Bendixsen Casper, Barnes Kathrine, Kieke Burney, Schenk Danielle, Simich Jessica, Keifer Matthew
a National Farm Medicine Center , Marshfield Clinic Research Institute , Marshfield , Wisconsin , USA.
b Center for Clinical Epidemiology & Population Health , Marshfield Clinic Research Institute , Marshfield , Wisconsin , USA.
J Agromedicine. 2017;22(4):316-327. doi: 10.1080/1059924X.2017.1353938.
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.
Semistructured 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.
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.
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.
本研究的主要目标是描述银行家和保险公司对其农业客户健康与安全决策的相互认知影响。
对来自威斯康星州中部的10位奶农、11位农业银行家和10位农业保险公司人员进行了半结构化访谈。其中三个访谈问题涉及卡片分类。卡片分类包括类似5点李克特量表,以帮助参与者梳理32张索引卡。每张卡片代表一个被认为可能影响农民决策的个人或群体,包括总体决策以及健康与安全方面的决策。结果(卡片堆照片量化为电子表格、实地记录和访谈记录)使用SAS和NVivo进行分析。
尽管银行家因行业监管在定性表达上有所顾虑,但所有三组对让农业银行家参与都表达了中度到强烈的积极看法(x2(2)=2.8155,p=0.2695)。保险代理人得到了更多积极支持,特别是来自银行家,也来自奶农自身,并且在参与设计和实施农场安全计划方面表现出更大信心。
农业银行家和保险公司可以影响个体农民在健康与安全方面的决策。两者都被认为是安全计划和知识的良好传播者,特别是在利用经济激励措施时。保险代理人在安全计划设计中被认为更为关键。保险公司和银行与安全计划存在财务关联可能既有积极影响也有消极影响,因为农民可能对激励措施的意图持怀疑态度,这使得信息传达至关重要。