f o r Farmers", The Western Producer, Winnipeg, Thursday, October 10, 1974, p. 4 l .  7  The f i r s t m a r k e t i n g b o a r d l e g i s l a t i o n t h a t e n a b l e d the e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f f e d e r a l m a r k e t i n g boards i n Canada was e n a c t e d i n 1934 under the N a t u r a l P r o d u c t s M a r k e t i n g A c t . The 17 m a r k e t i n g schemes which were e s t a b l i s h e d under t h i s l e g i s l a t i o n were s c u t t l e d i n 1936 when the Supreme C o u r t o f Canada and l a t e r the JCPC d e c l a r e d the N a t u r a l Products Marketing A c t u l t r a - v i r e s f e d e r a l j u r i s d i c t i o n . ( T h i s was p a r t o f t h e "New D e a l " package R.B. B e n n e t t had i n t r o d u c e d and which t h e L i b e r a l government o f MacKenzie K i n g a s k e d t h e c o u r t s t o d e c l a r e on.) I n 1949, the F e d e r a l Government s u c c e s s f u l l y e n a c t e d the A g r i c u l t u r a l P r o d u c t s M a r k e t i n g (Canada) A c t "which p r o v i d e d e n a b l i n g l e g i s l a t i o n p e r m i t t i n g the p r o v i n c i a l m a r k e t i n g boards t o e x e r c i s e o u t s i d e o f the p r o v i n c e i n which t h e y were e s t a b l i s h e d t h e same powers which p r o v i n c i a l l e g i s l a t i o n a l l o w e d them t o e x e r c i s e w i t h i n the provinces". See P h i l i p s (1974: 4l)  8  G. A. H i s c o c k s and T.A. B e n n e t t (1974: 15) r e p o r t 80 m a r k e t i n g boards i n 1974. Omitted from t h i s f i g u r e are pulpwood and o y s t e r boards and the Quebec m a n u f a c t u r i n g m i l k b o a r d s .  9  The c h i c k e n and egg wars were one m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f i n t e r p r o v i n c i a l c o m p e t i t i o n o f p r o v i n c i a l m a r k e t i n g b o a r d s . When one p r o v i n c i a l marketi n g b o a r d found i t s e l f w i t h a s u r p l u s o f eggs - t h a t i s , w i t h more eggs  53.  t h a n the consumers i n i t s own p r o v i n c e would purchase - i t would t r y t o u n l o a d t h o s e s u r p l u s eggs i n a n e i g h b o u r i n g p r o v i n c e a t a p r i c e below t h e s e l l i n g p r i c e o f eggs i n t h a t second p r o v i n c e . 10  I t w i l l be r e c a l l e d t h a t the T a s k F o r c e recommended t h i s be r u l e d out. The F e d e r a l L i b e r a l P a r t y has f o r the most p a r t c o n c u r r e d : b e e f import r e s t r i c t i o n s have been l e v i e d and l i f t e d s p o r a d i c a l l y .  11  See T a b l e 3> " F i v e Stages o f Government Involvement i n Farming: Degree o f Government P l a n n i n g and C o n t r o l " , Canadian A g r i c u l t u r e i n the S e v e n t i e s : 280. To p u t t h e r a t i n g o f Canada i n p e r s p e c t i v e , i t i s i n s t r u c t i v e t o know t h a t C h i n a i s p l a c e d between 80° and 90° and R u s s i a between 75° and 80° on t h i s same continuum. A t t h i s extreme end, a g r i c u l t u r e i s under complete government c o n t r o l and p l a n n i n g and t h e f a r m e r i s a wage-earning employee o f t h e government. C l o s e r t o the Canadian r a t i n g are F r a n c e and B r i t a i n , b o t h o c c u p y i n g p o s i t i o n s somewhere between 30° and 4-5°.  12.  T h i s d e f i n i t i o n o f c o n s e r v a t i s m i s drawn from the f o l l o w i n g s o u r c e s : C. R o s s i t e r , " C o n s e r v a t i s m " , I n t e r n a t i o n a l E n c y c l o p e d i a o f t h e S o c i a l S c i e n c e s ed. E. S i l l s (New Y o r k : M a c m i l l a n , 1968); J . C. Rees, "Conservatism", A D i c t i o n a r y o f the S o c i a l S c i e n c e s , eds. J . Gould and W. K o l b (New Y o r k : F r e e P r e s s , 1964), 129-130; D o l b e a r e and D o l b e a r e , American I d e o l o g i e s , C h a p t e r s 5 and 10; H e r b e r t McClosky, " C o n s e r v a t i s m and P e r s o n a l i t y " , APSR, 52 (March, 1958), 27-45; G. H o r o w i t z , "Conservatism, L i b e r a l i s m and S o c i a l i s m " (1970:42-74); and V i s c o u n t Hailsham, The C o n s e r v a t i v e Case, (Penquin, Harmondsworth,  1959). 13  T h i s d e f i n i t i o n o f l i b e r a l i s m draws upon the f o l l o w i n g s o u r c e s : D o l b e a r e and D o l b e a r e , American I d e o l o g i e s (1973: C h a p t e r s 2,3,4, and 10); G. H o r o w i t z , "Conservatism, L i b e r a l i s m and S o c i a l i s m " (1970:64); Robinson, Rusk, and Head, Measures o f P o l i t i c a l A t t i t u d e s (1968: C h a p t e r 3); J . W. P i c k e r s g i l l , The L i b e r a l P a r t y (1962:69); James P. Young, The P o l i t i c s o f A f f l u e n c e (1968); Leo S t r a u s s , L i b e r a l i s m A n c i e n t and Modern (1968)  14  The d e f i n i t i o n o f s o c i a l i s m r e l i e s on a number o f s o u r c e s o f which t h e p r i n c i p a l ones are D o l b e a r e and D o l b e a r e , American I d e o l o g i e s (1973: C h a p t e r s 9 and 10); H o r o w i t z , "Conservatism, L i b e r a l i s m and S o c i a l i s m " (1970); Leo Huberman and P a u l M. Sweezy, I n t r o d u c t i o n t o S o c i a l i s m  (1968). 15  NFU C o n v e n t i o n B o a r d o f D i r e c t o r s R e p o r t (Winnipeg: D e c , A g r i c u l t u r a l P r o d u c e r s C o l l e c t i v e B a r g a i n i n g and M a r k e t i n g Copy (Winnipeg: D e c , 1973). Here, as f o r a l l r e f e r e n c e s source o f NFU p o l i c y p o s i t i o n s , the r e f e r e n c e i s s e l e c t i v e  1973); Act Draft t o the i n the  54. sense that a l l NFU b e l i e f s and positions outlined recur several times i n one or a l l of the Union Farmer, the NFU Newsletter, The Western Producer, or other NFU Publications. 16  Proposed C o l l e c t i v e Bargaining: Resolution (Saskatoon:  NFU, June,  1970), p. 2. 17  National Convention P o l i c y Statements (Winnipeg: D e c , 1973 and and D e c , 1974); Union Farmer (Saskatoon: NFU, Jan., 1975), p. 7.  18  A C r i t i q u e of the A g r i c u l t u r a l Adjustment or Development P o l i c y f o r Canadian Agriculture (Saskatoon: NFU, June 16, 1971), p. 4.  19  Newsletter (Saskatoon: NFU, A p r i l 28, 1972); "Land Ownership P o l i c y " , Union Farmer (Saskatoon: NFU, Jan., 1975), P« 8.  20  "Egg P o l i c y " , Union Farmer  21  For the former see Background Information f o r the Farmers' Task Force Grains P o l i c y Hearings (Saskatoon: NFU, n.d.). For the l a t t e r see issues of the Union Farmer and Newsletter from J u l y 9 to October 22,  (Saksatoon:  NFU, Jan., 1975), P- 7.  1973. 22  Submission to Alberta A g r i c u l t u r a l Marketing Council (Saskatoon: NFU, n.d.), p. 15-16.  23  Proposed C o l l e c t i v e Bargaining Resolution (Saskatoon: NFU, June, 1970); "NFU P o l i c y " , Union Farmer (Saskatoon: NFU, Jan., 1975).  24  These components of an ideology are outlined by Dolbeare and Dolbeare (1973: 3-7). The delineation conforms to several other notions of ideology which include both cognitive b e l i e f s (generally about the d e s i r a b i l i t y or u n d e s i r a b i l i t y of government intervention i n the economy) and s t y l i s t i c orientations (posture toward change). See McClosky (1958); H i k e l (1973:5); and C h r i s t i a n and Campbell (1974: 15-18).  55. Chapter The  3  Study Groups  I n the study o f p r a i r i e p o l i t i e s t h e r e e x i s t s no more e x c i t i n g c h r o n i c l e t h a n t h a t r e c o u n t i n g the m o b i l i z a t i o n t o p r o t e s t p o l i t i c s p r a i r i e farmers students  i n the e a r l y decades o f t h i s c e n t u r y .  d i s p u t e the meaning of f a r m e r s u p p o r t  of  Even today,  f o r t h e U n i t e d Farmers o f  A l b e r t a , the S o c i a l C r e d i t P a r t y i n A l b e r t a , the C o o p e r a t i v e  Commonwealth  F e d e r a t i o n i n Saskatchewan, and the P r o g r e s s i v e P a r t y on t h e p r a i r i e s a whole.  Were such movements m a n i f e s t a t i o n s  farmer s o c i a l i s t p e r s p e c t i v e s ?  ( L i p s e t , 1950)  d e v i a t i n g from t h e i r i n h e r e n t c o n s e r v a t i s m economic g r i e v a n c e s ? l o g i c a l l y at a l l ,  (Macpherson, 1953)  and Krueger, 1968;  Or, were farmers  i n order t o a l l a y Were farmers  Eager, 1968;  Naylor,  1972)  only  (Bennett  W h i l e the c o n t r o v e r s y  i t i s p o s s i b l e to i n q u i r e i n t o the  of  "meaning"  More p r e c i s e l y , g i v e n the e x i s t e n c e o f a  c u r r e n t p r o t e s t farm u n i o n , by sampling  b o t h members o f t h a t o r g a n i z a t i o n  and non-members, i t i s p o s s i b l e t o t r a c e t h e l i n k s , i f any,  The  severe  o f contemporary r e c r u i t m e n t t o a farm o r g a n i z a t i o n  radical i n i t s objectives.  farmers'  only  not a c t i n g ideo-  t o r e d r e s s economic h a r d s h i p s ?  n e c e s s i t y remains u n r e s o l v e d , f o r some farmers  o f a g r a r i a n r a d i c a l i s m and  n o t s e e k i n g t o implement s o c i a l i s t g o a l s , b u t  u t i l i z i n g a v a i l a b l e channels  as  between  membership i n a r a d i c a l farm o r g a n i z a t i o n and t h e i r b e l i e f s e t s .  r a d i c a l farm o r g a n i z a t i o n a v a i l a b l e i s the N a t i o n a l Farmers U n i o n . I n 1969,  the N a t i o n a l Farmers U n i o n was  formed out o f the  amalgamation o f the e x i s t i n g p r o v i n c i a l Farmers U n i o n s . after,  Shortly there-  l o c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s were e s t a b l i s h e d i n most p r o v i n c e s , i n c l u d i n g  56.  Alberta.  Since then the National Farmers Union has engaged i n both  quiet diplomacy and more vociferous confrontation t a c t i c s i n the pursuit of c l e a r l y defined goals and objectives. i n Chapter 2, pages 45 - 4 9 ) .  (Some of these were outlined  The NFU leadership has presented b r i e f s  and p o l i c y proposals to the p r o v i n c i a l and f e d e r a l governments  on v i r t u -  a l l y every governmental action (or inaction) of consequence to Canadian farmers.  Members of the organization have taken part i n r a l l i e s and  pickets of agribusiness conglomerates (Bordens, Weston, K r a f t ) , waged a national boycott of K r a f t products f o r several years, and demonstrated on the grounds of P r o v i n c i a l L e g i s l a t i v e Assemblies i n Alberta, Saskatchewan, B r i t i s h Columbia, and other provinces.  I t was members of  t h i s union whose t r a c t o r s and vehicles blocked a l l access routes i n t o Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island i n August, 1971, Roy Atkinson, was j a i l e d as a consequence.  and whose President,  Such a c t i v i t i e s have earned  i t the reputation of "the most m i l i t a n t and most r a d i c a l " of present farm organizations.  (Brown,  1972:4o) I t i s from t h i s organization, whose  membership has been estimated to encompass about 10% of a l l Canadian farmers, that one of the two study groups has been drawn. The sampling design by which farmers i n the NFU and the counterpart "control" group of non-members were drawn i s d e t a i l e d i n t h i s chapter.  In addition, the chapter contrasts the two groups of farmers  on an aggregate l e v e l and considers the extent to which the two groups represent farmers i n the province as a whole. Selection of the Study Groups Two study groups comprise the data base f o r t h i s study: 48 farmers who were members of the National Farmers Union i n 1974,  and  57.  85  farmers who  were n o t members o f t h a t o r g a n i z a t i o n  at that  time.  B o t h groups have been chosen by a d e s i g n which e n t a i l e d p e r s o n a l views w i t h respondents completion  i n one  g e o g r a p h i c a l a r e a o f the p r o v i n c e and  o f m a i l q u e s t i o n n a i r e s by farmers  p r o v i n c e as a whole.  their 1.  The  and non-member (non-NFTJ)  were p e r s o n a l l y i n t e r v i e w e d o r  r e t u r n e d m a i l q u e s t i o n n a i r e s w h i c h t h e y had  completed  on  own. Interviewed The  Groups  farmers  i n t h e two  s t u d y groups who  were p e r s o n a l l y  i n t e r v i e w e d by the r e s e a r c h e r were a l l r e s i d e n t s o f a g e o g r a p h i c a l which l i e s ,  f o r t h e most p a r t , w i t h i n Census D i v i s i o n 13.  a r e a as one  i n which t o sample i n t e n s i v e l y  made f o r two  First,  s p e c i a l i z e d and mixed farmers  both  a d i v e r s i t y o f crops i n the a r e a on l a n d t h a t ranges from b e i n g h i g h l y productive farmland.  I t i n c l u d e s 9.5$  was produce  marginal  o f the t o t a l farms i n  A l b e r t a ; o n l y t h r e e census d i v i s i o n s c o n t a i n more. r e p r e s e n t a t i v e as any  3.1  The  choice of t h i s farming reasons.  area  Diagram  shows t h e l o c a t i o n o f t h i s d i v i s i o n i n t h e p r o v i n c e o f A l b e r t a .  to  the  randomly s e l e c t e d i n the  Hence, b o t h t h e member (NFU)  s t u d y groups are composed o f farmers who farmers who  inter-  I t appears t o be  f a r m i n g a r e a o f the p r o v i n c e as a whole.  as  Table  3.1  i n d i c a t e s t h a t , i n comparison w i t h the p r o v i n c e as a whole, Census D i v i s i o n 13 has of  s m a l l e r farms on t h e average, b o t h i n terms o f t h e number  a c r e s owned and  market v a l u e .  operated' ' as w e l l as w i t h r e s p e c t t o the 1  There are fewer wheat farms s i n c e t h i s a r e a i s o u t s i d e  t h e wheat growing b e l t . istics age  o f the farmers  composition  estimated  W i t h r e s p e c t t o the socio-demographic  character-  i n t h e a r e a , w h i l e the r e l i g i o u s a f f i l i a t i o n  are s i m i l a r t o t h o s e  o f farmers  throughout  and  the p r o v i n c e j  58.  t h e r e are more E a s t e r n - E u r o p e a n W i t h a few  c a v e a t s , sampling  b o r n farmers  i n Census D i v i s i o n  i n t h i s a r e a a f f o r d s the o p p o r t u n i t y t o  e s t a b l i s h the g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y of p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s o f the b e h a v i o r o f p r a i r i e wheat farmers Second, the a r e a was U n i o n had  13.  political  e a r l y i n the t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y .  s e l e c t e d because the N a t i o n a l Farmers  o r g a n i z e d i n t h e a r e a and s u s t a i n e d a l e v e l o f  activity  2 r o u g h l y e q u a l t o t h a t o f most o t h e r d i s t r i c t s i n the p r o v i n c e .  The  3 l a r g e s t p a r t o f NFU NFU  D i s t r i c t 3 o v e r l a p s w i t h Census D i v i s i o n  13.  D i s t r i c t 3 i n A l b e r t a encompasses a l l f a r m i n g areas n o r t h o f the  N o r t h Saskatchewan R i v e r , e x c e p t i n g the Peace R i v e r B l o c k , w i t h the e a s t e r n boundary l y i n g 12 m i l e s e a s t o f Highway 2 N o r t h .  The  area  i n c l u d e d i n the d i s t r i c t i s r o u g h l y demarcated i n Diagram 3«1  where i t  can be o b s e r v e d t h a t t h e o v e r l a p o f t h e NFU  census  d i v i s i o n i s not p e r f e c t . - T h o r h i l d and A t h a b a s c a NFU  d i s t r i c t w i t h the  (The census d i v i s i o n i n c l u d e s two  counties  - the l a r g e s t p a r t s o f which l i e o u t s i d e the  d i s t r i c t i n question.)  F i v e e s t a b l i s h e d l o c a l s e x i s t e d i n NFU  D i s t r i c t 3 a t the time o f t h e r e s e a r c h ; members o f the NFU  study group  have been drawn from a l l l o c a l s except the one which had been e s t a b l i s h e d i n A p r i l o f t h a t y e a r and w h i c h was Division  o u t s i d e the c o n f i n e s o f Census  13. While  the p r o p o r t i o n o f NFU  members t o farmers  as a whole i s  p r o b a b l y n o t as g r e a t i n t h i s d i s t r i c t as i t i s i n some o t h e r d i s t r i c t s i n the p r o v i n c e , D i s t r i c t 3 had two it  d e s i r a b l e as an a r e a i n which t o conduct  First,  a l a r g e number of farmers  NFU  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w h i c h made  the p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w s .  i n the a r e a had  e x p e r i e n c e d and were  c o n t i n u i n g t o f e e l a r e d u c t i o n i n t h e i r income, owing t o b o t h a l o s s of.  Diagram  3.1  NFU D i s t r i c t  3  Census D i v i s i o n  13  Table 3.1  60. A Comparison of Census D i v i s i o n 13 and the Province as a Whole Province ...un 1 . 1 1 —  Birthplace Canada U.S.A. Northern Europe Western Europe Southern Europe Eastern Europe A s i a , A f r i c a , Other  Census D i v i s i o n 13 i . n . .II,  • .11 . 1 1 . . 1 . 1 . 1 1 .I.I. 1 .  82.7% 2.9 5.2 3.3 1.2 3.3 1.4  82.25  100.0  100.0  42.0 26.5 15.0 5.2 6.7 4.2 .4  38.0 30.6 18.3 4.7 5.1 3.3  100.0  100.0  2.5 14.2 24.1 28.6 11.5 9.1 5.8 4.2  2.0 13.8 26.1 28.0 11.3 9.3 5.9 3.6  100.0  100.0  Size of Farm Average # acres operated  790  487  Average # acres owned  506  392  $83,603  $54,625  55.5 19.6 7.7 8.4 5.4 1.7 1.7  65.2 16.6 8.2 1.7 6.8 .3 1.2  100.. 0  100.0  Religious A f f i l i a t i o n Anglo-Protestant Catholic European Protestant Evangelical Protestant Not a f f i l i a t e d Other r e l i g i o n Jewish  3.2 3.9 3.0 .2 6.9 .6  b  0  d Age Under 25 years 25 - 34 years 35-44 years 45 - 54 years 55 - 59 years 60 - 64 years 65 - 69 years 70 years plus  6  f Average c a p i t a l value farm g Primary Product Raised C a t t l e , hogs^sheep Small grains Mixed Wheat Dairy F i e l d Crops Other i  -  M  61. T a b l e 3.1  Continued  Codes Si  Source o f P r o v i n c e D a t a : T a b l e 35, " P o p u l a t i o n by B i r t h p l a c e and Sex f o r Canada and P r o v i n c e s , R u r a l Nonfarm and R u r a l Farm, 1971"» C a t a l o g u e 92 - 727, 1971 Census. Source o f C D . 13 D a t a : T a b l e 36, " P o p u l a t i o n by B i r t h p l a c e and Sex f o r Census D i v i s i o n s , 1971", P o p u l a t i o n , Catalogue 92 - 727, 1971 Census. ^Source o f P r o v i n c e D a t a : " P o p u l a t i o n by R e l i g i o u s Denomination and Sex f o r Canada and P r o v i n c e s , R u r a l Non-Farm and R u r a l Farm, 1971"» P o p u l a t i o n , 1971 Census. Source o f C D . 13 D a t a : " P o p u l a t i o n by R e l i g i o u s Denomination and f o r Census D i v i s i o n s , 1971", P o p u l a t i o n , 1971 Census. C  Sex,  T h e r e l i g i o u s a f f i l i a t i o n groups i n c l u d e the f o l l o w i n g s p e c i f i c d e n o n  ^ri|io-Pr6testant: A n g l i c a n , P r e s b y t e r i a n , U n i t e d Church, B a p t i s t C a t h o l i c : Roman C a t h o l i c , Greek C a t h o l i c European P r o t e s t a n t : L u t h e r a n , Greek Orthodox, C h r i s t i a n Reformed E v a n g e l i c a l P r o t e s t a n t : A d v e n t i s t , C h r i s t i a n A l l i a n c e , Church o f C h r i s t , Jehovah's W i t n e s s , Mormon, P e n t e c o s t a l Other r e l i g i o n : S a l v a t i o n Army, H u t t e r i t e , Mennonite, B u d d h i s t , Other  d  S o u r c e o f P r o v i n c e and C D . 