\section{An ideological challenge}

A collaborative research project led by researchers at the University of Southern Denmark and Hanken School of Economics, Finland, is facilitating a shift to more profitable and environmentally friendly farming methods by dispelling the myths surrounding organic production.

\subsection{AGRICULTURE CAN BE}

Agriculture can be broadly split into two forms: organic and chemical. Conventional chemical farming cultivates crops using inorganic chemical inputs like fertilisers and pesticides. By contrast, organic farming methods do not rely on synthetic chemical fertilisers or feed additives, instead using only organic-certified substances and natural techniques like crop rotation, compost and biological pest control.

Organic farming has experienced a boom in recent decades. Since 1990, the market for organic produce has grown rapidly, reaching US\$63 billion worldwide three years ago. Of course, this has driven demand for organically managed farmland. According to the latest data on organic agriculture, in 2012 approximately 92 million acres globally were farmed organically, but this still amounts to less than 1 per cent of total world farmland. Despite the demand for organic food, it appears many farmers are reluctant to make the transition from conventional methods.

Recognising that this can impede agricultural progress, Professor Eric Arnould, a marketing expert from the University of Southern Denmark and Professor Melea Press from the Hanken School of Economics, Finland (both formerly at the University of Wyoming, USA), began a study of the reasons preventing farmers changing methods. Together with Professor Jeff Murray at University of Arkansas, USA, and Katherine Strand, a PhD candidate at McGill University, Canada, they set out to study organic commodity agriculture in America’s Northern High Plains.

Change is particularly important for this region. Farming is critical to rural communities in the High Plains, but many farms are under threat due to the rising costs of fuel and fertiliser. In 2002, 97 per cent of Wyoming farms had annual sales below \$500,000. Farmers in this area are in urgent need of alternative production methods that reduce costs, increase profitability or add value. Organic production methods could be the answer. Because of their increased sale value, they can increase profit and alleviate financial difficulties. Arnould and his team thus aim to clarify the incentives and disincentives of adopting organic farming practices, and communicate that ideologies are not recognised as a barrier to making decisions that could be more profitable in the long term.

\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{figure_1.pdf}
\caption{Ripening organic Wyoming wheat.}
\label{figure_1}
\end{figure}

\subsection{AN AGRICULTURAL PUZZLE}

The researchers’ investigations of the challenges and opportunities for organic producers in the High Plains forms part of a three-year US Department of Agriculture-funded project. As part of these activities, in November 2014 they released a groundbreaking report published in the \textit{Journal of Marketing}, which analysed the production and marketing strategies of commodity producers – those who provide basic inputs to commonly prepared foods. Using wheat farmers in the High Plains as their subjects, they assessed the challenges to strategic change in agriculture, specifically asking why chemical farmers resist converting to more profitable organic methods.

Indeed, the economic incentives are clear. Over the past 30 years, organic wheat production has consistently yielded profits. On average, price premiums have been 47 per cent above chemical wheat production. Organic wheat production is profitable, while chemical production is only profitable due to government subsidies, but it still represents only 1 per cent of the overall market. The researchers want to know why this is.

In answering this question, the team focused on ideology, a rarely addressed aspect in this type of research. ``Widespread business practices exhibit features that social science would attribute to ideologies, and can therefore be thought of as such,'' they explain. The researchers revealed a clear link between the two, as ideologies have a measurable impact on business decisions. These in turn have significant social and economic consequences. As ideology is so closely linked to strategic orientations, considering personal beliefs

\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{figure_2.pdf}
\caption{Added storage costs for organic producers.}
\label{figure_2}
\end{figure}

\subsection{Have you identified any top-down factors preventing farmers from making a shift in their strategy?}

In addition to the relative weakness of up- and downstream marketing institutions, the burden of unfamiliar paperwork required for Organic Certification from USDA discourages some farmers. Perhaps more challenging than the paperwork itself are fears about periodic changes to the regulations for organic certification. Moreover, farmers generally do not like on-farm certification of their paperwork. A final important factor is the impact of hedge funds on the organic market. The increasing role of these funds for agricultural commodities has been negatively impacting organic producers and marketers by driving market volatility.

Just as the chemical system is legitimised at every turn, the organic system is not. So, the fact that the supply chain for organic wheat is underdeveloped is a huge barrier. The fact that there is limited research on inputs and rotations, that organic seed can be hard to find, and that sometimes banks that provide agricultural loans don’t take organic producers seriously, could all be seen as top-down barriers.