preliminary results of mgsp 2008 survey center for economic analysis michigan state university 29...
Post on 21-Dec-2015
215 views
TRANSCRIPT
Preliminary Results of MGSP 2008 Survey
Center for Economic AnalysisMichigan State University
29 July 2008
Sampling Frame
• 2400 surveys were mailed out– 1200 farmers– 800 rural residents– 400 urban residents
• Undeliverable/bad addresses were minimal– 18 for farm residents– 66 for non-farm residents
Survey response rate (2008)
37
40
0
10
20
30
40
Farm Non-farm
Residence
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
co
mp
lete
d s
urv
ey
Survey response rate (1996-2008)
5351
40
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1996 2000 2008
Year
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
co
mp
lete
d s
urv
ey
Distribution of 2008 sample
Urban, 16.5%
Rural, 33.5%
Farm, 47.2%
Unknown, 2.8%
County of respondents (2000 & 2008)
79
83
77
72
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
2000 2008
Year
Nu
mb
er
of
co
un
tie
s r
ep
res
en
ted
All
Farm
Age of respondents (2008)
1.3
15.4
42.3
0.0
12.2
50.8
37.0
0.3
13.6
47.8
38.3
40.9
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
Less than 25 yrs 25-44 yrs 45-64 yrs 65 yrs and over
Age group
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
res
po
nd
en
ts
Urban
Rural
Farm
Age of Respondents (1996-2008)
0.8
26.8
43.2
29.2
1.1
25.4
47
26.5
0.3
13.4
47.2
39
0
10
20
30
40
50
Less than 25 yrs 25-44 yrs 45-64 yrs 65 yrs and over
Age group
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
res
po
nd
en
ts
1996
2000
2008
Gender of respondents (2008)
Male, 60.1%
Female, 39.9%
Male, 75.9%
Female, 24.1%
Male, 81.3%
Female, 18.7%
Urban (n=148) Rural (n=299)
Farmers (n=422)
Gender of respondents (1996-2008)
78.8 77.675.4
21.2 22.424.6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1996 2000 2008
Year
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
res
po
nd
en
ts
Male
Female
Level of Education (2008)
4
21
33
17
25
8
24
37
11
19
9
32
38
9
12
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Less than High School High School Diploma Some College/Assoc Deg. Four Year Degree Graduate Level
Education Level
Per
cen
tag
e o
f re
spo
nd
ents
Urban
Rural
Farmers
Level of Education (1996-2008)
9
28
34
11
18
8
31
38
10
13
8
27
37
11
17
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Less than High School High School Diploma Some College/Assoc Deg. Four Year Degree Graduate Level
Education level
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
res
po
nd
en
ts
1996
2000
2008
Race/Ethnicity (2008)
2.04.7
90.5
1.4 1.43.0
0.3
95.7
0.3 0.70.2 0.0
97.9
0.01.9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
American Indian African-American White/Caucasian Spanish/Hispanic Other
Race/Ethnicity
Per
cen
tag
e o
f re
spo
nd
ents
Urban
Rural
Farmers
Farm operations
3.53.2
48.3
13.1
8.8
6.1
36.837.9
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
45.0
50.0
55.0
Livestock/Dairy Poutry/Turkey Row Crops Orchard Vegetables Hay/Forage Greenhouses Nurseries
Farm Operation
Per
cen
tag
e o
f F
arm
ers
Farm Size (1996-2008)
34
21
1715
1414
8
20
26
33
49
19
14
8
10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
50 acres or less 51-100 acres 101-200 acres 201-400 acres More than 400 acres
Farm size
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
farm
ers
1996
2000
2008
Groundwater Knowledge (2000 & 2008)
51
54
59
555557 57
56
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Urban Rural Farm All
Sub-sample
Av
era
ge
sc
ore
(%
)
2000
2008
Groundwater Knowledge (2008)Statement Percentage of respondents with correct answer
Farm Rural Urban
Groundwater in Michigan provides water to lakes and streams. (Correct) 82 83 78
Groundwater generally follows the contours of the land surface. (Correct) 63 66 69
Irrigation and lawn watering can affect the amount of water leaching into the ground. (Correct)
88 88 90
Once it reaches the water table, groundwater does not move, unless pumped. (Incorrect)
72 68 61
Water that looks clear and tastes good is safe to drink. (Incorrect) 87* 94* 88*
Just like surface water, groundwater flows downhill. (Correct) 40 44 47
It is more cost effective to prevent pollution of groundwater than to pay for the cleanup. (Correct)
91 91 91
Less than 1% of the earth’s water is available for drinking. (Correct) 37 40 36
An average American uses 50 gallons of water each day. (Incorrect) 16 17 20
Groundwater in Michigan can best be described as an interconnected series of rivers, streams, and caverns. (Incorrect)
10 11 11