13 D a t a : T a b l e 31, " P o p u l a t i o n , Tenure, Age and R e s i d e n c e of Operator, Type o f O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r Census-farms, 1971", A g r i c u l t u r e A l b e r t a , 1971 Census.  e  S o u r c e o f P r o v i n c e and C D . 13 D a t a : T a b l e 31, " P o p u l a t i o n , Tenure, Age and R e s i d e n c e o f Operator, Type o f O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r Census Farms, 1971", A g r i c u l t u r e A l b e r t a , 1971 Census.  f T a b l e 50, s  A g r i c u l t u r e A l b e r t a , 1971  Census.  S o u r c e o f P r o v i n c e and C D . 13 D a t a : T a b l e 14, "Census Farms w i t h o f $2500 o r more C l a s s i f i e d by Product Type", A g r i c u l t u r e A l b e r t a , Census. Small grains:  """Other:  Sales  1971  Barley, oats, etc.  F o r e s t r y , f r u i t s and v e g e t a b l e s ,  p o u l t r y , 'miscellaneous  specialty'  62.  t h e i r crops the p r e v i o u s the c a t t l e market.  fall  t o a premature s n o w f a l l and a slump i n  Secondly, i n seeking  compensation f o r t h i s l o s s  of  income, a number o f farmers i n the r e g i o n had p e r s o n a l l y p e t i t i o n e d the p r o v i n c i a l government.  These two  f e a t u r e s , combined w i t h the f a c t t h a t  a n o t h e r more c o n s e r v a t i v e farm o r g a n i z a t i o n , Unifarm, had present to  i n t h e a r e a , meant t h a t t h e r e g i o n a f f o r d e d a good  t a p f a r m e r s of d i f f e r e n t i d e o l o g i c a l I n June, 197^,  i n the r e g i o n .  The  members o f t h e s e felt  p r e t e s t e d on t e n f a r m e r s  p r e t e s t group i n c l u d e d l e a d e r s of the two (the N a t i o n a l Farmers U n i o n and  o r g a n i z a t i o n s , and f a r m e r s who  farm Unifarm),  belonged to n e i t h e r .  t h a t such a range o f f a r m e r s w i t h b o t h v a r y i n g degree o f  ulateness difficulty,  and  i d e o l o g i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e would h i g h l i g h t problems o f  b i a s , and  three accounts;  ambiguity.  The  e x e r c i s e was  a number o f items were d e l e t e d from the  n a i r e s , because t h e y were n o t  o r i g i n a l t a r g e t of 50  o f the N a t i o n a l Farmers U n i o n and sample o f NFU  members was  The  lists  were compiled  (These  were a c c u r a t e  question-  50  discussed i n this  report.)  p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w s w i t h members i n t e r v i e w s w i t h non-members was  randomly drawn from a l i s t  of  set.  current of  the  from which the non-NFU members were randomly s e l e c t e d  lists  i n the counties  item  questionnaire,  members made a v a i l a b l e t o the r e s e a r c h e r by p r o v i n c i a l o f f i c i a l s NFU.  artic-  completed by randomly drawn r e s p o n d e n t s ,  have n o t been i n c l u d e d i n t h e a n a l y s e s An  It  s u c c e s s f u l on a l l  o t h e r items were added, and t h e w o r d i n g o f some changed.  The  opportunity  persuasions.  a q u e s t i o n n a i r e was  o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n the p r o v i n c e  was  l o n g been  o f farmers o b t a i n e d from the D i s t r i c t  o f B a r r h e a d , Lac Ste Anne, and W e s t l o c k .  i n t h e sense t h a t i t was  Agriculturalists The  extremely u n l i k e l y t h a t  D.A.  files  practising  63-  farmers were absent from them; t h e y were u n r e l i a b l e i n the sense  of  i n c l u d i n g n o t o n l y people f a r m i n g , b u t as w e l l , people i n t e r e s t e d i n farming.  Where p o s s i b l e , t h e l i s t  knowledgeable  o f t h e a r e a who  o f f a r m e r s was  v a l i d a t e d by  c o u l d e l i m i n a t e non-farmers.  u n f o r t u n a t e l y , p o s s i b l e i n o n l y one  farmers  This  was,  county.  Farmers i n b o t h s t u d y groups were i n i t i a l l y c o n t a c t e d by a l e t t e r i n f o r m i n g them o f the r e s e a r c h e r ' s i n t e r e s t i n i n t e r v i e w i n g them and o f the n a t u r e o f the q u e s t i o n n a i r e t h e y would be asked t o r e s p o n d t o . I n t e r v i e w d a t e s were s e t by  t e l e p h o n e and the i n t e r v i e w s were  conducted 1974.  i n t h e r e s p o n d e n t s ' homes i n the months o f September and October, The normal h a l f hours.  l e n g t h o f the i n t e r v i e w ranged between two  and two  and  one  T h a t so few f a r m e r s f a i l e d t o c o - o p e r a t e and t h a t almost a l l  a v a i l e d the r e s e a r c h e r o f so much o f t h e i r time i s , I b e l i e v e ,  testimony  o f the e x t e n t t o w h i c h t h e y found the e x p e r i e n c e an i n t e r e s t i n g  one.  5 Of t h e o r i g i n a l t a r g e t , t h r e e r e f u s a l s , o f f i v e farmers who removal  o f two  elimination  c o u l d n o t be c o n t a c t e d a f t e r t h r e e attempts,  farmers who  had been i n t e r v i e w e d b u t who  and the d e l e t i o n o f a f u r t h e r two who  had been w o r k i n g  the p a s t y e a r , brought t h e f i g u r e s t o 4-3 NFU 2.  the  the  were s e m i - r e t i r e d , o f f the farm f o r  members and kj> non-NFU f a r m e r s .  The M a i l Q u e s t i o n n a i r e I n o r d e r t o augment t h e s i z e o f b o t h s t u d y groups  and t o  i n c r e a s e the g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y o f the r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s , the r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n n a i r e was  m a i l e d t o a randomly drawn sample o f 300  p r o v i n c e as a whole.  f a r m e r s i n the  T h i s a s p e c t o f the sampling d e s i g n was  b e s e t by a  problem which had n o t been as acute i n the g a t h e r i n g o f the p e r s o n a l interviews.  The  d i f f i c u l t y i n v o l v e d the census d e f i n i t i o n o f a  'farmer'.  64.  The 196l, 1966,  and 1971  census of Canada define a census farm as an  a g r i c u l t u r a l holding of one acre or more with sales of a g r i c u l t u r a l produce during the preceding twelve months of $50 or more. ion  The d e f i n i t -  i s unduly generous, defining as a farmer anyone who produces foodstuffs  grossing at l e a s t $50 annually.  I t includes as farmers large numbers  of people who do not depend upon farming f o r t h e i r l i v e l i h o o d ; people, for  example, who farm as a hobby or tax dodge; and semi-retired and  r e t i r e d farmers who may continue to produce small quantities of foods t u f f s but who are not dependent upon farming (but rather upon pensions) for  the major source of t h e i r income.  The d e f i n i t i o n admits, as w e l l ,  corporate enterprises engaged i n farming.  The imprecise d e f i n i t i o n of  "farmer" posed problems f o r the s e l e c t i o n of the farmers to whom questionnaires would be mailed because t h i s sample was drawn from a l i s t of 8 4 8 farmers who had been randomly drawn from the S t a t i s t i c s Canada census l i s t of a l l farmers i n the province of A l b e r t a . ^  Three hundred  Farmers  were randomly drawn from t h i s l i s t by the method of the table of random numbers and questionnaires were mailed to them.  Of these, 47 questionnaires  were returned by f u l l - t i m e farmers, s u f f i c i e n t l y completed to enable t h e i r i n c l u s i o n i n the analysis.  A further twelve which were returned were  deleted f o r one of two reasons:  the p o t e n t i a l respondent was no longer  farming or he was r e c e i v i n g the bulk of h i s income from off-farm employment. off  In many of the l a t t e r instances, the i n d i v i d u a l had been working  the farm f o r a number of years.  A more precise census d e f i n i t i o n of  'farmer' would have eliminated such people from the universe of farmers, avoided an unnecessary expense of money and time on the researcher's part, and i n d i r e c t l y could have resulted i n a higher response rate.  And, of .  65.  course,  .  t h e r e i s no way o f knowing how many q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were n o t  r e t u r n e d because t h e p o t e n t i a l respondent no l o n g e r saw h i m s e l f as f i t t i n g i n t o the category The  of  "farmer".  m a i l q u e s t i o n n a i r e s r e t u r n e d b o l s t e r t h e NFU study  group  by f i v e members t o a t o t a l N o f 4 8 and t h e non-NFU group by a f u r t h e r 4 2 farmers  t o a t o t a l N o f 85 farmers;  these  a r e t h e groups c o n t r a s t e d  i n the f o l l o w i n g analyses unless i t i s s p e c i f i e d Comparability  otherwise.  o f Study Groups  To what e x t e n t does amalgamation o f t h e m a i l w i t h the i n t e r v i e w schedules groups?  a l t e r the composition  S i n c e t h e m a i l group o f NFU farmers  questionnaires  o f t h e two study  i s comprised o f o n l y 5 f a r m e r s ,  f o r t h e purposes o f t h i s d i s c u s s i o n t h e NFU and Non-NFU i n t e r v i e w  schedules  are j o i n t l y c o n t r a s t e d w i t h t h e combined NFU and Non-NFU m a i l q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . The  comparison o f f i r s t l y t h e two d i f f e r e n t samples i n T a b l e s  3.2  and 3*3,  f o l l o w e d by a c o n t r a s t o f . t h e s e t a b l e s w i t h T a b l e 3-1  indicates that  the e f f e c t o f a d d i n g  i s t o make t h e NFU  t h e m a i l and i n t e r v i e w s c h e d u l e s  and non-NFU study groups more l i k e t h e p r o v i n c e as a whole t h a n would otherwise  have been t h e case.  (This i s p a r t i c u l a r l y true with  respect  t o t h e Non-NFU group.) S i n c e i t i s t h e c r i t e r i o n o f NFU v e r s u s non-NFU (and n o t i n t e r v i e w v e r s u s m a i l ) w h i c h d e f i n e s t h e two d a t a s e t s i n t h e t h e s i s a n a l y s i s , the question of the g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y of research f i n d i n g s r e v o l v e s around t h e c o m p a r a b i l i t y o f t h e NFU and non-NFU groups 3.3 and 3.4)  and t h e p r o v i n c e as a whole ( T a b l e 3 - l ) .  (Tables  66. Table 3.2  A Comparison of the Interview and M a i l Groups  Interview (N=86)  Mail (N=47)  (NFU & Non-NFU)  (NFU & Non-NFU)  Birthplace  80.4 4.3 2.2 •4.4  62.8 2.3 5.9 8.2 .  Canada United States Northern Europe Western Europe Southern Europe Eastern Europe  20.9  8^7  100.1  100.0  Religious A f f i l i a t i o n  30.2 23-3 18.6 12.8 15.1  13.6 38.6 27.3 6.8 13.6  100.0  99.9  66.3 18.6  -  29.8 34.0 12.8 6.4 4.3 2.1 6.4 4.3  100.1  100.1  European Protestant Anglo-Protestant Catholic Evangelical Protestant Not a f f i l i a t e d  Primary Product Raised Mixed C a t t l e , hogs Wheat *Feed Grains Dairy F i e l d Crops Other Missing  14.0  1.2 _ _  *Feed Grains, as a category used by farmers themselves, approximates the "Small Grains" census category i n Table 3.1 Table 3-3  Mean Market Value, Income, Farm Size, Years of School, and Age of NFU, Non-NFU, Interview and M a i l Questionnaire Groups. NFU  Market Value Net Income # acres owned # acres operated # years school Age  Non-NFU  $128,800 $150,300 $ 5,170 $ 6,870 493 915 8.6  46.6  588 787 9-3  48.9  Interview  Mail  $117,100 $ 5,490  $191,600 $ 9,080  491 722 8.3  47.6  717 1039 10.5  48.9  67.  1.  The NFU and non-NFU Groups and the Province as a Whole . Differences of r e l i g i o u s a f f i l i a t i o n , type of farming, and  estimated market value of farm prevail.- F i r s t , both the NFU and nonNFU groups d i f f e r from the province as a whole i n being more EasternEuropean born, less Anglo-Protestant, and more u n a f f i l i a t e d r e l i g i o u s l y . The NFU contains more European Protestants than the province as a whole; the non-NFU group, more E v a n g e l i c a l Protestants.  I t i s suggested that  these differences r e f l e c t the f a c t that the period of settlement of Northern A l b e r t a (from where the bulk of the NFU group and one h a l f the non-NFU group are drawn) was l a t e r than that of Southern A l b e r t a and consequently involved more people from Eastern Europe and fewer B r i t i s h and American immigrants.  (Hiller:112-115)  The differences also r e f l e c t  the greater tendency of Eastern Europeans to c l u s t e r i n one geographical area.  (Hiller:123,477-8)  The i n f l a t e d f i g u r e f o r E v a n g e l i c a l Protestants  i n the non-NFU group i s the consequence of a large Dutch settlement i n Census D i v i s i o n 13, the Dutch also being an ethnic group with a tendency to c l u s t e r .  (Hiller:477) Secondly, the two study groups have more farmers engaged  i n mixed farming.  Since the proportion of "mixed" farmers among the NFU  and non-NFU groups i s comparable t o that c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of a sample of  7 farmers included i n a random survey of the province i n 1971»  "the d i f -  ferences would appear t o be an a r t i f a c t of the census coding scheme not allowing "mixed" as an admissable category on the c r i t e r i o n of primary product raised. T h i r d l y , both the NFU and non-NFU farmers report a higher estimated market value f o r t h e i r farms than the 1971 Census farm c a p i t a l value average.  There are two possible explanations here.  One, the  68. Table 3.4  Comparison of NFU and Non-NFU Study Groups NFU  (N=48)  Non-NFU  (14=85)  Birthplace 12.~5% 4.3 2.1 6.4 14.9  Canada U.S.A. Northern Europe Western Europe Eastern Europe  100.0  61.1% 2.4 5-9 7.0 17.7  100.1  Religious A f f i l i a t i o n European Protestant . .Anglo-Protestant Catholic Evangelical Protestant Not a f f i l i a t e d  31'9 25.5 23.4 6.4 12.8  100.0  20.5 30.1 ' 20.5 13.3 15-7  100.1  Primary Product Raised Mixed C a t t l e , hogs Wheat *Feed grains Dairy F i e l d Crops Other  55-3 27.7 4.3 12.8 -  52.3 22.1 4.7 10.5 3-5 1-2 5.8  100.1  100.1  *This category i s s i m i l a r to the "Small Grains" category i n Table 3-1  differences could be the spurious e f f e c t of the census data having been gathered i n 1971 and the study group data i n 197^.  The trend over t h i s  period has been towards l a r g e r and more c a p i t a l intensive farms.  A  second possible explanation i s that farmers, f e a r f u l of census information f a l l i n g into the hands of income tax o f f i c i a l s , under-value farm value f o r census-taking purposes.  their  69.  Whether the unrepresentativeness of the study groups on these c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w i l l l i m i t the g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y of the research findings w i l l , of course, be contingent upon the extent to which these factors are important determinants of farmers' b e l i e f 2.  systems.  NFU versus Non-NFU Groups And f i n a l l y , since the focus of the thesis i s upon these  groups, i t may be u s e f u l to note b r i e f l y the s i m i l a r i t i e s and.differences of the NFU and non-NFU farmers. In terms of Tables 3-3 and J>.k, any differences of education, age, and type of farming engaged i n are s l i g h t .  The non-NFU farmers  assess the market value of t h e i r farms as greater and declare s l i g h t l y higher net incomes.  They own s l i g h t l y larger farms, although they do  not operate more acres.  The non-NFU group i s s l i g h t l y less Canadian  and s l i g h t l y more Eastern European born.  I t has, compared t o the NFU  group, more farmers with Evangelical Protestant a f f i l i a t i o n s and less with European Protestant t i e s .  In general, then, the non-NFU group seems  to be s l i g h t l y better o f f , and i s less Canadian-born  and less  orthodox  in i t s religious a f f i l i a t i o n . With the sampling method defined and the nature of the two study groups described, i t i s now possible to move t o the empirical inquiry into the content of farmers' p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f  systems.  70. Notes on Chapter 3 1  The number of acres owned may differ from the number of acres operated since farmers may farm land that they rent or lease.  2  There are NFU districts, such as the d i s t r i c t encompassing the Peace River Block, where membership is higher. There are also parts of the province - south of the city of Red Deer - that have not yet been organized by the NFU.  3  The United Farmers of Alberta d i s t r i c t organizations, established i n the early part of the twentieth century, served as guidelines i n the setting of NFU d i s t r i c t boundaries.  4  The alternative to using these l i s t s of District Agriculturalists was to compile a l i s t of farmers from the County and Municipal maps. This approach was rejected because the D.A.'s l i s t s had been drawn from such maps and because for two of the three counties no current map could be obtained. Those available were described as being hopelessly outdated as a result of the high turnover of land i n some areas.  5  In the case of the refusals, one farmer was i n the midst of harvesting; another was angry with "snoopy governmental o f f i c i a l s " and could not be persuaded that the interviewer was not one; and the third had reluctantly agreed to an interview time but was absent from his home when the researcher arrived.  6  This l i s t of 848 farmers was compiled by o f f i c i a l s i n the Federal Department of Agriculture for the Alberta Department of Agriculture. It was generously made available to me by Mr. Hugh Bryce of the Marketing Division of the Alberta Department of Agriculture.  7  62.5$ farmers (N=l44) described themselves as mixed farmers in the Alberta 1971 post-electoral survey. The principal researcher of this Canada Council sponsored project was Professor Richard Baird, Department of P o l i t i c a l Science, University of Alberta.  71 Chapter Cognitive B e l i e f s :  k How  the System Works  This chapter and the subsequent one document the  content  of selected aspects of farmers' cognitions, and evaluations of the marketing and p o l i t i c a l systems i n which they function.  Both chapters  examine i n d e t a i l the attitudes by which the two groups of farmers can be distinguished.  In order to f a c i l i t a t e a general appraisal of the  perspectives of the two groups, conservative, l i b e r a l , and r a d i c a l responses are defined on each of the dimensions.  