**3. Data and methods**

In this chapter farmers' adaptation to changing agricultural policies and market situation are explored and with that the future prospects of family farming. Analysis of empirical data are carried out on 2002 to 2010 survey data (Trend-data), and data from Statistics Norway to reveal whether the structure of Norwegian farming resembles dualistic pattern (towards large and small farms) or other structural developments. Are small farms subsumed into larger capitalistic unites or is family farming still resisting such potential threats to the system and as such surviving and reproducing family farm?

Trend-data is derived from survey research with samples of Norwegian farmers. These surveys are conducted bi-annually by the Centre for rural research in Norway, with the first survey conducted in 2002 and the latest in 2010. The purpose of the survey is to provide a general base of knowledge on the socio-cultural factors of Norwegian agriculture and the changes in these over time. It also provides new research with relevant empirical data and reveals new questions in rural research.


Table 2. Trend-data: sample and response rate.

The target group or population is Norwegian farmers. These are persons that are main operators of farms with a minimum of agricultural production that makes them eligible for production subsidies (and then a name in the agricultural registers). All samples were analysed and found representative for Norwegian farmers at the time of measurement (Logstein, 2010; Rye & Storstad, 2002; Rye & Storstad, 2004; Vik, 2008; Vik & Rye, 2006).

Table 3 reveals some of the characteristics of the farmer and family adaptations in the time period studied in this chapter.

Table 3 show that the gender pattern has been relatively stable throughout the decade. It starts at 12 percent women farmers (head of farm) in 2002 and end at 14 percent in 2010. It is of interest to note that women heirs gained equal rights to inherit farms in 1974. Before that it was the first born boy who had the first right to inherit. A more balanced gender distribution is wanted, but at the time being it seems to have stabilised.


Source: Trend-data

290 Sociological Landscape – Theories, Realities and Trends

the farm forest or support for starting new enterprises in relation to the farm resources etc. This is connected to both the possibilities of deriving added value from farm resources, but also acknowledging the multifunctional outputs of farm activities for the

Various renditions of farming can be understood as adaptations only when farms are too small to supply fulltime employment or adequate income (Jervell, 1999). However, today an essential amount of income comes from wage labour outside of farming on most farms. This is, however, a result of a long, ongoing process. Wage income from off-farm work has exceeded farm income on the average Norwegian farm since the 1980's (Jervell and Løyland, 1998). During the same period, the average working hours on Norwegian farms increased (Bjørkhaug & Blekesaune, 2008). This decreasing value of farm work occurred due to changes in agricultural subsidies and commodity prices, but also as a result of more women working longer hours off the farm. Women's increased participation in the off-farm labour market is described as one of the most important structural changes in Norwegian farm households (Blekesaune, 1996a). New relations have also created new opportunities for exploiting rural resources and niches, such as local handicraft, baking or refining other farm produce (Eikeland, 1999). But, family farming has changed from an activity that occupied

In this chapter farmers' adaptation to changing agricultural policies and market situation are explored and with that the future prospects of family farming. Analysis of empirical data are carried out on 2002 to 2010 survey data (Trend-data), and data from Statistics Norway to reveal whether the structure of Norwegian farming resembles dualistic pattern (towards large and small farms) or other structural developments. Are small farms subsumed into larger capitalistic unites or is family farming still resisting such potential

Trend-data is derived from survey research with samples of Norwegian farmers. These surveys are conducted bi-annually by the Centre for rural research in Norway, with the first survey conducted in 2002 and the latest in 2010. The purpose of the survey is to provide a general base of knowledge on the socio-cultural factors of Norwegian agriculture and the changes in these over time. It also provides new research with relevant empirical data and

Year 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Sample 1678 1712 1677 1607 1584 Response rate 53 55 54 51 50

The target group or population is Norwegian farmers. These are persons that are main operators of farms with a minimum of agricultural production that makes them eligible for production subsidies (and then a name in the agricultural registers). All samples were

the family towards one that provides job opportunities for only a few.

threats to the system and as such surviving and reproducing family farm?

greater public good.

**3. Data and methods** 

reveals new questions in rural research.

Table 2. Trend-data: sample and response rate.

Table 3. Some characteristics of farmers and farm adaptations. Percentages.

Age distributions are difficult to interpret from table 3. It seems like 2004 had an overrepresentation of higher aged farmers. It is still a pattern that indicates that the farming population is getting older, and with that an indication of little recruitment of young farmers.

Fewer farmers affiliate with farmer as their occupational identity throughout the decade measured. This can be explained by the fact that more and more farmers work off farm. At the same time, partner (wife/husband/spouses) is participating in farming activities (above 80 percent except in 2008). Views on potential successors of the farm within family are more optimistic in 2010 (62 percent expecting family members to succeed) than in 2004 (58 percent). "Do not know" takes up a majority of the remaining percentages. This question was not included in the 2002 survey.

In the first part of the forthcoming analysis data are used to map changes in the structure of Norwegian farming across the first decade of the 21st century. Both objective criteria's like changes in farm size and income are discussed against farmers subjective opinions of the economic situation and how this affects their will to invest in- and develop their farm. The second part of the analysis is carried out on the latest survey from 2010. Bi- and multivariate technics are used to understand where the future of Norwegian farming might be heading. A linear regression model is used to identify which types of farms and farmers that will invest in their farm in the near future. In this model both characteristics of the farm like size

Exploring the Sociology of Agriculture:

Source: Trend-data.

0

10

20

30

40

50

Source: Trend-data.

Fig. 3. Income from farming.

0

5

10

15

20

25

change (from 68 to 42 percent).

Fig. 2. Farming structure change. Farm size.

Family Farmers in Norway – Future or Past Food Producers? 293

0-100

250+

0-99

700+

100-199 200-299 300-399 400-499 500-599 600-699

100-250

2004 2006 2008 2010

Many farmers also feel that the economic situation has become better during the last decade. Figure 4 show that both the number of those experiencing positive economic change and those experiencing no change is increasing on behalf of those who experience negative

2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Figure 5 shows expected change the next five years. A remarkable drop in those expecting negative change was measured in 2008, and similarly a rise in the number of those expecting a positive change. This picked up rising food prices globally and shows an immediate effect of that. Prices on the world market did fall – but later rose again. Expected direct returns to

and production is included, in addition to characteristics of the farmer him- or herself and their views of the future (optimism/pessimism) and prospects of succession. Operationalisation of the variables used is commented on consecutively as they appear in the forthcoming analysis.