It is best to apply lawn fertilizers in the spring before the grass starts to turn green. (Incorrect)
34 32 33
Groundwater in Michigan can best be described as a wet sponge where water fills the spaces between soil particles. (Correct)
58 55 52
Approximately 50% of Michigan’s population relies on groundwater for drinking purposes. (Correct)
51 53 47
The Groundwater Stewardship Program is a voluntary program that helps people select practices that reduce the risk of groundwater contamination. (Correct)
63* 54* 52*
Groundwater Knowledge (1996-2008)Statement Percentage of respondents with correct answer
1996 2000 2008
Groundwater in Michigan provides water to lakes and streams. (Correct) 82 77 81
Groundwater generally follows the contours of the land surface. (Correct) 57 57 65
Irrigation and lawn watering can affect the amount of water leaching into the ground. (Correct)
86 85 88
Once it reaches the water table, groundwater does not move, unless pumped. (Incorrect)
71 66 68
Water that looks clear and tastes good is safe to drink. (Incorrect) 88 86 89
Just like surface water, groundwater flows downhill. (Correct) 45 43 43
It is more cost effective to prevent pollution of groundwater than to pay for the cleanup. (Correct)
92 92 90
Less than 1% of the earth’s water is available for drinking. (Correct) 44 43 38
An average American uses 50 gallons of water each day. (Incorrect) 16 17 17
Groundwater in Michigan can best be described as an interconnected series of rivers, streams, and caverns. (Incorrect)
11 16 11
It is best to apply lawn fertilizers in the spring before the grass starts to turn green. (Incorrect)
- 36 33
Groundwater in Michigan can best be described as a wet sponge where water fills the spaces between soil particles. (Correct)
61 55 56
Approximately 50% of Michigan’s population relies on groundwater for drinking purposes. (Correct)
57 52 51
The Groundwater Stewardship Program is a voluntary program that helps people select practices that reduce the risk of groundwater contamination. (Correct)
46 41 58
High risk perception of land use on groundwater (2008)
66
57
45
27
59
54
49
33
51
41
37
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Nation Michigan County Home/property
Location of impact
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
res
po
nd
en
ts
Urban
Rural
Farm
High risk perception of land use on groundwater (1996-2008)
45
3735
22
47
40
34
20
56
48
42
29
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Nation Michigan County Home/property
Location of risk impact
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
res
po
nd
en
ts
1996
2000
2008
Participation in Groundwater Programs (1996-2008)
3.3
1.4
0
3.3
2.4
1.9
6.1
4.2
2.3
4.2 4.2
2.8
3.3
1.1
1.4
2.7
1.9
00
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Cost share Local GWS teams Ag chem spill asst Tech asst Regional GW spec GW envlop monitoring
Program/Facility
Pe
rce
nta
ge
cu
rre
ntl
y u
sin
g
1996
2000
2008
Participation in Groundwater Programs (1996-2008)
3.8 3.8
0.5
0.9
4.7 4.7
5.1
2.3
6.1
4.1
4.4
1.4
4.9
1.9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Clean sweep Pesticide cont recycling Wellhead program HH hazardous droop-off MGSP
Program/Facility
Pe
rce
nta
ge
cu
rre
ntl
y u
sin
g
1996
2000
2008
Sources of Groundwater Information (2008)
19
13
10
9
7
6 6
5
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
ConservationDistrict
MSU Extension Farm Bureau ConservationDistrict newsleter
Friend MSU Extensionnewsletter
Local newspaper MSU Extensionweb
Information source
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
tim
e c
ite
d
Water supply to homes (1996-2008)
88.7
95.4 94.1
50.4 51.3
68.7
10.4
4.6 5.9
48.6 48.3
30.4
0.9 1.0 0.4 0.80
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1996 2000 2008 1996 2000 2008
Year
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
res
po
nd
en
ts
Private Well
Public water system
Don't know
Farmers Non-Farmers
Origin of Public Water (1996-2008)
Farmers Non-Farmers
4543
57
41
2930
45
48
33
27
39
34
10 10 10
29
32
36
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1996 2000 2008 1996 2000 2008
Year
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
res
po
nd
en
ts
Surface water source
Groundwater source
Don't know
Testing of drinking water (1996-2008)
67
79 79
63
68
73
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1996 2000 2008
Year
Pe
rce
na
teg
of
res
po
nd
en
ts
Farmer
Non-farmer
Home and Garden Practices of Non-Farmers (2000 & 2008)
78
51
13
94
13
32
73
83
39
16
95
11
44
79