I t thereby becomes  possible to examine the " i d e o l o g i c a l " consensus within each of the  two  study groups (NFU and non-NFU members) as w e l l as the " i d e o l o g i c a l " contrasts betweeen the two groups. does a few important  This analysis, pinpointing as i t  inter-group differences i n the midst of several  s i m i l a r i t i e s of perspective, suggests the s l i g h t l y greater extent to which the attitudes of the NFU members predispose them to c o l l e c t i v e and p o l i t i c a l action. Findings are reported i n two steps. the two study groups i s outlined:  F i r s t , a p r o f i l e of  the views of the NFU members and  NFU non-members are reported and contrasted.  And secondly, by way  e s t a b l i s h i n g the status of these evaluations and cognitions as responses,  of  enduring  the i n t e r - i t e m a s s o c i a t i o n of the i n d i v i d u a l measures w i t h i n  each of the two groups i s d e t a i l e d .  The strength of association i s generally  such as to a f f i r m the a t t i t u d i n a l status of these  responses.  72.  I.  The Perceived Locus of Control As part of i t s world view, an ideology includes assumptions  about causation - "the frame of reference with which the ideology understands events and processes"." " 1  ism and l i b e r a l i s m may  Dolbeare and Dolbeare argue that  conservat-  be distinguished from more r a d i c a l ideologies i n  t h e i r tendency to search f o r the causes of events i n i n d i v i d u a l actions. (1973: 26l)  The  strength of individualism as a component of a l i b e r a l  perspective means that i n d i v i d u a l s are held responsible f o r t h e i r actions and l o t i n l i f e .  own  This assumption of i n d i v i d u a l causation occurs  as w e l l i n some s t r a i n s of conservatism ( i n d i v i d u a l i s t conservatism) but not i n others  (organic conservatism).  For s o c i a l i s t s , on the other hand,  a causal analysis i s u s u a l l y a s t r u c t u r a l analysis and one which focuses on phenomena external to i n d i v i d u a l s .  Since p o l i t i c a l power resides with  economic forces, the explanation of p o l i t i c a l events w i l l include a focus upon the economic system. (Dolbeare and Dolbeare:  262)  I t i s suggested that ideologies, or more s p e c i f i c a l l y , conservatism and radicalism/socialism can be distinguished i n terms of t h e i r assumptions regarding the perceived locus of c o n t r o l .  Psychological  journals have i n the past two decades abounded x^th a r t i c l e s t r e a t i n g  2 just such a v a r i a b l e as a personality a t t r i b u t e .  I t i s , however, be-  coming i n c r e a s i n g l y clear that the variable taps i d e o l o g i c a l b e l i e f s as well.  Repeated f a c t o r analyses  on d i f f e r e n t samples of the i n t e r n a l i t y -  e x t e r n a l i t y measure developed by Rotter et a l . to tap a b e l i e f i n i n t e r n a l external control have yielded several a n a l y t i c a l l y d i s t i n c t components. Mirels found two factors which he l a b e l l e d Feelings of Personal Mastery and Feelings of P o l i t i c a l Control: the former measures "a b e l i e f  concerning  73.  f e l t mastery over the course of one's l i f e " ; the second, "a b e l i e f concerning  the extent to which the i n d i v i d u a l c i t i z e n i s deemed capable of exerting  an impact on p o l i t i c a l i n s t i t u t i o n s " .  (1970: 226-228) The l a t t e r , I  suggest, i s what scholars t y p i c a l l y r e f e r to as a f e e l i n g of p o l i t i c a l efficacy. The research of Gurin and associates showed the Rotter measure to be multi-dimensional i n the sense of tapping not only the two  dimensions  which M i r e l s i s o l a t e d but, i n addition, an I n d i v i d u a l versus Systemic Blame f a c t o r and an I n d i v i d u a l i s t i c versus C o l l e c t i v i s t Orientation factor."^ The Individual versus Systemic Blame f a c t o r i s interpreted as an  assessment  of whether i n d i v i d u a l q u a l i t i e s of the person or s o c i a l system factors are perceived as key determinants of h i s f a t e .  The I n d i v i d u a l i s t i c versus  C o l l e c t i v i s t Orientation f a c t o r i s viewed as d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between i n d i v i d u als who  advocate i n d i v i d u a l e f f o r t and mobility rather than group a c t i o n  as the best way to r e a l i z e goals. I t i s posited here that three of the four dimensions of locus of  control i s o l a t e d by Gurin and associates are important i n d i s t i n g u i s h i n g  the conservative or l i b e r a l from the r a d i c a l / s o c i a l i s t :  Control Ideology,  Individual versus Systemic Blame, and I n d i v i d u a l i s t versus C o l l e c t i v i s t Orientation.  The Personal Control factor, which seems to measure whether  the i n d i v i d u a l f e e l s he has control over h i s own l i f e appears to be both a r e a l i t y - t e s t i n g measure as w e l l as a personality variable and not necessa r i l y an i d e o l o g i c a l one.  The more general Control Ideology dimension  allows f o r the p o s s i b i l i t y that while the i n d i v i d u a l may f e e l he has personal control over h i s own " l i f e space", people i n general do not.  The  Individual versus Systemic Blame dimension i s -perceived by the researcher  74.  to be a more s p e c i f i c measure than Control Ideology but one of the same e s s e n t i a l type:  whether the i n d i v i d u a l blames himself or external others  f o r what happens to him w i l l r e f l e c t and be dependent upon the r o l e he accords to i n t e r n a l and external forces i n determining events as a whole. Conservatives and l i b e r a l s w i l l be i n t e r n a l l y oriented on the whole and a t t r i b u t e a larger determinant role to i n t e r n a l ( i n d i v i d u a l ) factors than to external forces.  The s o c i a l i s t / r a d i c a l would do the opposite.  With  respect to the t h i r d dimension, the c o l l e c t i v i s t versus i n d i v i d u a l i s t orientation, conservatives and l i b e r a l s would again be i n d i v i d u a l l y oriented; r a d i c a l / s o c i a l i s t s , c o l l e c t i v e l y oriented. of control externalized from i n d i v i d u a l farmers.  The NFU o f f i c i a l view i s Because of t h i s s i t u a t i o n ,  one u n i f i e d n a t i o n a l organization of farmers i s a pre-requisite to governments' i n v i t i n g farmers i n t o t h e i r chambers to allow farmers a say i n the important decisions that a f f e c t t h e i r l i v e s .  The locus of control  w i l l continue to l i e outside the i n d i v i d u a l farmer, but w i l l be shared by governments, farmers through t h e i r farm organizations, and other appropriate  5 organizations. In t h i s research three aspects of i n t e r n a l i t y - e x t e r n a l i t y of locus of control are examined:  i n d i v i d u a l versus systemic blame, the  p r o c l i v i t y towards i n d i v i d u a l i s t or c o l l e c t i v i s t action, and the sense of personal c o n t r o l .  This analysis i s viewed as a means by which to e s t a b l i s h  the parameters of farmers' b e l i e f systems; more s p e c i f i c a l l y , the salience of the external world to t h e i r l i v e s . A.  Individual versus Systemic Blame Three items are used to tap t h i s locus of control dimension.  Farmers were queried as to where they view control as r e s i d i n g i n two current-problem areas:  the cost-price squeeze and the decline of the family  75.  farm.  A t h i r d item assesses r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a more ongoing d i f f i c u l t y  - farmers lack of success at obtaining "a good deal" from governments. In a l l instances, questions were open-ended; i n t e r n a l i t y - e x t e r n a l i t y i s thus assessed on the basis of volunteered responses. 1.  A t t r i b u t i o n of Blame f o r the Cost-Price Squeeze Most Canadian farmers have i n the past few years been experien-  cing what has come to be known as a cost-price squeeze.  Very simply t h i s  term refers to the costs of production r i s i n g at a more rapid rate than the prices farmers receive f o r t h e i r produce so that p r o f i t s are minimal or non-existent.  Because t h i s phenomenon i s one of which v i r t u a l l y a l l  farmers are aware (87% of the t o t a l study group) as w e l l as one which f o u r - f i f t h s were experiencing, i t was f e l t that information concerning both whom they blamed f o r the squeeze and who they f e l t could do something about i t would provide a measure of the i n t e r n a l i t y - e x t e r n a l i t y of control. Two questions were posed to the farmer. opinion i s to blame f o r the cost-price squeeze?" body can do about the cost-price squeeze?" are  "Who  or what i n your  "Is there anything any-  Responses to the two queries  reported i n Table 4.1. The two groups of farmers externalize both the blame f o r the  cost-price squeeze and the locus of control to do something to h a l t i t : the former p r i n c i p a l l y to extra-governmental forces, the l a t t e r mainly to the government.  The extra-governmental forces blamed f o r the squeeze i n  order of the frequency with which they are mentioned, include b i g businesses and/or corporations, speculators, labour and s t r i k e s , and a host of less tangible forces - i n f l a t i o n , society as a whole, the energy c r i s i s , the  76. Table 4.1  Individual versus Systemic Blame Regarding the Cost-Price Squeeze: NFU and Non-NFU Groups. NFU  a.  (N=48)  Non-NFU (N=85)  Who i s to blame?  Extra-Governmental forces Government with others Government alone Farmers: alone/with others missing data  44.7% 25.5 19.110.6  (21) (12) ( 9) ( 5) ( 1)  43.9% 25.6 20.7 9.8 100.0%  99-9% b.  (36) (21) (17) ( 8) ( 3)  Can anybody act re squeeze?  Government Nobody Farmers . Gov't. & Farmers *Extra-Governmental Forces Gov't. & Extra-Gov'tal Forces Missing data  55.6% 20.0 17.8 4.4 2.2 —  (25) ( 9) ( 8) ( 2) ( 1)'  • 52.1$ 24.7 9.6 4.1 6.9 2.7  ( 3)  (38) (18) ( 7) ( 3) ( 5) ( 2) (12)  100.1%  100.0%  ^Includes "Society as a whole" and the s p e c i f i c a t i o n of middlemen.  monetary system, i n t e r n a t i o n a l forces, human nature, supply and demand, and consumers.  NFU members are s l i g h t l y more i n c l i n e d t o single out b i g  business; non-NFU farmers to blame labour and s t r i k e s .  When the government  i s blamed (either the Federal or P r o v i n c i a l Government, sometimes both), i t i s more frequently f o r doing nothing to a l l e v i a t e the squeeze than f o r creating or exacerbating i t by i n t e r f e r i n g actions. While o n e - f i f t h NFU farmers and one-quarter non-members f e e l there i s nothing anybody can do about the cost-price squeeze, over one-half the farmers i n both study groups point to either the Federal or P r o v i n c i a l government as capable of acting on the squeeze.  The implication i s that  farmers i n both groups do not see the problem - or the world, f o r that matter - as being so complex that they cannot i d e n t i f y who has the power or r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o deal with the problem a f f l i c t i r i g them.  772.  A t t r i b u t i o n of Blame f o r the Disappearance of the Family Farm Whereas the cost-price squeeze i s an immediate problem which  confronts farmers d a i l y , the decline of the family farm as Canadians have knoxm i t may be a more remote but no less r e a l concern.  In the l a s t decade,  the migration from farm to urban centre has accelerated.  I t i s estimated  that currently 10,000 farmers leave the land every year.  ( M i t c h e l l : 6)  Why?  In most farmers' minds, i t i s the cost-price squeeze and income problems generally that are to blame. two farmer groups.  Table 4.2  gives the relevant figures f o r the  As blame f o r that squeeze i s most frequently e x t e r n a l i z -  ed, i t may be concluded that the source of t h i s problem i s seen to l i e outside farmers themselves.  Table 4.2  A t t r i b u t i o n of Blame f o r the Disappearance of the Family Farm: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  NFU (N-48) Cost-price squeeze Squeeze & unattractiveness Unattractiveness of farming Squeeze & farmers' f a u l t Gov'tal. P o l i c y Farmers' f a u l t Gov't. & Farmers' f a u l t Gov't. & unattractiveness Farmers' f a u l t & unattract. missing data  60.4$ 16.6 10.4 4.2 2.1 2.1 2.1 _  2.1 100.0^  3.  (29) ( 8) ( 5) ( 2) (1) (1) (1)  Non-NFU 57.8# 24.2 6.0 2.4 2.4 3.6 —  2.4 1.2  (1)  (N-85) (48) (20) ( 5) ( 2) ( 2) ( 3)  -  ( 2) (1) ( 2)  100.0^  A t t r i b u t i o n of Blame f o r Farmers' Lack of Success with Governments Following a series of questions assessing the respondent's  evaluations of the a b i l i t y of farmers to "get a good deal" from the P r o v i n c i a l and Federal Governments, those farmers who assessed that record as "generally unsuccessful" were asked why they thought farmers and farm '  78. organizations had been unsuccessful.  Reasons volunteered have been  collapsed into categories which a f f i x the blame to farmers and/or farm organizations, to government(s), to both farmers and government, or to the minority p o s i t i o n of farmers i n the t o t a l population.  The l a t t e r i s a  "non-blame" response - the g i s t of t h i s response being that because the urban areas and consumers have the majority of the votes, and farmers are a p o l i t i c a l minority, the government i s necessarily preoccupied with urban, and consumer problems and demands. Table 4.3  A t t r i b u t i o n of Blame f o r Farmers' Relative Lack of Success -with Governments: NFU and Non-NFU-Groups NFU  (N=48)  Non-NFU  (N=85)  Farmers' f a u l t Gov't.'s f a u l t Minority P o s i t i o n Gov't. & Farmers' f a u l t missing data  58.3^ 14.6 8.3 6.3  (28) ( 7) ( 4) ( 3)  32.9^ 13.4 28.0 2.4  (27) (11) (23) ( 2) ( 3)  Inapplicable - farmers been successful  12.5  ( 6)  23.2  (19)  100.0%  99.9^  Table 4.3 indicates that while non-members of the NFU divide between blaming farmers themselves and not blaming anyone f o r farmers' r e l a t i v e lack of success, NFU members are much more i n c l i n e d to a f f i x the blame to farmers themselves - to farmers f o r being too i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c and self-centred to organize themselves into unions, and less frequently f o r having no understanding of t h e i r s i t u a t i o n and/or f o r asking f o r too much.  The f a u l t i s also seen to l i e with weak farm organizations - weak  because of t h e i r l i m i t e d membership and c o n f l i c t i n g public utterances.  79.  Limited and equal proportions of farmers i n both study groups externalize the blame f o r farmers' lack of success to the government(s).  These farmers  blame the government f o r being apathetic, f o r being d e l i b e r a t e l y a n t i farmer ("having a cheap food p o l i c y " ) , giving "handouts to p a c i f y farmers when things are rough just t o keep farmers on the farm", and f o r having a L i b e r a l and Eastern-Canadian b i a s . In short, farmers i n both study groups, even though they may f e e l that i t i s not t h e i r f a u l t personally, but that of a l l the other farmers who are not cooperative, appear to blame themselves more than they blame the government f o r t h e i r perceived lack of success i n getting a good deal from government. NFU farmers extend the locus of control more widely than do nonNFU members, no doubt p a r t i a l l y because they a f f i r m the p o s s i b i l i t y of c o l l e c t i v e action by NFU members to achieve desired goals. B.  The I n d i v i d u a l i s t versus C o l l e c t i v i s t Orientation Two open-ended items, one s l i g h t l y more directed than the other,  ascertain the i n d i v i d u a l i s t - c o l l e c t i v i s t o r i e n t a t i o n of farmers i n the two study groups. 1.  A b i l i t y of farmers to act regarding the Cost-Price Squeeze A presupposition t o both a c o l l e c t i v i s t and an i n d i v i d u a l i s t  o r i e n t a t i o n to solving problems i n the p o l i t i c a l arena i s the b e l i e f that one can be e f f e c t i v e at a l l . groups concerning t h i s b e l i e f .  There are important differences i n the study F i r s t l y , when asked whether there was  "anything you can do about the cost-price squeeze", whereas one-third of the NFU members f e l t there was not, the figure climbed to k6% f o r the nonNFU farmers.  (See Table k.k)  C l e a r l y , more so f o r non-NFU members than  80.  f o r members, the locus of control to deal with a current problem l i e s  7 outside themselves.  These differences are not e n t i r e l y the a r t i f a c t of  the comparison of members of an organization (and presumably i n d i v i d u a l s who believe i n the e f f i c a c y of t h e i r action) with non-members since just under two-fifths of the l a t t e r do indeed belong to another farm organization. Secondly, as anticipated, NFU members are much more c o l l e c t i v e l y d i r e c t e d than non-members, suggesting that they could do something about the squeeze by organizing and supporting a farmers' union or by s t r i k i n g or engaging i n a withholding action.  The kinds of a c t i v i t i e s mentioned more frequently  by non-members were actions they could undertake on t h e i r own - such as c o n t r o l l i n g t h e i r own spending and t r y i n g to keep t h e i r costs down, cutting back production, working harder, and even, as a l a s t r e s o r t , q u i t t i n g farming. Table  k.k  I n d i v i d u a l i s t versus C o l l e c t i v i s t Action on the Cost-Price Squeeze: NFU and Non-NFU Groups. NFU  Social/political activity No action possible Personal/nonpol. a c t i v i t y S o c i a l & personal a c t i v i t y missing data  (N=48)  45-75I 32.6 19.6 2.2  Non-NFU  (N=85)  20.2$  (17) (39) , (25) ( 3)  (21) (15) ( 9) ( l)  29.8 3.6  ( 2) 100.1$t  2.  h6A  ( l)  100.0$  A b i l i t y of farmers to organize as a p o l i t i c a l group As a second estimate  of c o l l e c t i v e versus i n d i v i d u a l orientations,  farmers were questioned as t o the p o s s i b i l i t y of t h e i r organizing p o l i t i c a l l y . The import of the question was organization i n the form of a p o l i t i c a l group rather than an i n t e r e s t group:  the question was "What do you think about the  81. i d e a o f f a r m e r s o r g a n i z i n g t o g e t h e r t o form a p o l i t i c a l group  today,  n o m i n a t i n g c a n d i d a t e s and t r y i n g t o g e t them e l e c t e d i n o r d e r t o form the government here i n A l b e r t a ?  Do you t h i n k i t ' s  a realistic  idea - that i s , Q  i s i t l i k e l y t h a t farmers c o u l d g e t t o g e t h e r and form a p o l i t i c a l While  group?"  