|
Citation
|
Bendixsen C, Barnes K, Kieke B, Schenk D, Simich J, Keifer M. J. Agromed. 2017; 22(4): 316-327. |
|
Abstract
|
OBJECTIVES: The primary goal of this study was to describe the mutually perceived influence of bankers and insurers on their agricultural clients' decision-making regarding health and safety.
METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 dairy farmers, 11 agricultural bankers, and 10 agricultural insurers from central Wisconsin. Three of the interview questions involved pile-sorting. Pile-sorting included 5-point Likert-like scales to help participants sort through 32 index cards. Each card represented an individual or group that was thought to possibly affect farmers' decision-making, both generally and about health and safety.
RESULTS (photographs of piles of cards quantified into spread sheets, fieldnotes, and interview transcripts) were analyzed with SAS and NVivo.
RESULTS: All three groups expressed moderate to strong positive opinions about involving agricultural bankers (x2(2) = 2.8155, p = 0.2695), although bankers qualitatively expressed apprehension due to regulations on the industry. Insurance agents received more positive support, particularly from bankers but also from dairy farmers themselves, and expressed more confidence in being involved in designing and implementing a farm safety program.
CONCLUSION: Agricultural bankers and insurers can influence individual farmer's decision-making about health and safety. Both are believed to be good purveyors of safety programs and knowledge, especially when leveraging financial incentives. Insurance agents are thought to be more critical in the design of safety programs. Insurers and bankers being financially tied to safety programs may prove both positive and negative, as farmers may be skeptical about the intention of the incentives, making messaging critical.
Language: en |