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Set mower cuttingblade
Store pesticide ingarage
Measure amount ofwater
Read directions Use prof lawn careprovider
Drop-off progarm Identify pest beforeusing pesticide
Home and garden practices
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
res
po
nd
en
ts
2000
2008
Undesirable Practice
Farm Management Practices of Farmers (2008)
30
66
93
79
68
41
45
11
38
59
41
22
9
24
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Water testing Container recycling Triple or powerrinsing
Use air-gap or anti-backflow
Spill kit available Written drift mgtplan
Written nutrientmgt plan
Farm management practice
Pe
rec
nta
ge
of
farm
ers
FAS farmers
Non-FAS farmers
NOTE: FAS is Farm Assessment System
Farm Management Practices of Farmers (2000 & 2008)
38
22 22
33
18
7
28
12
22
2928
9
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Conduct PSNT Test drinking water Mix pesticides on non-porous surface
Pesticide recycling Rinse away spills On-site farm dump
Farm management practice
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
farm
ers
2000
2008
Undesirable Practices
Farmers’ Participation in NRCS Programs (2008)
17
4
1
4
3
5 5
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
CRP CREP CSP EQIP GRP WRP WHIP
NRCS Programs
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
farm
ers
NOTE: NCRS is National Resources Conservation Service
Farmers’ Participation in Assessment Systems (2000-2008)
24.0
8.0
9.3
3.1
0.3
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Farm*A*Syst Crop*A*Syst Greenhouse*A*Syst
Assessment System
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
farm
ers
2000
2008
Effectiveness of Assessment Systems in providing Technical Assistance (2008)
Ineffective, 6%
Somewhat effective, 22%
Effective, 50%
Very effective, 22%
Motivating factors for participating in Assessment Systems (2008)
8.6
28.6
45.7
0
40
45.7
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Media campaign Participation in otherprogram
Long term viability ofbusiness
Neighbor's participation Cost-share incentives RUP Credit
Motivation for participating
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
pa
rtic
ipa
tin
g f
arm
ers
Barriers to participation in Assessment Systems (2008)
3
12
4
7
36
43
3
11
4
7
34
41
2
7
3
6
29
47
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
High costs Lack of time Lack of technicalassistance
Lack of interest Lack of awareness Not relevant
Barrier to participation
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
no
n-p
art
icip
ati
ng
fa
rme
rs
Farm*A*Syst
Crop*A*Syst
Greenhouse*A*Syst
Knowledge of and participation in MAEAP (2008)
Yes, 17%
No, 83%
Yes, 5%
No, 95%
Familiarity with MAEAP MAEAP verified
Participation in MAEAP by Farmers familiar with MAEAP (2008)
Plan to be MAEAP verified MAEAP Phase 1 Attendance
Yes, 25%
No, 75%
Yes, 26%
No, 62%
Unsure, 12%
Barrier to MAEAP by Non-participating Farmers (2008)
33
25
50
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Too time intensive Too expensive Lacks benefits
Barrier to MAEAP Verification
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
farm
ers
Salient Findings
• Noticeable shifts in demographics– 2008 sample was older– Proportion of females in farm and urban sub-
samples increased substantially, but declined marginally for rural sub-sample.
• Small farm predominate in 2008 as opposed to large farms in 2000
Salient Findings
• There has been significant change in knowledge on 6 of 14 measures between 2000 and 2008 surveys– Farm residents were more likely to correctly identify
MGSP– Rural residents were more likely to know that water
that looks clear and tastes good is not necessarily safe for drinking
• Risk perception of groundwater contamination has increased dramatically since 2000
Salient Findings
• The inverse relationship between risk intensification and proximity to respondents’ household remains
• Rural and urban residents are consistent in their rating of perceived risk to groundwater from materials and land use and practices
• Farmers now see agricultural chemicals as constituting moderate to high impact on groundwater quality
Salient Findings
• Current participation in groundwater programs has declined since 2000
• Groundwater stewardship practices among farmers have generally declined
• Farmers in any A*Syst are more likely to engage in groundwater stewardship practices
• Tangible incentives are good motivators for farmers’ participation in assessment systems
• Groundwater stewardship practices among home owners have risen