o n e - q u a r t e r o f non-members a f f i r m the p o s s i b i l i t y o f t h i s , J>6% o f  NFU members f e e l farmers c o u l d o r g a n i z e i n t o a p o l i t i c a l group. f i g u r e s are g i v e n i n T a b l e 4.5)  Those who  (These  r e p l i e d i n the n e g a t i v e were  probed as t o t h e i r s k e p t i c i s m o f a f a r m e r s ' p o l i t i c a l  organization.  C o n t r a r y t o the e a r l i e r i n c l i n a t i o n f o r NFU members t o be more i n c l i n e d t o blame farmers and farm o r g a n i z a t i o n s f o r farmers n o t g e t t i n g a b e t t e r b a r g a i n from government, i t i s now  non-members who  pose l i m i t a t i o n s  f a r m e r s as t h e g r e a t e s t o b s t a c l e t o t h e i r c o l l e c t i v e p o l i t i c a l NFU  of  mobilization.  farmers are s l i g h t l y more l i k e l y t o r e f e r t o t h e m i n o r i t y s i t u a t i o n o f  f a r m e r s i n the p o p u l a t i o n (and hence p o l i t i c a l l y ) t h a n t o a t t r i b u t e s  of  farmers and t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n d e n y i n g the f e a s i b i l i t y o f f o r m i n g a p o l i t i c a l group T a b l e 4.5  of farmers. A b i l i t y o f Farmers t o Organize as a P o l i t i c a l Group: NFU and Non-NFU Groups NFU  Could organize Unable t o o r g a n i z e . Farmers' f a u l t Minority situation Both farmers' & m i n o r i t y M i s s i n g data  (N=48)  Non-NFU  (N=85)  36.0% (15)  25.7% (18)  31.0 33-0  45-7 22.9 5.7  (13) (14) ( 6)  100.0%  100.0%  (32) (16) ( 4) (15)  82.  The  i m p l i c a t i o n , then, i s that i f control i s to reside i-ri-th  farmers, f o r NFU members i t i s by means of a c o l l e c t i v e a c t i o n on the part of farmers through an i n t e r e s t group rather than a p o l i t i c a l  organization.  Non-members of the NFU, on the other hand, maybe because of the lower v i s i b i l i t y of the i n t e r e s t group as a v e h i c l e of action, p o s s i b l y as w e l l because they deny i t s v i a b i l i t y , are more l i k e l y t o f e e l that any e f f e c t i v e action w i l l be an i n d i v i d u a l one. Thus, while there are no differences i n the two groups i n the e x t e r n a l i z i n g of f a u l t f o r two current economic problems, there are discrepancies i n the mode of a c t i o n that farmer i n i t i a t i v e s ought to take to secure p o l i t i c a l goods. The  foregoing cognitions are parameter b e l i e f s - t h e i r  ence affirms a perception of the relevance farmer's l i f e and outlook.  occur-  of the external world to the  Before leaving these items, t h e i r i n t e r - a s s o c i -  ation pattern i s examined to substantiate t h e i r character as enduring cognitions; t h e i r association with l i k e items confirms t h e i r status as attitudes rather than as opinions. Because of the m u l t i p l i c i t y of tables engendered by the i n t e r item tabulations of the locus of control measures, only the general of these tables are reported i n the text.  trends  The tables themselves, and a  more d e t a i l e d summary of t h e i r r e s u l t s are reported i n Appendix A. The  cross-tabulation of i n d i v i d u a l locus of control items  within the NFU group"^ reveals three consistent patterns.  F i r s t , NFU  members are consistent i n t h e i r b e l i e f i n the a b i l i t y of farmers to organize or engage i n j o i n t action.  Secondly, farmers who a f f i x blame  externally f o r one current problem tend t o view the locus of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to correct that problem as external t o the farmer.  Conversely, those who  83.  blame farmers themselves f o r one problem are i n c l i n e d to blame farmers f o r other problems.  T h i r d l y , NFU members who hold farmers themselves  responsible f o r t h e i r lack of success with governments and who the  affirm  v i a b i l i t y of farmer action on a current problem view power external-  ized to governments rather than to extra-governmental forces. Conversely, NFU farmers who  judge the locus of.control i n one problem area to reside  with extra-governmental forces deny the p o s s i b i l i t y of farmer action to correct the problem. Among non-NFU farmers, inter-item cross-tabulations indicate the  following trends.  F i r s t l y , non-members are f a i r l y consistent i n  a f f i x i n g blame to a given problem.  Secondly, there i s congruence i n  suggesting the l i m i t e d p o s s i b i l i t y of a c o l l e c t i v e action on the costp r i c e squeeze and f e e l i n g farmers could organize p o l i t i c a l l y .  Thirdly,  there i s a l i m i t e d i n d i c a t i o n that i n d i v i d u a l s who a t t r i b u t e the costp r i c e squeeze and/or farmers? lack of success with governments to c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of farmers themselves are more c o l l e c t i v i s t i c a l l y oriented. In short, there appears to be s u f f i c i e n t inter-item consistency within both groups to assure that these are f a i r l y stable perspectives regarding the i n t e r n a l i t y - e x t e r n a l i t y of the locus of control i n these problem areas. C.  Sense of Personal Control While a conservative economic p o s i t i o n as regards agriculture i  can sometimes be distinguished from a l i b e r a l or r a d i c a l one i n terms of i t s perception of the way i n which the economic system works,  84.  there i s as well an important element of reality-testing involved. However, how the individual orients himself and where he affixes blame and credit i n light of this reality-testing probably does distinguish ideologies. That i s , i t i s not the cognitions themselves but the evaluations pursuant upon those cognitions that are ideological. In the following section which describes how farmers perceive the system i n which they market their produce and buy their supplies, the items are probably most correctly viewed as realistic assessments of the degree of personal control. By way of a preface to subsequent findings, i t may be s i g n i f i c ant to note that analysts of the agricultural marketing and price system are virtually unanimous i n the observation that farmers have no a b i l i t y to control the price of their product or the cost of their supplies. This sentiment, argued i n i t i a l l y by V.C. and D.V. Fowke  (19682 : 10)  has been  more recently seconded by H. Bronson who describes farmers as operating in "a controlled and manipulated market".  (19721 : 23) Don Mitchell expands  upon Bronson's conclusion: Only agricultural resources and products, like land, wheat and livestock, have their price fate determined so completely by shifts i n supply and demand and by the speculative activity of grain brokers and petty investors. Other goods and services under capitalist production and markets are priced by the companies involved, primarily according to costs of production and profit objectives.  (19755 : 6)  1.  Perceptions of the Pricing System: How i t Works Clearly, farmers perceive themselves as functioning i n a system  in which they have no control over either the prices they receive for the produce they s e l l or the price they pay for the goods and supplies they buy.  When questioned, "How much control does the farmer have over the  prices he receives for his produce?", 94 % of NFU members and 79% of  85.  non-members said "none".  NFU members are s i g n i f i c a n t l y more l i k e l y to  f e e l they have no control at a l l over p r i c e s :  only 6 per cent of t h i s  group i n contrast t o 17.5 per cent of the non-member group f e e l farmers have "a l i t t l e " control over farm p r i c e s .  Only s l i g h t l y more farmers i n  both groups f e e l they have as l i t t l e control over the cost of t h e i r supplies. Again, 94% of NFU farmers responded with "none" when queried as to the amount of control the farmer has over the costs of supplies l i k e b u i l d i n g materials, f u e l , not  f e r t i l i z e r s , and machinery.  The non-NFU farmers are  f a r behind; 85% of them state they have no control over input costs.  The remainder of both groups assessed that c o n t r o l as no greater than "only a l i t t l e " . In  short, the farmers' perceptions of the p r i c i n g system  c l o s e l y approximate those of p o l i t i c a l economists, and supposedly of reality.  But although the farmer himself may have none or l i t t l e  control,  he could s t i l l perceive the system to be one i n which he has as much control as anyone else i f he were to see i t as a non-manipulated  system  wherein the forces of supply and demand determine p r i c e s , or as one i n which producers and consumers a l i k e were subject to governmental  control.  Tables 4.6 and 4.7 give the range of responses to the questions of who controls the prices of farm produce and farm supplies, r e s p e c t i v e l y . ^ There are differences between the two groups of farmers; none, however, are s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t . NFU members a t t r i b u t e more control over farm prices  to corporations/middlemen alone or corporations/middle-  men and government together.  Neither group adhere very strongly t o the  perception of a free market system:  only 6.5%  and 17.3%  of NFU and non-  NFU members r e s p e c t i v e l y believe that supply and demand alone control  86.  farm produce p r i c e s .  However, rion-NFU members are more strongly i n c l i n e d  to suggest that supply and demand has something to do with the f i x i n g of  12 farm produce p r i c e s .  There i s , as w e l l , greater unanimity among members  as to where control resides; non-members divide t h e i r responses more evenly among the seven categories. Table 4.6  Perceived Locus of Control over Farm P r i c e s : NFU and Non-NFU Groups NFU £1  1 Corporations, middleman 2 Corporations & Gov't. 3 Corps. & Supply and demand 4 Corps., Gov't.,^& supply demand 5 Supply & demand 6 Gov't. & supply & demand 7 Government missing data  39.1$ 21.7 13.1 8.7 6.5 6.5 4.3 99.9$  (N=48)  18 (10) ( 6) ( 4) ( 3) ( 3) ( 2) ( 2)  Non-NFU  (N=85)  21.3$ 14.7 12.0 6.7 17.3 13.3 14.7  (16) (11) ( 9) ( 5) (13) (10) (ll)  (10) 100.0$  Si  Corporations: includes "Big Business"; "Industry"; "Middlemen" such as food processors, chain food stores, the r e t a i l e r , the wholesaler, packing plants; "The Winnipeg Grain Exchange"; "The Commodities Market"; "Speculators"; and "Unions". Supply and demand: refers to "The Consumers" (pressuring government, boycotting); "The International Market"; "The U.S. Market"; and "Supply and demand".  The Government: includes "The Canadian Wheat Board"; Marketing Boards; "The Government" ( l e v e l unspecified) or the Federal and P r o v i n c i a l Government as s p e c i f i e d .  The perspective of corporate control of farm p r i c e s as revealed here by members of the National Farmers Union p a r a l l e l s that of a r t i c l e s i n the NFU newspaper which r e f e r to "the existence of a managed market system and an administered price structure by the corporate i n d u s t r i a l complex" and the"oligopoly power of r e t a i l food chains making excess p r o f i t s "  87.  I t i s d i f f i c u l t to draw conclusions from Table 4 . 6 .  The impression i s that  NPU members are somewhat more i n c l i n e d thannon-members to believe that farm p r i c e s are manipulated.  NPU farmers appear to believe corporations  /  14  and/or middlemen monopolize p r i c e s e t t i n g .  On the other hand, the non-  NFU group seem to subscribe to a view of there being s u f f i c i e n t "fingers i n the p i e " - a p l u r a l i s t i c d i s t r i b u t i o n of control - to ensure that the 15 farmer i s not the v i c t i m of anyone's manipulation. While there i s no c l e a r perception of monopolistic control over foodstuff p r i c e s , there c e r t a i n l y i s with regard to machinery, f u e l , and other farm input costs.  Table 4 . 7 shows the majority of farmers  c r e d i t the manufacturer on h i s own or the manufacturer and the middleman together as determining the p r i c e the farmer pays bare.  The government i s  perceived t o have l i t t l e say, e i t h e r alone or with other agencies.  The  differences i n the perceptions of NFU and non-NFU members are small.  NFU  members are more unanimous i n viewing control as uni-dimensional and i n the hands of the manufacturer, and secondarily, the middleman.  Table 4 . 7  Locus of Control over Input Supplies Costs NFU  a  b  The manufacturer alone  69.6%  0thers  30.4  (N=48)  Non-NFU  (32)  6l.0%  (l4)  39.0  ( 2)  missing data  100.0%  (N-85) (47)  (50) ( 3)  100.0%  cl  The manufacturer alone: responses include "The Manufacturer"; c e r t a i n s p e c i f i e d manufacturers such as machine and f u e l companies; "Big Business"; "Industry"; "Corporations". Others: includes "The Manufacturer and Middlemen"; "The Government"; s p e c i f i e d middlemen such as " R e t a i l outlets"; "Labour"; "Unions"; "Everyone along the l i n e " ; "Supply and demand"; and combinations of these  88  2.  Perceptions of the Marketing System An important aspect of the market system with which the  farmers i n t e r a c t i s i t s provision f o r both "orderly" and "open" marketing of grain (wheat being exempted).  Orderly marketing refers to marketing  through the Canadian Wheat Board. orderly i n at least two senses:  Canadian Wheat Board marketing i s f i r s t l y , every farmer has  an equal  opportunity to market as ensured by the "orderly" provision of elevator cars throughout the Canadian Wheat Board region; and secondly, every farmer s e l l i n g t o the Canadian Wheat Board i s assured of the same p r i c e per bushel of grain, regardless of when he s e l l s .  Open marketing i s o f f -  Board marketing - the price the farmer receives i s the p r i c e of grain on the day he s e l l s , as established by bidding on the Winnipeg Grain Exchange. There i s no quota system of d e l i v e r y but rather grain s e l l e r s are received on a first-come f i r s t - s e r v e d basis.  Accordingly, there i s a greater amount  of speculation involved i n off-Board marketing.  The merit of the open  market system would appear to be higher i n i t i a l prices f o r the farmer who brings h i s grain to market early i n the harvesting season. I t i s d i f f i c u l t t o over-estimate the h i s t o r i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e of the Canadian Wheat Board.  When i t was established i n the 1930's as  a temporary agency and i n 19^3 as a permanent f i x t u r e , the Canadian Wheat Board represented the victorious culmination of a lengthy struggle f o r a compulsory pooling agency.  Since the early 1900's, p r a i r i e farmers had  been organizing themselves into Grain Growers movements i n an e f f o r t to wrest monopoly control over the marketing and s e l l i n g of grain from private dealers operating through the Winnipeg Grain Exchange.  The s i g n i f i c a n c e  89.  of the marketing issue manifested i t s e l f i n the sweep of the Progressive Party i n 1921.  In 1922, when the Farmers Union of Canada was  founded,  and l a t e r i n the mid 1920's, with the establishment of the three p r a i r i e Wheat Pools, the organization of farmers f o r the drive f o r the Wheat Board became more intense.  Part of that endeavour to persuade governments of  farmer support f o r a monopoly Pool to which a l l farmers would s e l l t h e i r grain was a massive campaign t o sign up a majority of a l l farmers.  Accord-  ingly, the eventual establishment of the Canadian Wheat Board and i t s continuation to the present day s i g n a l l e d then and continues to do so today a tangible symbol of the force of c o l l e c t i v e farmer mobilization. Farmers were asked whom they f e l t to be the b e n e f i c i a r i e s of open marketing.  The question, admittedly, does not n e c e s s a r i l y e l i c i t  an i d e o l o g i c a l p o s i t i o n . the  The respondent who believes the farmer i s not  b e n e f i c i a r y of open marketing may be a proponent of regulated marketing  and hence may be a non-conservative economically. He could, on the other hand, f e e l the farmer i s not the b e n e f i c i a r y because the free market i s not acting properly (that i s , as i t should) because i n d i v i d u a l s or the government are meddling with i t , and were there to be no meddling, a l l would be w e l l with the free market and the farmer. As Table 4.8 shows, while s l i g h t l y more than one-half the nonNFU members believe farmers to be the b e n e f i c i a r i e s of the open marketing system, the figure f o r NFU members i s much lower and i n f a c t , here, the majority of respondents f e e l i t i s not the farmer, but speculators and grain companies, who b e n e f i t c h i e f l y from open marketing.  While not  s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , these differences are substantively important  90.  (Gamma: .28)  Subsequent analyses show that i t i s c l e a r l y those farmers who  prefer to s e l l t h e i r grain o f f the Board who f e e l that the farmer benefits from the system.  Concomitantly,  farmers who prefer to market through the  Canadian Wheat Board perceive speculators to be the main b e n e f i c i a r i e s of open marketing.  (Gamma = .83; c h i square s i g n i f i c a n t at the .0001 l e v e l ;  Pearson r = .64; s i g n i f i c a n t at the .001 l e v e l . ) Table 4.8  Perceived Beneficiary of the Open Marketing System: NFU and Non-NFU Groups NFU  (N=48)  S p e c u l a t o r s , grain cos.  58.1$t (25)  ^The  37.2  (16)  4.7  ( 2)  farmer  Both speculators & Farmers ^missing data  Non-NFU  42.2$ (27) 51.6 (33) 6.3  ( 4) (21)  ( 5) 100.0$%  (N=85)  100.1$  Speculators: r e f e r s to "Private Grain Companies"; "Brokers"; "The Winnipeg Grain Exchange"; and.less frequently, "The Money Man", "Manipulators"; and "Middlemen". ^The  farmer: usually includes a q u a l i f i c a t i o n as t o the type of farmer: "The Bigger Farmer"; "Farmers who can hold o f f and s e l l when the p r i c e i s high"; "Farmers who run feedlots"; "Farmers who buy feed"; and so on.  Both speculators and farmers: A few farmers thought both the producer and the speculators benefitted. ^Don't know: The f a i r l y high proportion of "missing" responses on t h i s , item includes r e p l i e s from farmers f o r whom the question was not meaningful because they were not presently, or had never marketed grain. Most farmers not presently r a i s i n g grain f o r sale had done so i n the past and so had a preference. Twenty-six farmers f e l t u n q u a l i f i e d to make a choice. The thrust of the discussion to t h i s point has been to e s t a b l i s h i n a general way how the groups of farmers perceive the functioning of the market system.  