Search

Scholars have noted persistent high rates of agricultural health and safety incidents and the need to develop more effective interventions. Participatory research provides an avenue to broaden the prevailing research paradigms and approaches by allowing those most impacted to illuminate and work to solve those aspects of their lives. One such approach is photovoice, an emancipatory visual narrative approach. Yet, despite its broad appeal, photovoice can be hard to implement. In this article, we leverage our experience using photovoice for a farm children safety project to describe and reflect on the ethical and methodological aspects broadly relevant to agricultural health and safety topics. We first contextualize the tensions of navigating between photovoice, the research ethics committees (RECs) regulatory frameworks, and competing views on visual representations in agriculture. We then discuss the sources of risks to participants and researchers, how we addressed these risks, and how these risks unfolded during the research phase of the photovoice activity. We conclude with three lessons we (re)learned: the importance of collaborating with RECs, the need to increase preparation to limit psychological risks to participants and researchers, and avenues to augment the emancipatory power of photovoice in a virtual environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Increased attention to suicide in agriculture has led to an increase in interventions informed in part by research on who is most likely to die from suicide, using what means, and for what reason(s). However, the limited understanding of how suicide is studied and the limited engagement in previous studies with theories raises questions about the body of knowledge underpinning these interventions. To assess prevailing methodological approaches and the implications of gaps in our understanding of suicide, we conducted a scoping review of 108 English-language articles. The use of the prevailing health science model to conduct literature reviews also provides a space to reflect on the knowledge that is missed or obscured when using overly positivistic approaches to identify and summarize bodies of literature. We find that the prevailing approaches to studying suicide are methodologically narrow, overplay a limited set of individual-level factors, and underplay key structural-level factors. In line with previous critics, our review hints at the inadequacy of existing interventions given that the existing body of knowledge has not adequately incorporated theoretically important drivers of suicide. Our reflections on current approaches to conducting literature reviews and gaps in the suicide literature provide a roadmap to bridge disciplinary traditions while helping address the knowledge gaps we have identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the last 20 years, earth's increasing surface temperature has dramatically altered local climates and risks associated with agricultural work. In parallel, increasing automation has continued to be a hallmark of innovation in agriculture, promising to lower the economic and health externalities of labor in food production by reducing worker demand and hazardous exposure. However, many of these automations neither eliminate labor nor ameliorate climate change pressures on farms. As a result of the confluence between automation and environmental change, empirical studies into the social determinants of agricultural health and safety in rapidly automating industries impacted by local effects of climate change are essential for a responsive agricultural health and safety science. In this commentary, I suggest that looking outside of our disciplinary boundaries to the lessons learned from rural studies (RS), environmental social science (ESS), and science and technology studies (STS) can lend useful theoretical framing for the development of new research trajectories in the areas of automation and climate change as they impact agricultural health and safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Measures to curb the spread of COVID-19 in the Spring of 2020 immediately raised concerns among farm safety experts about the increase in children's risk exposure due to changes in childcare and schooling arrangements. The goal of this study is to understand how farm parents were taking care of their children in the early months of COVID-19. Methods: I conducted univariate and inductive content analysis on survey data from 134 farm parents from 38 U.S. states to understand. Results: My findings overall confirm experts' predictions. The move to distance learning for about three-quarter of respondents with school-age children and changes in childcare arrangements for over half of those with pre-school-age children led respondents to contend with fewer options and added responsibilities. Most frequently used adaptation strategies reflected lower reliance on the traditionally important social networks, a desire to preserve household income, and greater involvement of children on the farm. As a result, taking care of their children became harder for more than half of respondents with likely repercussions on children's exposure to risk, parents' well-being, and on the farm business. Conclusion: The empirical insights of this study provide descriptive baseline and contextual data for future research on the impact of COVID-19. The conceptual insights expand the farm safety literature by illustrating the need to study underappreciated structural factors shaping how farm parents juggle children with their professional obligations. Finally, findings around the complexity of raising children and connections to farm productivity and farm safety highlight the importance of considering farm women's well-being alongside the safety of their children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rural studies scholars have highlighted the important role farm households play in propping up the farm business along the life course. Yet, little is known about how challenges facing farm households impact the farm business and how social safety nets may interact with household and business development trajectories. We use the example of US farm households' access to health insurance and health care to develop empirical insights into these research gaps. We draw on a life course conceptual framework integrating the European and US literature and conduct bivariate analysis using age categories as the dependent variable on a primary dataset of 1,114 surveyed farm families. Difficulties meeting health care needs affected respondents at any age. Variations in trade‐offs between consumption, savings and investments as farm households make health‐related decisions hint at compounding effects over the life course on farm structure and transition timing. With biggest differences between households under and over 65 years of age (the threshold for universal public coverage), our findings highlight the importance of considering how social policies shape farm families' (in) ability to meet their social needs and the connections to farm persistence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study, we seek to illuminate: (1) the ways farm service providers and mental health professionals understand the drivers of farm stress, (2) the strategies, challenges, and opportunities farm service providers and mental health professionals identify for supporting the mental health needs of farm families, and; (3) opportunities for future research and outreach to improve the mental health of farmers in the U.S. Midwest region. We obtained qualitative data from a series of semi-structured key informant interviews with 19 subject matter experts, using content analysis to identify themes across four domains: main challenges, unique impacts by subpopulation, coping strategies, and interventions and recommendations. The key informants we interviewed identified a variety of acute and chronic stressors, including several that are structural, rather than individual and interpersonal, and which lie outside of the control of farmers themselves. They also highlighted diversity within farm populations by socio-demographic and farm characteristics as well as positive and negative coping strategies, with negative being more common. For interventions and recommendations, they stressed the importance of education on mental health, improving access to care, and addressing root causes of stress. While farmer stress is well-documented, less is known about the perspectives of farm service professionals and mental health providers who care for them. The insights from this study add important information on how to best support the immediate and long-term mental health needs of farmers and farm families in the U.S. Midwest and beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]