This b r i e f inquiry has demonstrated both uniformity and  d i v e r s i t y i n the cognitions of the market system.  Farmers i n the two groups  91.  a r e v i r t u a l l y one i n t h e i r b e l i e f t h a t t h e y f u n c t i o n i n a market  system  i n which t h e y have no say - o r , a t b e s t , o n l y a l i t t l e  say -  system as r e g a r d s b o t h f o o d s t u f f s and m a t e r i a l s .  concur, as w e l l ,  i n the  judgment  They  i n the p r i c e  o f almost m o n o p o l i s t i c c o n t r o l by m a n u f a c t u r e r s t o f i x  f u e l , machinery, and o t h e r s u p p l y c o s t s .  T h i s degree o f c o n c u r r e n c e  between t h e f a r m e r s ' assessments and t h o s e o f p o l i t i c a l economists i s g r a t i f y i n g and may  be t a k e n as one t e s t i m o n y t h a t f a r m e r s  a s s e s s t h e i r p o s i t i o n i n t h e market m i n i m a l c o n t r o l over t h e p r i c e  realistically  system - a t l e a s t as r e g a r d s t h e i r  system.  Where t h e r e i s g r e a t e r d i v e r s i t y o f o p i n i o n i s j u s t where we would a n t i c i p a t e i t - on s p e c u l a t i o n as t o t h e way system works.  i n which t h e market  There i s a d i v i s i o n o f f a r m e r s as t o whether t h e market  system i s f r e e , r e g u l a t e d , o r m a n i p u l a t e d .  (See T a b l e 4 . 8 )  would appear t o endorse t h e assumptions o f t h e f r e e market; seem n o t t o .  o t h e r s would  I n s h o r t , t h e r e seems t o be a range o f p e r c e p t i o n s , some o f  which have i d e o l o g i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s , II.  Some f a r m e r s  i n t h e s t u d y group.  D i s t r i b u t i o n of Influence i n the P o l i t i c a l  System  The p r e c e d i n g s e c t i o n has documented b o t h t h a t few f a r m e r s i n e i t h e r group saw themselves as h a v i n g c o n t r o l over p r i c e s and c o s t s o f f o o d s t u f f s and s u p p l i e s , and, as w e l l ,  t h a t o n l y a l i m i t e d number o f  farmers a t t r i b u t e d much c o n t r o l t o governmental a g e n c i e s i n t h e a r e a o f price fixing.  To what e x t e n t i s the p e r c e p t i o n o f l i m i t e d p e r s o n a l and  governmental c o n t r o l i n t h i s s p e c i f i c a r e a o f p r i c e f i x i n g symptomatic the p e r c e i v e d d i s t r i b u t i o n o f p o l i t i c a l c o n t r o l g e n e r a l l y ? any d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e two groups i n t h i s r e g a r d ?  of  And a r e t h e r e  92.  The recognized r e l a t i v e strength of p o l i t i c a l and economic control i n the p o l i t i c a l system as a whole i s an important i n d i v i d u a l ' s b e l i e f system.  The s o c i a l i s t  d i s t r i b u t i o n of power whereby those who  aspect of an  ideology•posits an unequal  control the means of production  are the most powerful p o l i t i c a l l y i n the sense of being able to get t h e i r way.  Large corporations and middlemen, i n the s o c i a l i s t perspective, by  c o n t r o l l i n g the d i s t r i b u t i o n of wealth i n the economic system, have much to say about the d i s t r i b u t i o n of p o l i t i c a l goods and services.  A  liberal  perspective, on the other hand, tends to view p o l i t i c a l power as more broadly based; p o l i t i c a l power i s p l u r a l i s t i c a l l y tributed.  and i n d i v i d u a l l y d i s -  The p o l i t i c a l power of corporations i s counterbalanced  by that  of the l e g i t i m i z e d governing bodies and multiple i n t e r e s t groups which represent the v a r i e d i n t e r e s t s i n society. have access to the important vote p r i n c i p l e .  In addition, i n d i v i d u a l s  decision-makers by v i r t u e of the one man,  Like the s o c i a l i s t  one  outlook, the conservative perspective  i s one of p o l i t i c a l power as economically based.  Contrary to the  the conservative evaluates the economic base of p o l i t i c a l power  socialist, favorably.  The NPU" o f f i c i a l view of the d i s t r i b u t i o n and source of p o l i t i c a l power r e f l e c t s the s o c i a l i s t perspective:  the corporate e l i t e i s  judged to make the major decisions i n the country.  I f the p o l i t i c a l  authorities appear to act as though uninfluenced by b i g business, i t i s 17 because t h e i r i n t e r e s t s are synonymous. In t h i s study, farmers' images of the d i s t r i b u t i o n of power are ascertained by presenting them with the following task. handed a card with a diagram of concentric c i r c l e s the centre, A, as the place where the important  They were  and asked to "think of  decisions a f f e c t i n g farmers  93.  are made. Think of the outer circle, E, as being the place where those people are who do not have any influence i n agricultural matters - no say in the important decisions affecting farmers.  Think of the other circles,  B, C, and D as the places where those people are located who have lesser amounts of influence than the people at A and greater amounts of influence than the people at E". Once presented with this set of instructions, farmers were then requested to assess the position i n the set of circles of various persons and groups, including themselves, the Federal and Provincial Ministers of  l8  Agriculture, multinational.corporations, and so on.  As an i n i t i a l overview of how farmers i n the two study groups visualize the distribution of influence i n important decision-making, the mean rankings for the two groups for each of the"actors" i s given i n Table 4.9.  Possible ratings of influence range from 1 ("A') to 5 ("E"); a  high mean represents less influence i n decision-making than a low mean since "1"  represents the greatest influence i n decision-making and "5"  the least. Table 4.9  Mean Influence Ratings of Selected P o l i t i c a l Actors: NFU and Non-NFU Groups NFU  P o l i t i c a l Actor Multinational corps. Fed. Minister Agric. Packing plants Chain food stores Min. Can. Wheat Board The banks Winnipeg Grain Exchange Prov. Minister Agric. Can. Pacific Railway U.S. Gove rnment  (N=48)  Non-NFU (N=85)  Mean  S.D.*  Mean  S.D.  i.4 1.7 1.7 1.8 '» 1.9 2.0 2.3 2.3 2.3  .77 .76 .81 .94 .83 1.06 1.00 1.02 1.19 1.20  1.9 1.6 1.9 1.9 1.8 2.3 2.1 2.1 2.5 1.9  1.16 .85 • 91 1.09  1 9  a  .84  1.38 1.03 .98 1.26 1.02  94. T a b l e 4.9  cont'd. NFU(N=48)  P o l i t i c a l Actor  Nat'1. m a r k e t i n g b d s . Prov. m a r k e t i n g b d s . Average Member P a r i . Average M.L.A. N a t ' l , Farmers U n i o n Unifarm Respondent  Non-NFU  Mean  S.D.*  Mean  S.D.  2.8  1.24 1.26  2.6 2.8  .1.13 1.17 1.04  3.5 3.5 3-5  1.15 1.17  2.9  3-3 3-5 3.5 3.9 4.5  1.11  3.6  .91  4.6  (N=85)  1.27 1.15  1.02 1.01 .68  ^IFU and non-NFU d i f f e r e n c e s on a 2 - t a i l p r o b a b i l i t y T - t e s t a r e s i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .01 l e v e l . ^ S t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n from t h e mean. I t can be r e a d i l y observed t h a t t h e r e a r e no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e mean r a t i n g s o f t h e two s t u d y groups, w i t h two e x c e p t i o n s . The average r a t i n g o f " m u l t i n a t i o n a l c o r p o r a t i o n s " by t h e two s t u d y groups is significantly different.  W h i l e NFU and non-NFU mean r a n k i n g s o f  "The banks" a r e s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , t h e s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n i s s u f f i c i e n t l y l a r g e t o i n d i c a t e a l a c k o f s t a b i l i t y o f t h e mean and hence suggests one s h o u l d n o t p l a c e t o o much c o n f i d e n c e i n i t as a summary statistic. F o r b o t h groups a m i x t u r e o f p o l i t i c a l and economic b o d i e s appear i n t h e t o p s i x most i n f l u e n t i a l groups (those which have a mean l e s s t h a n 2.0):  m u l t i n a t i o n a l corporations, the Federal M i n i s t e r of  A g r i c u l t u r e , p a c k i n g p l a n t s , c h a i n f o o d s t o r e s , t h e M i n i s t e r i n charge o f t h e Canadian Wheat Board, and t h e banks  ( f o r t h e NFU group)and t h e  U n i t e d S t a t e s Government ( f o r t h e non-NFU g r o u p ) .  I f there i s a v i s i o n  of a p l u r a l i s t i c d i s t r i b u t i o n o f power, i t i s o f a d i v i s i o n o f power between t o p governmental o f f i c i a l s  and l a r g e c o r p o r a t i o n s and middlemen,  and n o t one which i n c l u d e s farmer i n t e r e s t groups. s i m i l a r i n t h e i r judgements  The s t u d y groups a r e  o f t h e l e a s t i n f l u e n t i a l groups.  Placed  95.  at the outer c i r c l e s are the respondent himself, Unifarm ( a p r o v i n c i a l farm organization), the National Farmers Union, and the average M.L.A. and M.P. - i n short, the farmer, h i s farm organizations, and h i s most accessible representatives.  The farmer apparently f e e l s that h i s lack  of control over prices i n the' market system i s only one aspect of a general incapacity to influence the important decisions i n h i s l i f e . The a b i l i t y of manufacturers, large corporations, and middlemen (packing plants, chain food stores) to set the prices of input supplies and to a l e s s e r extent, of foodstuffs, i s one manifestation of t h e i r c a p a b i l i t y of getting t h e i r way on most things.  The farmers under scrutiny here do  not seem to subscribe to a p l u r a l i s t image of the d i f f u s i o n of power among c o n f l i c t i n g i n t e r e s t groups which represent a l l the i n t e r e s t s i n society. Instead, the general perception i s of a concentration of power i n an economic sector and a few top governmental o f f i c i a l s . Perhaps a more r e l i a b l e i n d i c a t o r than t h e i r ranking of where they are i n the set of concentric c i r c l e s i s the farmers' r a t i n g of where they could be.  On the l a t t e r c r i t e r i o n , the NFU subgroup mean i s 3-0  (standard deviation of 1.2); the non-NFU group mean i s 3-3 deviation of 1.3).  (standard  The NFU r a t i n g i s thus somewhat closer to the centre  of the c i r c l e - where the important decision-making takes place.  This  may r e f l e c t the sentiment some members voiced that by working through t h i s national organization, they would be able to get that much c l o s e r to the centre of decision-making.  The absence of such an organizational  vehicle f o r the non-member group may account f o r t h e i r lower perceived possible influence.  96.  The  second p i e c e o f i n f o r m a t i o n needed to e s t a b l i s h the  " i d e o l o g i c a l " d i r e c t i o n o f the a p p r a i s a l o f i n f l u e n c e and power i n the political  system i s the judgement o f the a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s o f t h a t  b u t i o n o f power - whether i t i s as i t s h o u l d be.  distri-  A f t e r f a r m e r s had  the s e r i e s o f a c t o r s as t o where t h e y were i n the s e t o f c o n c e n t r i c of  circles  d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g , t h e y were asked t o a s s e s s whether each had " t h e r i g h t  amount" o f i n f l u e n c e i n d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g , "too much", o r "too Respondents of  rated  1  little".  e v a l u a t i o n s o f the a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s o f d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g i n f l u e n c e  each o f the s p e c i f i e d a c t o r s a r e g i v e n i n T a b l e Farmers i n b o t h groups  4«10.  e v a l u a t e middlemen ( p a c k i n g p l a n t s , c h a i n  f o o d s t o r e s ) , m u l t i n a t i o n a l c o r p o r a t i o n s , and the U n i t e d S t a t e s ' Government as u n d u l y i n f l u e n t i a l ; p o l i t i c a l a u t h o r i t i e s and f a r m e r s '  political  and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s , as u n d e r - i n f l u e n t i a l .  one  The  e x c e p t i o n t o the l a t t e r i s the M i n i s t e r i n charge o f the Canadian Wheat Board.  Farmers appeared  t o be a s s e s s i n g the c u r r e n t incumbent o f t h a t  p o r t f o l i o r a t h e r than the p o r t f o l i o  itself.  The d i s t a s t e f u l n a t u r e o f Mr.  O t t o Lang's F e d e r a l Feed G r a i n s  P o l i c y t o the m a j o r i t y o f f a r m e r s s u r v e y e d h e r e , may  he one f a c t o r  a c c o u n t s f o r the r e l a t i v e l y l o w e r p e r c e n t a g e o f f a r m e r s who p o l i t i c a l i n f l u e n c e as "too l i t t l e "  i n comparison  view Lang's  t o the p r o p o r t i o n who  a s s e s s o t h e r p o l i t i c a l a u t h o r i t i e s as have too l i t t l e  d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g say.  There a r e s l i g h t d i f f e r e n c e s o f p e r s p e c t i v e between NFU non-NFU f a r m e r s .  that  and  F i r s t , NFU members a r e more i n c l i n e d than t h e i r c o u n t e r -  p a r t s t o judge p r o v i n c i a l and n a t i o n a l m a r k e t i n g boards and the  average  Member o f P a r l i a m e n t and Member o f the L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly as h a v i n g too  T a b l e 4.10  Assessments o f A p p r o p r i a t e n e s s o f D i s t r i b u t i o n o f P o l i t i c a l I n f l u e n c e : NFU and Non-NFU Groups ( $ ' s ) NFU (N=48) Too much  Chain food stores M u l t i n a t i o n a l corps. Packing plants U.S. Government Can. P a c i f i c RailwayWinnipeg G r a i n Exch. Banks M i n . Can. Wheat Bd. Fed. M i n i s t e r A g r i c . Prov. M i n i s t e r A g r i c . N a t ' l . marketing bds. Prov. marketing bds. Average M.L.A. Average M.P. Unifarm N a t ' l . Farmers U n i o n  Right amount  89 87 85 74 56 54 44  11 11 11 26 38 41 50  24  48  8 4 24 27  43 4l 26 20 22 17 24 9  — —  ll  2  Non-NFU Too Little  2 4 —  7 5 6 28 49 54 50 54 78 83 64  89  Too much  87 80 81 68 59 48  45 37 15 4 32 23 6 9 1 5  Right amount  9 14 16 27 32 31 43 39 48  50 29 32 25 19 19 17  (N=85) Too little  4 7 3 5 9 21 12 24  37 46  39 45 68 72 80 77  98. l i t t l e influence.  Non-NFU farmers i n greater proportions evaluate n a t i o n a l  marketing boards as having too much say i n decision-making.  Secondly, i n  keeping with e a r l i e r intimations of a greater open marketing bias, nonNFU members are much more i n c l i n e d to assess the Winnipeg Grain Exchange as having too l i t t l e influence and the M i n i s t e r i n charge of the Canadian Wheat Board as having too much say i n important decision-making.  Thirdly  and not s u r p r i s i n g l y , the two groups of farmers exhibit t h e i r farm organizational bias:  NFU members assessing i n greater proportions the NFU  as  u n d e r - i n f l u e n t i a l ; non-members judging the more conservative p r o v i n c i a l organization, Unifarm, as having less say than they would l i k e . Four summary measures have been devised to assess the appropriateness of the perceived d i s t r i b u t i o n of decision-making  power.  These indices  are: (a) (b) (c)  Perceived Under-Influence of P o l i t i c a l A u t h o r i t i e s Perceived Over-Influence of Economic Forces D i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with Perceived Current Personal Influence  (d)  D i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with Perceived Possible Influence  The four measures have a s p e c i f i c empirical and t h e o r e t i c a l meaning, (a)  Perceived Under-Influence The  respondents'  of P o l i t i c a l A u t h o r i t i e s  influence ratings of 16 p o t e n t i a l p o l i t i c a l  actors and of the respondent's current, desired, and possible d e c i s i o n making influence were f a c t o r analysed to discern the manner i n which farmers grouped the various actors.  The loadings of actors on the f i r s t f a c t o r of  the unrotated f a c t o r matrix of the NFU and non-NFU groups are presented i n Table  4.11.  99.  Table 4.11  The F i r s t Factor of the Unrotated Matrix of P o t e n t i a l P o l i t i c a l Actors: NFU and Non-NFU Groups (Factor Loadings) NFU  Federal M i n i s t e r of A g r i c u l t u r e Average Member of Parliament Average Member of the L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly M i n i s t e r f o r the Canadian Wheat Board P r o v i n c i a l M i n i s t e r of Agriculture P r o v i n c i a l marketing boards National marketing boards National Farmers Union Unifarm Winnipeg Grain Exchange The hanks M u l t i n a t i o n a l corporations Canadian P a c i f i c Railway Chain food stores Large packing plants The U.S. Government Respondent i n Respondent l i k e to be Respondent could be  (N=48)  .647 -535 .547 «447 .756 -748 .690 .637 .648 .022 -.063 -.324 -.147 -.257 -.331 -.126 .382 .246 .130  Non-NFU  (N=85)  .451 .616 .804 .498 .695 .666 .660 «479 .546 .112 .296 -.083 .273 .171 .292 .137 .225 .003 .112  The f i r s t f a c t o r which emerges f o r both farmer groups i s a " p o l i t i c a l " factor.  Elected o f f i c i a l s - the P r o v i n c i a l M i n i s t e r of  A g r i c u l t u r e , the average Member of Parliament and Member of the L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly -, government authorized boards - p r o v i n c i a l and n a t i o n a l marketing boards -, and one farmers' organization - Unifarm - emerge on the f a c t o r of the unrotated matrix f o r both groups.  first  The Federal M i n i s t e r of  Agriculture and the National Farmers Union have a s l i g h t l y higher loading on the f i r s t f a c t o r i n the NFU  group.  "Economic forces" load, s i g n i f i c a n t l y  f o r n e i t h e r group. The measure of Perceived Under-Influence of P o l i t i c a l A u t h o r i t i e s i s a L i k e r t index constructed by the summation of "too l i t t l e  influence"  scores on the eight p o l i t i c a l a u t h o r i t i e s which load at .450 or greater  on  100.  this i n i t i a l factor:  the Federal and P r o v i n c i a l Ministers of A g r i c u l t u r e ,  p r o v i n c i a l and national marketing boards, the average M.P.  and M.L.A., the  National Farmers Union, and Unifarm. (b)  Perceived Over-Influence of Economic Forces This i s a L i k e r t measure as well, the summation of "too much  influence" scores on f i v e actors:  the Winnipeg Grain Exchange, chain food  stores, multinational corporations, the Canadian P a c i f i c Railway, and packing plants.  These are the economic actors which load i n common on a  separate f a c t o r i n a Varimax s o l u t i o n of the f a c t o r analysis of the ratings of influence of the actors. (c)  D i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with Perceived Current Personal  Influence  This i s a continuous l e v e l variable representing the  distance  between the i n d i v i d u a l ' s r a t i n g of where he i s i n the decision-making c i r c l e and where he would l i k e to" be. (d)  D i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with Perceived Possible  Influence  Also a continuous l e v e l measure, i t represents the  distance  between where the i n d i v i d u a l f e e l s he i s and where he could be.  It is  thus a measure of the respondent's perception of the openness of the decision-making process. The two groups are contrasted on these four variables i n Table 4.1J. Any differences between them are small.  Both are displeased with t h e i r  present influence and with the d i s t r i b u t i o n of power between p o l i t i c a l and economic actors. t h e i r counterparts  Non-NFU members are s l i g h t l y more optimistic than  that the decision-making process i s open enough that  they could have the say i n decision making that they desire ( i f they presumably t r i e d  harder)."^  101.  Table 4.13  Summary Indices of Appropriateness of P o l i t i c a l Influence D i s t r i b u t i o n : . NFU and Non-NFU Groups. NFU Mean  (N=48)  Non-NFU (It 85) Mean S.D.  S.D.*  ^Tnder-Infl. P o l . Auth.  4.9  2.2  4.4  2.0  0 v e r - l n f l . Econ. Forces  3.5  1.3  3.4  1.5  Dissat. Current  2.4  ' 1.3  2.1  1.4  6.0  1.5  5.9  1.5  b  ^ i s s a t . Possible  Influence Influence  ^Standard deviation "Possible range of scores i s 0 - 8 . ^Possible range of scores i s 0 - 5. Possible range of scores i s 0 - 4. ^Possible range of scores i s 1 - 9 since some people f e l t more influence was possible than they desired.  In summary, cognitions and evaluations  of the d i s t r i b u t i o n of  decision-making influence do not vary much across the two study groups. There i s a s l i g h t i n d i c a t i o n that NFU members are more d i s t r e s s e d a t being shut out of decision-making c i r c l e s and p a r t i c u l a r l y , at seeing t h e i r p o l i t i c a l and organizational representatives i d e o l o g i c a l perspective  as having been excluded.  of both groups tends more toward a  perspective than a l i b e r a l or conservative  The  socialistic  one f o r both farmer groups.  Both members and non-members perceive an improper  imbalance of d e c i s i o n -  making power on the side of the economic sector. III.  Class Structure of Society A more general assessment of respondents' view of the organization  of the s o c i a l / p o l i t i c a l world i s t h e i r perception structured along class l i n e s and t h e i r approval f i c a t i o n on that b a s i s .  of whether society i s or disapproval of s t r a t i -  I t i s suggested, i n accordance with common  102.  assumptions, that a view of society structured along class l i n e s and approval of that s t r a t i f i c a t i o n characterizes a conservative The  s o c i a l i s t , l i k e the conservative,  perspective.  affirms the class nature of society  but, unlike the conservative, would r e j e c t i t s appropriateness. unlike either the conservative  an  The  liberal  or s o c i a l i s t , tends to deny that classes  e x i s t and that they should e x i s t . In order to tap t h i s dimension, two questions were posed to respondents.  F i r s t , "In your opinion, i s Canada divided into d i f f e r e n t  s o c i a l classes l i k e the working c l a s s , the middle c l a s s , and the upper class?"  And  secondly, "Should society be divided i n t o d i f f e r e n t classes?"  Responses of the NFU  and non-NFU groups to the two questions  indicate an  acceptance of the r e a l i t y of s o c i a l class d i v i s i o n s i n Canada and a r e j e c t i o n of i t s appropriateness.  Table 4.14  indicates that the  NFU  group i s s l i g h t l y more l i k e l y than the non-member group to a f f i r m the d i v i s i o n of Canadian society along class l i n e s ; the differences are not, however, s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t .  Both groups are equally adamant i n  r e j e c t i n g the need f o r a class d i v i s i o n of society, with only s l i g h t l y more than one quarter of each group f e e l i n g that there should be classes. Farmers here are an e g a l i t a r i a n l o t . In keeping with the d e f i n i t i o n s s t i p u l a t e d i n the introduction to t h i s section, conservative, l i b e r a l , and s o c i a l i s t class perspectives were distinguished. criterion.  Table 4.15  contrasts the two farmer groups on t h i s  I t can be seen that the two groups are s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t .  There i s a greater i n c l i n a t i o n to subscribe to a s o c i a l i s t class perspect i v e i n the NFU  farmer  group.  While the s o c i a l i s t perspective i s the  103.  most prevalent among the non-NFU group, there are more farmers i n t h i s set who adhere t o a l i b e r a l viewpoint regarding the class structure of society.  Table 4.14  Perception and Appropriateness of Class Nature of Canadian Society: NFU and Non-NFU Groups.  Perception of classes  NFU  Are classes Are not classes Missing data  83.0% 17.0  (N-48)  Non-NFU  (39) ( 8) ( 1)  75-9% 24.1  100.0% Appropriateness  100.0%  26.1% 73.9  (12) (34) ( 2)  100.0%  Liberal Socialist Missing Data  27.8% 72.2  (22) (57) ( 6)  100.0%  I d e o l o g i c a l Perspective on Class Nature of Canadian Society: NFU and Non-NFU Groups NFU  Conservative  (63) (20) ( 2)  of classes  Should be classes Should not be classes Missing data  Table 4.15  (N=85)  26.1% 13.0 60.9 100.0%  (N=48)  Non-NFU  (12) ( 6) (28) ( 2)  27-32 24.7 48.1 100.1%  (N=85) (21) (19)  (37)  ( 8)  104. This chapter has demarcated cognitions of two groups of Alberta farmers on a number of aspects of the locus of control i n current problem areas, the p r i c i n g and marketing systems, and p o l i t i c a l  decision-making,  and i n d i r e c t l y , i n the organization of society along class l i n e s .  These  cognitive b e l i e f s have included both general and s p e c i f i c objects of appraisal.  Throughout the discussion, the concern has been mainly to  describe the d i f f e r i n g perspectives of the two groups of farmers with the objective of h i g h l i g h t i n g suggestions  of divergent i d e o l o g i c a l perspectives.  Because these measures are mostly single item indices (and have not been extracted from a pool of a t t i t u d i n a l items sorted i n t o unidimens i o n a l scales by a multivariate procedure such as f a c t o r analysis) i t becomes important  to examine t h e i r pattern of inter-relationship' to  elaborate upon t h e i r meaning. enables an  understanding  The inter-item association of these measures  of t h e i r s p e c i f i c i t y - generality, and i n so  doing, provides information concerning the extent to which they are enduring IV.  responses.  The Structure of Cognitive B e l i e f s This section examines inter-item associations f o r the two farmer  groups (separately) on the following set of measures: 1.  Control i n the p r i c i n g and marketing system: - corporation control over prices of farm produce - manufacturer control over costs of supplies - speculators as b e n e f i c i a r i e s of open marketing  2.  Control i n p o l i t i c a l decision-making: -perceived over-influence of economic forces -perceived under-influence of p o l i t i c a l authorities' - d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with current personal influence - d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with perceived possible influence  3.  Class structure of society: - c o n s e r v a t i v e / l i b e r a l / s o c i a l i s t perspective  105.  For the purposes of these analyses,  eleven members of the NFU who hold  membership i n another farmers' organization, Unifarm,are removed from the NFU group.  The o f f i c i a l statements of Unifarm reveal quite d i s s i m i l a r  points of view on a number of issues to those held by o f f i c i a l NFU spokesmen.  I t i s believed that the remaining 37 farmers are more i d e o l o g i c a l l y  representative of the National Farmers Union than the o r i g i n a l 48, and i t i s these 37 who comprise the NFU group i n the following discussion. Inter-item associations f o r the NFU and non-NFU groups are given i n Tables 4.16 and 4.17, respectively, (l) (a)  P r i c i n g and Marketing Systems:  Cognitive  Structure  The NFU Group While NFU farmers agree that forces other than themselves  control the marketing system, there i s a l i m i t e d accord as to just where control resides.  There i s no association between b e l i e v i n g that  corporat-  ions f i x farm p r i c e s and that manufacturers control input costs or that speculators b e n e f i t from open marketing.  There i s a weak p o s i t i v e  association between b e l i e v i n g manufacturers  control costs and that i t  i s the nonfarmer who benefits from open marketing.  This l i m i t e d s t r u c t u r i n g  among b e l i e f s i s i n part the consequence of l i m i t e d variance on a number of these items:  of t h i s reduced group, 72% suggest that  corporations  control farm p r i c e s , 6l% that speculators b e n e f i t from open marketing, and  69% that the manufacturer controls the cost of farm input supplies. (b)  The Non-NFU Group While i n d i v i d u a l s who hold that corporations alone e s t a b l i s h  farm prices tend also to believe that manufacturers independently c o n t r o l input costs, they do not also believe that speculators are the. chief  106. b e n e f i c i a r i e s of the free marketing system.  This l a t t e r "non-association"  i s i n keeping with the preference of non-members to market t h e i r grain off the Board. (2)  P o l i t i c a l Decision-Making:  (a)  Cognitive Structure  The NFU Group There i s a strong tendency f o r NFU farmers to judge p o l i t i c a l  authorities as u n d e r - i n f l u e n t i a l i f they also regard the economic sector as unduly powerful.  Assessing the economic sector as o v e r - i n f l u e n t i a l i s  associated with both wanting more influence than the respondent f e e l s he has and that he f e e l s he could have.  There i s , however, no s i m i l a r  association between the l a t t e r two items and with evaluating p o l i t i c a l authorities as less powerful than they ought to be. l i g h t of the strong p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p between  This f i n d i n g , i n perceiving the economic  sector as unduly dominant and the p o l i t i c a l l y authorized bodies as r e l a t i v e l y less f o r c e f u l suggests that the sort of r e d i s t r i b u t i o n of power NFU members are looking f o r i s one that places more say i n t h e i r own and not t h e i r p o l i t i c a l a u t h o r i t i e s ' hands. An independent s t a t i s t i c a l technique confirms that NFU farmers operate on the assumption that more power f o r the economic sector necessa r i l y means less f o r p o l i t i c a l authorities and the respondent himself.  An  oblique r o t a t i o n of the f a c t o r analysis of the p o t e n t i a l p o l i t i c a l actors from which the measures of Perceived Under-Influence of P o l i t i c a l Authori t i e s and Over-Influence of Economic Forces have been constructed resulted i n the emergence of s i x factors f o r the NFU group, one of which i s an economic f a c t o r on which the economic actors (the Winnipeg Grain Exchange,  Table .4.16  Inter-Item Association (Pearson r*) of Locus of Control Measures: NFU Group Corps. control prices  Speculs. benefit open mk.  Manufs. control costs  Political auth. Under-Infl.  Economic forces Over-Infl.  Dissat. Present Infl.  Specul. benefit  _  Manufs. control  -  .16  Pol auth. Under  -.25  .20  .14  Econ. forces Over  -  .46  .13  Dissat. Present  .12  -  .18  —  .12  Dissat.  .24  .13  .14  —  .22  .48  .13  .14  Possible  Radical class view  —  —  .18  *Only Pearson r's equal to or greater than .12 are insignificant.  Dissat. Possible Infl.  .60  .15  -  reported since r's less than .12 are  The l e v e l of measurement of the variables i s as follows; Coded'as dummy variables are: Corporations control prices/corporations  do not control prices.  Speculators benefit from open marketing/speculators do not benefit. Manufacturers control supplies' costs/manufacturers do not control. The remaining variables are continuous l e v e l variables: P o l i t i c a l Authorities  Under-Influential  Economic Forces Over-Influential D i s s a t i s f a c t i o n Present D i s s a t i s f a c t i o n Possible  Influence Influence  Table 4.17  Inter-Item Association (Pearson r*) of Locus of Control Measures: Non-NFU Group Corps. control prices  Speculs. benefit open mk.  Manufs. control costs  Political Auth. Under-Inf1.  Economic Forces Over-Infl.  Dissat. Dissat. Present Possible Infl. Infl.  Special, b e n e f i t  -  Manuf s. c ontro1  .20  Pol. Auth. Under  .22  -.16  Econ. Forces Over  .12  Dissat. Present  .45  -  -  -.12  .23  -  .16  .13  Dissat. Possible  -  .15  .25  .18  .29  Radical class view  .14  .12  .21  -.17  —  * 0 n l y r's equal t o or greater than .12 are reported since r's less than .12 are generally insignificant. The  l e v e l of measurement of the variables i s the same as i n Table 4.16.  109.  the banks, multinational corporations,  chain food stores, packing plants)  20 load together. as one e n t i t y . Table 4.11,  The  implication i s that NFU members view economic forces  (On the f i r s t f a c t o r of the unrotated matrix given i n  i t w i l l be noted that economic actors have negative  loadings  21 on t h i s f i r s t p o l i t i c a l factor.)  The  f a c t o r pattern matrix  suggests  the" meaning underlying the negative association between Over-Influence of Economic Forces and D i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with Current and also Possible  Influence.  Correlations between factors i n the oblique s o l u t i o n indicate the NFU  y  members l i n k t h e i r power as i n d i v i d u a l s and as members of farm organizations to that of quasi-governmental bodies (the Canadian Wheat Board, p r o v i n c i a l and national marketing boards).  The  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s that the  farmer's a b i l i t y to influence decision-making i s contingent  upon the  effectiveness of quasi-governmental bodies l i k e the Canadian Wheat Board that are intended to work on t h e i r behalf, but not on p o l i t i c a l atives (the M.P.  represent-  or M.L.A.) or governmental spokesmen f o r agriculture  (the Federal and P r o v i n c i a l Ministers of A g r i c u l t u r e ) .  Thus, since i t  i s the l a t t e r four actors that mainly comprise the measure of  Perceived  under-Influence of P o l i t i c a l A u t h o r i t i e s , there i s no association between wanting more personal influence and viewing p o l i t i c a l a u t h o r i t i e s as underinfluential. (b)  Non-NFU Group Unlike members of the National Farmers Union, non-members do  not associate the disproportionate  influence of economic agents i n d e c i s i o n -  making with an unduly u n i n f l u e n t i a l p o s i t i o n of p o l i t i c a l a u t h o r i t i e s . Desiring more influence f o r oneself than what one believes one has  presently  or what i s possible i s associated weakly with wanting more say f o r authorized p o l i t i c a l actors and less f o r c e r t a i n elements i n the economic sector.  110.  (3)  Pricing/Marketing and P o l i t i c a l Decision-Making; Structure  (a)  Cognitive  NFU Group Are perceptions of the locus of control i n the marketing system  related to assessments of the appropriate d i s t r i b u t i o n of decision-making power?  D i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with Present and Possible Influence are both weakly  and p o s i t i v e l y related to b e l i e v i n g that corporations control prices and that the non-farmer benefits from open marketing.  (Again, l i m i t e d  variance on most of these items - 9 1 % W J members are displeased with t h e i r current influence and 62% with t h e i r assessed possible influence - undoubtedly p r o h i b i t s stronger correlations among items.)  Evaluating  economic  authorities as overly i n f l u e n t i a l i s weakly associated with b e l i e v i n g that manufacturers alone control the cost of input supplies and strongly with f e e l i n g that i t i s speculators marketing.  rather than farmers who b e n e f i t from open  These two b e l i e f s also tend to occur alongside assessments of  p o l i t i c a l authorities as u n d e r - i n f l u e n t i a l .  Thus, there i s some overlap  of views regarding the pricing/marketing system and p o l i t i c a l  decision-  making on the dimension of e x t e r n a l i z a t i o n of control t o economic forces. (b)  Non-NFU Group More say f o r p o l i t i c a l authorities and less f o r economic forces  are much.less i n t e r r e l a t e d with the other b e l i e f s of non-NFU members than i s the case with the NFU group.  Among the non-members the greater the  i n c l i n a t i o n to regard p o l i t i c a l authorities as u n d e r - i n f l u e n t i a l , the more l i k e l y i s there a b e l i e f i n corporations on t h e i r own being f o r s e t t i n g farm p r i c e s .  responsible  The greater the desire f o r the economic  sector  111.  to have less say i n decision-making, the greater the p r o c l i v i t y towards viewing the open marketing system as detrimental to farmers. As with NPU  farmers, d e s i r i n g more  influence f o r oneself than  what one believes one has presently or could conceivably have i s r e l a t e d to evaluating speculators as the b e n e f i c i a r i e s of open marketing.  Individuals  displeased with t h e i r estimated possible influence are also more i n c l i n e d to believe that manufacturers control costs. (4) (a)  Pricing/Marketing, P o l i t i c a l System, and Class System: Cognitive Structure NPU  Group The view of the class structure among NPU  to t h e i r judgments as to who from open marketing.  farmers i s not r e l a t e d  controls farm produce p r i c e s or who  But i t i s r e l a t e d to perceptions  dominant influence on input costs.  of NPU  benefits  of manufacturers'  farmers with a s o c i a l i s t  class perspective as contrasted to 56% with a conservative  outlook agree  that manufacturers control input costs. A r a d i c a l view of the class structure i s r e l a t e d weakly to perceptions  of an unfavorable imbalance of decision-making power:  that  i s , that p o l i t i c a l a u t h o r i t i e s and the respondent have too l i t t l e say the economic sector too much.  and  The perceived m a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of power and  authority i n the p o l i t i c a l system ma.y  thus be a s p e c i f i c manifestation  of  disapproval of the more nebulous imbalance of status i n society. (b)  Non-NFU Group Among non-NFU farmers, a r a d i c a l class perspective i s associated  (weakly) with a b e l i e f that corporations and manufacturers set farm produce prices and input supplies' costs, r e s p e c t i v e l y .  I t i s not r e l a t e d to  i s judged to be the b e n e f i c i a r y of the open marketing system.  who  112.  As with the NFU group, a r a d i c a l class outlook tends to occur alongside the judgment that p o l i t i c a l a u t h o r i t i e s have less influence than they should have.  Contrary to the NFU group, a r a d i c a l class perspective  i s negatively r e l a t e d t o the view of the economic sector as overly i n f l u e n t i a l , i n d i c a t i n g that i t i s i n d i v i d u a l s who are conservative  or l i b e r a l  i n t h e i r appraisal of the class structure of society who are most l i k e l y to disapprove of the power of the economic sector. a r a d i c a l perspective i s r e l a t e d to disapproving and present  And, not s u r p r i s i n g l y ,  of estimated possible  influence.  Although most i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s are weak, there i s s u f f i c i e n t inter-item consistency i n both farmer groups t o conclude that more than i s o l a t e d opinions are being tapped.  In addition there i s evidence of  some important d i s t i n c t i o n s among farmers i n the two study groups.  /  Summary Farmers r e c r u i t e d to the National Farmers Union are s i m i l a r i n some respects but d i f f e r e n t i n others, from farmers who have not been r e c r u i t e d to t h i s protest organization.  In terms of t h e i r s i m i l a r view-  points, both groups externalize the blame f o r t h e i r current economic difficulties.  Neither group f e e l s i t has any control over e i t h e r the market-  ing system or any influence i n the important p o l i t i c a l decisions that a f f e c t its life.  There i s a uniform perception of decision-making powers concen-  t r a t e d i n the hands of an economic e l i t e and a few top p o l i t i c a l  officials.  For both groups, more power f o r the economic sector means less f o r the farmer.  113.  Differences between members and non-members of the National Farmers Union are mainly s t r u c t u r a l but include at l e a s t one content aspect.  F i r s t , notwithstanding t h e i r lack of control over economic  problems, NFU members are much more i n c l i n e d to a f f i r m the p o s s i b i l i t y of a united farmers' action, and i t i s t h i s b e l i e f i n the v i a b i l i t y of a c o l l e c t i v e m o b i l i z a t i o n that ostensibly leads them to f a u l t for  themselves  t h e i r past f a i l u r e s to obtain desired p o l i c y outcomes from' govern-  ments.  Non-members, i n contrast, c i t e i n d i v i d u a l endeavors more frequently. Secondly, members of the National Farmers Union are more i n c l i n e d  to view the economic sector as a powerful c o l l e c t i v i t y .  NFU farmers appear  to be operating on a " l i m i t e d p i e " view of influence i n decision-making; p o l i t i c a l a u t h o r i t i e s have too l i t t l e say in' decision-making because the economic sector has too much.  For non-members, too l i t t l e say f o r top  p o l i t i c a l representatives i s not equated with too much influence f o r economic agents.  The i m p l i c a t i o n i s thus that f o r t h i s second group of  farmers the r e l a t i v e d i s t r i b u t i o n of influence i n decision-making i s not so clear-cut. T h i r d l y , whereas NFU farmers are generally consistent i n viewing control externalized across the p r i c i n g , marketing, and p o l i t i c a l d e c i s i o n making sectors, and combine t h i s perception with a r a d i c a l perspective of the class structure of society, non-NFU farmers exclude the marketing sector as an area out of the control of farmers.  Hence, f o r non-NFU farmers,  the integrated consensual outlook includes a v i s i o n of monopoly control of the prices of farm produce and input supplies, of p o l i t i c a l a u t h o r i t i e s as u n d e r - i n f l u e n t i a l , of the respondent as excluded from p o l i t i c a l d e c i s i o n making c i r c l e s , and of. a negatively evaluated class structured society.  .  Those non-NFU farmers who  114.  judge the open marketing system to be detrimental  to farmers are, l i k e NFU members, disapproving of the undue power of the economic sector. To conclude t h i s chapter, the view of "how  the system works"  held by members of the protest farm organization i s more integrated along radical/socialist lines.  The extent t o which these cognitions give r i s e  to equally r a d i c a l solutions to r e c t i f y the m a l d i s t r i b u t i o n (from the farmer's viewpoint) of influence i n the marketing and p r i c i n g system i s the subject of the next chapter.  115. Notes to Chapter  4  1  Dolbeare and Dolbeare, American Ideologies, p. 26l. Robert Lane, P o l i t i c a l Ideology, makes the same point: " a l l ideologies, l i k e a l l other b e l i e f s , imply an.empirical theory of cause and e f f e c t i n the world . . . .", p. 15.  2  J . B. Rotter, "Generalized Expectancies f o r I n t e r n a l versus External Control of Reinforcement", Psychological Monographs, No. 1, 80(1966), 1 - 2 8 developed the o r i g i n a l I-E Scale. A bibliography by Warren E. Throop and A.P. Macdonald, J r . l i s t e d 339 a r t i c l e s which discussed the concept. See "Internal-External Locus of Control A Bibliography", Psychological Reports, 28(l97l),  175-190.  3  P. Gurin et a l . , "A Multi-Dimensional E Scale", Journal of S o c i a l Issues, 25(1969), 29 - 53. They equate the Personal Control f a c t o r with Rotter's i n t e r n a l - e x t e r n a l measure. The Control Ideology f a c t o r "seems to measure the R's ideology or general b e l i e f s about the r o l e of i n t e r n a l and external forces i n determining success and f a i l u r e i n the culture at large". .  4  Louise S e l v i r n and Charles Nakamura, "Powerlessness, S o c i a l - P o l i t i c a l Action, S o c i a l - P o l i t i c a l Views: Their I n t e r r e l a t i o n among College Students", Journal of S o c i a l Issues, 27 (No. 4, 1971), 137-157. Left-wing a c t i v i t y i s high on " e x t e r n a l i t y " , evidence that the measure. i s correlated with ideology; and L.E. Thomas, "The I-E Scale, I d e o l o g i c a l Bias, and P o l i t i c a l P a r t i c i p a t i o n " , Journal of Personality, 38(1970), 273-286, found that i n t e r n a l i t y - e x t e r n a l i t y has a conservative b i a s .  5  An a r t i c l e i n the Dec. 22, 1971 NFU Newsletter argued "The problem of farmers' income i s not on the farm - i t ' s o f f the farmer ( s i c ) . The problem i s the market system of our economy which i s designed to e x p l o i t farmers and to deny them a f a i r p r i c e f o r t h e i r product." The Regional Co-ordinator f o r Alberta, i n an a r t i c l e c a l l e d " I n f l a t i o n Major Problem", suggested "...with no control over the p r i c e s e t t i n g mechanism and with no control over the costs of inputs that go i n t o that production, farmers are at the mercy of the r e a l power within our country - the multi-national corporations"; See Union Farmer, Aug., 1974, p. 12.  6  The question w i l l immediately arise as to whether I am not simply measuring p o l i t i c a l e f f i c a c y . That may be the case, but i n l i g h t of the e a r l i e r discussion i n Chapter 2, the i n t e r e s t i n g aspect of the concept f o r i d e o l o g i c a l b e l i e f s i s whether e f f i c a c i o u s f e e l i n g s are c o l l e c t i v i s t or i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c i n t h e i r o r i e n t a t i o n .  116.  7  Among NPU members, but not among non-NFU members, those who f e e l they themselves could do nothing about the squeeze are more i n c l i n e d to believe nobody could do anything. The question ascertaining whether "you can do anything about the costprice squeeze" immediately followed the general question, "Is there anything that anybody can do about the cost-price squeeze?" Hence farmers were given the opportunity to evaluate t h e i r c a p a b i l i t y to act independently of that of the body most able to e f f e c t a s o l u t i o n to the cost-price squeeze.  8  Membership i n organizations i s not r e l a t e d to the type of a c t i v i t y the respondent volunteers i n answer to the query as to whether he can do anything about the squeeze. Among NFU members, those who f e e l they can do nothing belong to 1.3 farm organizations; those who mention a n o n - p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t y to 1.7 organizations; and those who suggest a p o l i t i c a l / c o l l e c t i v e action to 1.3 farm organizations. Among nonNFU members, i n d i v i d u a l s f e e l i n g they could not act on the squeeze belong to .6 farm organizations; those who suggest a n o n - p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t y to .7 farm organizations, and those mentioning the p o s s i b i l i t y of c o l l e c t i v e farm action as an answer to the squeeze, to .6 farm organizations.  9  The farmer was directed to respond to the second (underlined) question. The question was phrased i n terms of a p o l i t i c a l "group" rather than p o l i t i c a l ."party" because h i s t o r i c a l l y Alberta farmers (or at any rate the leadership of the United Farmers of Alberta) had rejected "party p o l i t i c s " f o r "group p o l i t i c s " .  10  The NFU N i s 37. NFU members who belong to another farm organization, eleven i n number, have been deleted from the NFU group.  11  Because both questions were open-ended, multiple responses were possible. About one-half the sample gave multi-agency responses, naming more than one body as c o n t r o l l i n g p r i c e s . The remainder mentioned a single agency. The question regarding cost controls e l i c i t e d f a r more single-agency r e p l i e s . • 76% of those answering the question (N=124) mentioned a single agency. In Table 4.6, multiple responses have been collapsed to form a single response. Hence, i f the farmer mentioned both "corporations" and the . "government" as f i x i n g farm prices, h i s response i s coded as "Corporations & Gov't." i n Table 4.6. Likewise, i f he mentioned a l l of "corporations", "the government", and "supply and demand", h i s response i s coded i n category "Corporations, Gov't., & Supply and demand" i n Table 4.6.  12  I f the responses which mention "supply and demand" are summed (codes 3 through 6), then 49.3% of the Non-NFU group and 3^.8% of the NFU group believe that "supply and demand" has' something to do with the way i n which farm produce prices are established.  117.  13 Union Farmer, Jan., 1975, p. 5 f o r the f i r s t quote. For the reference to chain store o l i g o p o l i c power, see " P r a i r i e Province Cost Study Commission", Submission to Alberta A g r i c u l t u r a l Marketing Council,  n.d., p. 10-12.  14  There are a number of ways of i n t e r p r e t i n g Table 4.6. I t i s possible to conclude that the NFU study group i s d i s i n c l i n e d t o believe that e i t h e r supply and demand alone or government regulation alone control p r i c e s , or that the two together do so. (The sum of responses 5,6, and 7 i s 17-3$) On the other hand, 92.5$ (the sum of responses 1, 2, 3, and 4) of NFU farmers believe that corporations and/or middlemen alone or i n conjunction with other forces f i x the price of farm f o o d s t u f f s .  15 Again, there are a number of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of Table 4.6. Less than one-half of the non-members believe that the government and/or supply and demand regulate farm p r i c e s . (This f i g u r e , 45.3$, i s the sum of responses 5, 6, and 7.) With respect t o the " p l u r a l i s t " i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , the following three figures seem relevant. 49.3$ (the sum of responses 3, 5, and 7) of non-members could f e e l the producer's say as regards prices i s afforded at l e a s t p a r t i a l l y by the laws of supply and demand. Concomitantly, those who view governmental regulation as a p a r t i a l surrogate f o r farmer c o n t r o l could account f o r 49-3$ (the sum of responses 2, 4, and 7) of "the group. And, 54.7$ (the sum of responses 1, 2, 3, and 4) of non-NFU farmers regard corporations as having a say i n the f i x i n g of prices i n one way or another. 16  I t i s r e c a l l e d (Table 3.2, Chapter 3) that 14$ of the NFU members and 19.2$ of the non-members reported r a i s i n g grains (feed grains, wheat) as t h e i r primary product. However, most farmers i n the area had e i t h e r r a i s e d grain i n the past or were currently doing so, and hence were f a m i l i a r with the two marketing systems. Only 5 NFU members and 21 non-members f e l t u n q u a l i f i e d to choose between the two mechanisms of marketing grain.  17  Speech by Walter M i l l e r , Vice-President of the NFU, NFU Newsletter; Jan. 26, 1973. An a r t i c l e e n t i t l e d "NFU Meets Farmers Inquiry" i n the Union Farmer, March, 1975, P . 3, included the following quote from a submission of the NFU t o the New Brunswick Farmers Inquiry: "Economic pox-rer and p o l i t i c a l power are s t i l l c l o s e l y aligned i n the present day one f i n a l difference between eighteenth century c a p i t a l i s m and the present form of c a p i t a l i s m practised large corporations was the absence of price competition. Instea. prices being determined f o r goods produced by corporations on a • pplydemand basis, corporations followed a p r a c t i s e of p r i c e s e t t i n g i n such a way as t o reduce competition".  118.  18  The actual wording of the question was: "Where i n the c i r c l e - that i s , how close to the centre - would you say each of these groups or persons i s most of the time when i t comes t o making decisions on a g r i c u l t u r a l matters?"  19  The following two tables which contrast the two groups on the simpler c r i t e r i o n of s a t i s f a c t i o n / d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with present and possible influence h i g h l i g h t these inter-group differences. S a t i s f a c t i o n with Present Influence:  NFU  Satisfied Want more influence Missing date  12.5%*( 6) 77.1 (37) 10.4 ( 5)  100.0%  Non-NFU 14.0%** 86.0%  100.0%  l8.8<t(l6) 21.6%** 68.2 (58) 78.4 12.9 ( l l )  99.9%  100.0%  S a t i s f a c t i o n with Possible Influence:  Satisfied  ^Dissatisfied Over-satisfied Missing data  27.1%*(l3)  31.0%**  31.8%* (27)  37-0%**  52.1 8.3 12.5  59.5 9-5  44.7 9.4 14.1  52.1 11.0  100.0%  100.0%  (25) ( 4) ( 6)  100.0%  (38) ( 8) (12)  100.1%  'are where would l i k e to be could be where would l i k e to be jwant more influence than f e e l they could have could have more.influence than they want *as % of entire group responding **as % of group responding substantively  20  The oblique matrix, presented belox^, presents patterns i n the data - clusterings of v a r i a b l e s . Differences between factors are thus emphasized. NFU Group  Prov. markting bds. N a t ' l . marketing bds. Unifarm Winnipeg Grain Exch. The banks Multinat'1. c orps. Canadian Pacifc R a i l Chain food stores Packing plants  960* 816* 639* 115 115 -038 -170 -164 031  012 051 021 719* 593* 507* 511* 836* 953*  -152 081 210 016 177 -221 -234 108 085  -142  -083 360 -014 127 -220 193 018 -196  074 135 -010 037 -104 484 055 158 -103  014 -123 183 -214  150 223 176 -169 -020  119. cont'd.  048 255 4o8 -152 168 398 150. 014 -028 289  U. S. Gov't. NFU Prov. M i n i s t e r A g r i c . CWB M i n i s t e r M.L.A. M.P. Federal Min. A g r i c . R could be R l i k e to be R is 21  670* 472 -531* -179  205 -176 -181 094 189 282 -238 -010 077 102  -412  -420 -250 -037 119 049  -082 -035 689* 149 186 159 852* -042 264 -330 -248 135 070 397 464 029 134 -052 334 253  -156 -058 -231 052 -383 -153 -294 -158 -761* 027  The matrix of f a c t o r pattern c o r r e l a t i o n s stresses the i n t e r relatedness of f a c t o r s . Factor Pattern Correlations f o r Pattern Matrix: NFU Group Factor  1  2  3  4  5  6"  1 2 3 4 5 6  1.00 -.01 -.02 .37 .03 -.30  1.00 -.01 .01 .05 .05  1.00 -.13 .03 .07  1.00 .03 -.09  1.00 -.06  1.00  120.  5  Chapter Evaluative Beliefs:  Continuing the attitudes,  i n q u i r y i n t o the  substance  t h i s . c h a p t e r focuses upon farmer's'  production, beliefs  How t h e S y s t e m O u g h t t o W o r k  of farmers'  evaluations  p r i c i n g a n d m a r k e t i n g , a n d u p o n more g e n e r a l  concerning appropriate l i f e  goals.  Assessments  of aspects  of  may p r o p e r l y b e  cognitive beliefs  c o n s t r u e d as t h e  tapped i n the preceding  The f o r m a t o f t h e d i s c u s s i o n i s ing chapter goal i s to  since the  objective  of the  . contrast the perspectives  a n d n o n - N F U members) systems of farmers  f o r the purpose  of the  responses  are  continuum. I.  c h a r a c t e r i z e d i n terms  (See  C h a r t 2.1, C h a p t e r  remains the  i n the  preced-  same.  That  o f f a r m e r s (NPU  of determining whether the organization differ  Once a g a i n , farmers'  i n order to  attitudes  belief  from  provide  i n general  o f t h e i r l o c a t i o n on t h e  those  terms,  left-right  2.)  Evaluative B e l i e f s Regarding Regulation of A g r i c u l t u r a l P r o d u c t i o n , P r i c i n g , and M a r k e t i n g The A l b e r t a f a r m e r ' s  free  enterprise bias  and h i s  governmental r e g u l a t i o n are tenets which almost every politics  takes  on f a i t h .  A l b e r t a farmers conservative the  and m a r k e t i n g  counterparts  i d e n t i c a l to that  o f t h e two groups  of farmers not s i m i l a r i l y m o b i l i z e d . some b e n c h m a r k b y w h i c h t o d e s c r i b e  evaluative  appropriate-  chapter.  analysis  recruited to a protest  of  evaluative  ness of governmental involvement i n the p r o d u c t i o n , p r i c i n g , of foodstuffs  political  consensus  student  f o r t h i r t y - f i v e y e a r s the backbone  S o c i a l C r e d i t government. of the handful of  I n doing so,  that of  the  we s u b s c r i b e t o  s c h o l a r s who h a v e s t u d i e d p r a i r i e  and a c t i v i t y .  of  of A l b e r t a  We a c c e p t u n t h i n k i n g l y t h e d e c l a r a t i o n  constituted  p o l i t i c a l movements  abhorrence  the  agrarian  121.  Macpherson's (1953) characterization of A l b e r t a farmers as conservatively accepting the free enterprise marketing and p r i c i n g system save i n economically depressed times when they may be converted to a f f i r m ing the necessity of bringing that system more under farmer c o n t r o l i s generally accepted by other scholars.  James McCrorie has described  Saskatchewan farmers as "small, independent  c a p i t a l i s t i c entrepreneurs  who believe, f o r the most part, i n the private ownership of land and the means of production". (1971: 36)  Elsewhere, the p o l i t i c s of t h i s same  group have been summarized as "conservatism based on pragmatism".  (Eager,  1968: 1) I f ;Commentators are i n agreement that farmers have been r e l u c t ant f o r governments t o involve themselves i n the production sector, they concur as well that farmers have h i s t o r i c a l l y opted f o r governmental regulation of the p r i c i n g and marketing sector i n an e f f o r t t o curb the "excesses" of monopoly power over a g r i c u l t u r a l p r i c e s and marketing conditions.  The f i g h t f o r the Canadian Wheat Board (described i n Chapter 4)  was part of a general drive against the monopoly power of large manufacturers and railways over the p r i c i n g of farm produce and farm input supplies. (Lipset, 1968; Morton, 1950;  Sharp, 1948)  The contemporary salience of  t r a d i t i o n a l farmer support f o r a regulated p r i c i n g and marketing system i s questionable i n l i g h t of more recent denouncements of governmental involvement i n e i t h e r the production or marketing sectors of a g r i c u l t u r e by such commodity groups as the P a l l i s e r Wheat Growers A s s o c i a t i o n and the Canadian Cattlemen's A s s o c i a t i o n .  1  There appears then to be a s p l i t among  farmers between those t r a d i t i o n a l l y i n c l i n e d toward governmental regulation  122. of selected aspects of the p r i c i n g and marketing systems and those  who  deny the v a l i d i t y of any interference with the free enterprise system. Farmers  1  judgments of the appropriate organization of the  production, p r i c i n g , and marketing sectors of farming are examined i n turn. A.  Governmental Involvement i n the Production Sector Three aspects of governmental involvement  here:  i n production appear  one, the respondent's recommended r o l e f o r the P r o v i n c i a l and  Federal Governments i n the production of food; two, examination  a more•specific  of the types of governmental programs l i k e d and d i s l i k e d ;  and three, approval or disapproval of the regulation of land and farm ownership. 1.  Recommendations regarding the governments' r o l e s i n production "What about the production of a g r i c u l t u r a l foodstuffs? What should be the r o l e of the Federal ( P r o v i n c i a l ) Government there?" The question i s a d i f f i c u l t one f o r a group of farmers whose  educational l e v e l averages just over nine years of school, and of whom 8k% d i d not f i n i s h high school.  Accordingly, there i s a great range i n  both the q u a l i t y and quantity of information e l i c i t e d . viewer probed as deeply as possible to understand volunteered, she was  While the i n t e r -  f u l l y the response being  r e l u c t a n t to structure the responses.  The open-  ended question format had been d e l i b e r a t e l y chosen to avoid the problem of "instant a t t i t u d e " formation by the respondent. (Converse these "non-attitudes".)  (1970)  calls  In retrospect, perhaps more probing - at l e a s t  i n the. d i r e c t i o n of s o l i c i t i n g the s p e c i f i c areas i n which government  123.  involvement  was  n o t d e s i r a b l e - would have been p r o f i t a b l e .  In i t s  absence, however, the r e s p o n s e s are perhaps more a c c u r a t e measures o f recommended governmental r o l e s t h a n t h e y might otherwise t h e y are almost c o m p l e t e l y T a b l e 5-1 two  voluntary.  c o n t r a s t s t h e v a r y i n g p r o p o r t i o n s o f farmers  study groups who  production roles.  have been because  recommend c o n s e r v a t i v e , l i b e r a l ,  The  two  and r a d i c a l f e d e r a l  groups d i s t r i b u t e themselves more o r  u n i f o r m l y among the t h r e e recommended r o l e s .  i n the  less  W i t h r e s p e c t t o the f e d e r a l  r o l e , w h i l e t h e r e are f a i r l y e q u a l p r o p o r t i o n s o f c o n s e r v a t i v e s among the NPU  and non-NFU study groups, t h e r e are s l i g h t l y more r a d i c a l s among  members and  s l i g h t l y more l i b e r a l s among non-members.  n o t , however, s i g n i f i c a n t . involvement  a.  Federal role  NFU  Conservative Liberal Radical M i s s i n g data  35.4% 29.1 35.5  Provincial  (N=48) a  (17) (l4) (17)  36.0% 34.7 29.3 100.0%  34.1% 40.9 25.0  &  (15) (18) (11) ( 4)  100.0% o f % answering s u b s t a n t i v e l y of total  Non-NFU a  (N=85) (27) (26) (22) (lO)  31.8% 30.6 25.8 11.8  c  100.0%  role  Conservative Liberal Radical M i s s i n g data  b  smaller.  Recommendations R e g a r d i n g Governmental Production Roles: NFU and Non-NFU Groups  100.0%. b.  of p r o v i n c i a l  o f f o o d s t u f f s , the d i f f e r e n c e s between NFU  i n recommended r o l e s are  T a b l e 5-1  d i f f e r e n c e s are  I n terms o f t h e i r recommended type  i n the p r o d u c i n g  non-NFU f a r m e r s  The  NPU  group  31-3% 37.5 23.0 8.3  30.6% 43.0 26.4  100.1%  100.0%  (22) (31) (19) (13)  25.' 36.4 22.4 15.3 100.0?  and  124.  The recommendations f o r conservative,  l i b e r a l , and r a d i c a l roles  with respect to the production of foodstuffs are q u a l i t a t i v e l y d i f f e r e n t proposals.  That i s , a r a d i c a l r o l e d i f f e r s from a l i b e r a l or  r o l e i n being not simply an advocation  conservative  of more continuous governmental  involvement and more of i t , but rather, i n e n t a i l i n g a p r e s c r i p t i o n f o r a d i f f e r e n t kind of involvement (based on a d i f f e r e n t conception  of the  r o l e of the farmer and foodstuffs i n the s o c i a l and economic system). Elaboration upon the types of responses coded as "conservative",  "liberal",  and"radical" c l a r i f i e s the meaning of t h i s statement. (a)  The  conservative p o s i t i o n on governmental involvement  This i s a recommendation that the government have no r o l e i n the production of foodstuffs.  Individuals who  subscribed to t h i s p o s i t i o n  generally suggested that the government "stay out a l l together",  "stay out  of advising the farmer what and how much to produce", or warned that there should be no interference with production.  Many responses coded as  "conservative" were as terse and to the point as the foregoing.  Indeed,  because of the necessity to probe to obtain a response of any s o r t from farmers who  were eventually coded i n t h i s category, and because of the  low informational content to most of these r e p l i e s , there was that "non-attitudes" were being coded as conservative i t must be acknowledged that t h i s may  some concern  attitudes.  have occurred i n a few  While  instances  i n the case of the personal interviews, i t i s also recognized that i t takes fewer words to be against something than to be f o r i t .  That i s , to  recommend a s o c i a l i s t p o s i t i o n as regards a g r i c u l t u r e when the t r a d i t i o n a l government p o l i c y has been n o n - s o c i a l i s t , of necessity means s p e l l i n g out what that p o s i t i o n would e n t a i l .  But when the modal governmental p o l i c y  125.  i s conservative or l i b e r a l , and one supports that p o l i c y , then one "knows" what one i s f o r and does not need t o elaborate since presumably  everyone  else i s f o r i t too; one only needs to say what one i s against. The problem of b r e v i t y was not uniform among conservative answers.  Some farmers expanded upon why they d i s l i k e d government involve-  ment; i n doing so, they "construct v a l i d a t e d " t h e i r responses.  A frequent  rationale f o r proposing no governmental interference i n production was "as soon as the government t e l l s the farmer what t o do, the farmer loses incentive".  A dairy farmer, c a l c u l a t i n g t h a t he had l o s t $13,000 the  previous year by producing more milk than h i s a l l o t t e d quota, was against quotas on t h e . p r i n c i p l e that a person should be able to produce what he wants (that i s , quotas r e s t r i c t freedom). enterprise: better."  Another man advocated free  "Let the chips f a l l where they may!  Everything would be  Other farmers, i n r e j e c t i n g incentive grants and subsidies,  referred t o the inherent knowledge of the farmer to know what to produce: "People would n a t u r a l l y produce what was needed and hold back when prices were low". Perhaps the most precise a r t i c u l a t i o n of the p r i n c i p l e s behind the advocacy of no government involvement i n production was that of the farmer who began by v o i c i n g h i s d i s l i k e of the compulsory s e l l i n g - o f eggs through the Egg Marketing Board because " i t destroys free enterprise and leads to a s o c i a l i s t state".  Referring to the American Government's p o l i c y  of paying farmers not t o produce, he rejected t h i s p o l i c y on the grounds that such disincentive grants only helped the lazy farmers, "the dumbbells".  In laying the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y on the i n d i v i d u a l f o r h i s fate,  t h i s farmer accepted personal accountability f o r dealing with the  126.  "gambling aspect" of farming:  he c a l l e d i t "the management f a c t o r " .  Seldom was there such an e x p l i c i t l i n k i n g of the respondent's  assumptions  of man with h i s recommended governmental p o s i t i o n . (b)  The l i b e r a l p o s i t i o n Two types of responses were coded as l i b e r a l :  those which  suggested either an informational and advisory r o l e f o r the government and/or a r o l e of f i n a n c i a l assistance i n the form of incentives and subsidies to produce and loans f o r c a p i t a l expansion or i n i t i a l purchase of farmland and machinery.  Types- of advice recommended are confined to  what the government presently makes a v a i l a b l e :  information pertaining to  research regarding market s i t u a t i o n s and production l e v e l s , and regarding the development  of new crop v a r i e t i e s .  A l s o coded as l i b e r a l responses  are suggestions that the government supervise the q u a l i t y of foodstuffs. Examples of l i b e r a l r e p l i e s include: "They need to do something about getting some more farmers - more young people - on the land. Grass incentive programs were a good idea, but now we're short of grain. I appreciate the Canadian Wheat Board reports on what they need and what farmers should produce regarding new strains of grain." and "They should guarantee c r e d i t to farmers at a reasonable cost, e s p e c i a l l y to beginning farmers even i f a 'reasonable cost' means no i n t e r e s t payments." I t w i l l be noted that the l i b e r a l r o l e corresponds c l o s e l y to the h i s t o r i c a l p o l i c y of the Canadian f e d e r a l government. (c)  The r a d i c a l / s o c i a l i s t p o s i t i o n The farmer whose reply i s coded within t h i s category i s more  e a s i l y recognized than either h i s l i b e r a l or conservative counterpart, p a r t l y because he tended to elaborate upon h i s recommendation more frequently •  127.  Responses coded here are generally of three types:  f i r s t l y , those advocat-  ing a government guaranteed ( f l o o r ) price or " f a i r return"; secondly, those suggesting the government control p r o f i t s of corporations, markups on food a f t e r i t leaves the farm, and/or material and machinery costs; and t h i r d l y , a proposal that production be regulated i n some way - e i t h e r by putting l i m i t s on the quantity of foodstuffs sold, or by c o n t r o l l i n g land usage and ownership.  Answers coded as r a d i c a l / s o c i a l i s t were frequently  the most a r t i c u l a t e and well-informed.  Many began with the premise that  current (and past) governmental policy-was c l e a r l y inadequate (pointing to the cost-price squeeze or the f a i l u r e of grass incentive and grain disincentive schemes i n the recent past) and attempted to suggest ways to overcome these perceived problems.  Concluding that "someone has to  take over as a whole - at the present time the Federal Government i s the only one capable of doing so", one farmer concluded that the Government should take steps to e s t a b l i s h a World Food Bank "to s t a b i l i z e p r i c e s " . Other responses were s p e c i f i c to the type of farming the respondent  was  engaged i n . A hog farmer suggested-the Federal Government should guarantee a c e r t a i n price f o r a set amount of hogs and a lower price f o r anything over the quota i n order to protect the small farmer. The implementation of quota systems to regulate production and a f a i r or p r o f i t a b l e floor' price were the most t y p i c a l r e p l i e s i n the r a d i c a l category. . Less t y p i c a l was the following c a r e f u l l y formulated position: "Farms should be l i m i t e d i n size to family farms. The Government should have a Land Use P o l i c y which keeps arable land f o r agriculture and the family farm. The government's role would be supply management so that farmers do not over-supply the market and hurt themselves and the taxpayers. The l a t t e r occurs when  128. the government buys up a g r i c u l t u r a l surpluses and • gives them away. Supply management would mean the elimination of the highs and lows of the costs of products. This yo-yo e f f e c t allows middlemen to keep prices high at a l l times, even when the market goes down. Pood should be geared to the income of consumers and the maximum number of people should be engaged i n the production of food and have an income equivalent to that of the Canadian labourer." I t i s perhaps no accident that t h i s farmer was currently a Director of the National Farmers- Union. I t was apparent that farmers recommending a l l three production roles f o r the Federal and P r o v i n c i a l governments were frequently responding to past and present governmental p o l i c i e s .  The most s i g n i f i c a n t cues  in.the way of governmental, p o l i c i e s were LIFT (Lower Inventories f o r Tomorrow) and the f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l beef production incentive schemes, which had followed i n the wake of LIFT.  Both programs had, i n a very r e a l  sense, backfired and were responsible, i n a number of people's eyes, f o r the current depressed beef prices and grain shortages. appeared to react to these p o l i c i e s i n one of two ways:  Many farmers either by blaming  the current depressed beef prices on too much governmental interference and concluding that the only solution was f o r governments to stay out completely from involvement i n a g r i c u l t u r e , or by blaming the current economic malaise not on government involvement per se, but on i t s shortl i v e d , ad hoc nature, and recommending more long-range and better formulated governmental planning.  The former tend to be conservatives; the l a t t e r ,  radical/socialists. To conclude, there are only s l i g h t differences between NFU members and non-members concerning t h e i r i d e o l o g i c a l perspective regarding foodstuff production. Fewer than one-third of the farmers i n either group  129.  suggest that the f e d e r a l government involve i t s e l f i n the production of food t o any greater extent than providing the money f o r the farmer to manage on h i s own.  Even fewer farmers i n both groups recommend that much  involvement on the part of the p r o v i n c i a l government. There i s some reason to believe that the strength of economic conservatism and l i b e r a l i s m witnessed here i s not unique to farmers i n t h i s study group.  A' 1971 province-wide random survey of Alberta residents  revealed that f u l l y 71% of the farmers interviewed disagreed with the statement " I f a farmer can't s e l l things he raises at a p r o f i t , the 3  government should buy them and l i m i t the amount the farmer can produce." 2.  Perceived harmful and b e n e f i c i a l programs I t has been noted that farmers tended to react t o previous  governmental programs when recommending a f e d e r a l or p r o v i n c i a l r o l e i n a g r i c u l t u r a l production.  Farmers were given a d i r e c t opportunity to  respond to these programs- when they were asked t o voice t h e i r approval or disapproval of p a r t i c u l a r schemes.  They were requested to r e c a l l  "any government p o l i c i e s - p r o v i n c i a l or f e d e r a l - that have benefitted farmers and yourself i n the past, or any p o l i c i e s that are currently helping farmers"; and secondly, any p o l i c i e s that were "currently hurting the,farmer", or had hurt farmers i n the past. forthcoming; four possible r e p l i e s were coded.  M u l t i p l e responses were In Table 5.2, programs  mentioned have been coded i n four discrete categories (monetary  assistance  schemes; incentives and subsidies; orderly marketing; and miscellaneous) plus categories representing combinations of these.  (The l i s t of programs  placed under each category may be found i n Table 5.2a i n Appendix B.)  130.  Table 5.2  Types of B e n e f i c i a l Programs Mentioned: NPU and non-NFU Groups. NFU  Monetary assistance Monetary assistance & Subsidies Incentives & subsidies Combination of programs Miscellaneous Orderly marketing None mentioned*  (N=48)  33.35I (16)  16.7 12.5 10.4 10.4 4.2 12.5  ( ( ( ( ( (  8) 6) 5) 5) 2) 6)  Non-NFU  (N=85)  31.8%  (27)  10.6 10.6 10.6 3.5 1.2 31.8  ( 9) ( 9) ( 9) ( 3) ( 1) (27)  ^ i n c l u d i n g missing data For farmers i n both groups, government programs s i n g u l a r l y mentioned as being the most b e n e f i c i a l are grants and loans with no strings attached - programs which make money available t o the farmer to do with as he wishes.  Monetary programs which i n t e r f e r e with the farmer's  freedom of decision-making, by giving him an incentive to raise hay, instead of grain, or c a t t l e instead of hogs, are not so welcome. In f a c t , the l a t t e r are viewed as being the most d i s t a s t e f u l by both NFU and non-NFU farmers.  The figure f o r incentive programs i n the Harmful  Programs table (Table 5.3) i s i n f l a t e d by the LIFT program of the f e d e r a l L i b e r a l government i n the early 1970's and the very recent moves by the Alberta government to encourage the production of beef.  At the time of  the.interviews, the bottom had f a l l e n out of the beef market.  LIFT was a  program that paid farmers $6.00 per acr