List of variables included in regression models and their summary statistics.
| Label . | Description . | Coding . | Mean† . | Standard deviation† . |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dependent variables | ||||
| D_ACCEPT | How acceptable are the described changes in payments to this farmer for you? (1: Fully unacceptable; 11: Fully acceptable) | 1–11 | 6.02 | 2.64 |
| D_FAIR | The farmer described, farmer X, will obtain Y per year in support payments. Do you think this amount is an unfairly low level of income support, a fair level of income support, or an unfairly high level of income support? (reverse coded; 1: Unfairly high level of income support; 11: Unfairly low level of income support) | 1–11 | 5.47 | 2.27 |
| D_SUPPLY | How happy would you be for farmer X to supply you (through a shop or market) with Y? (1: Very unhappy; 11: Very happy) | 1–11 | 7.08 | 2.61 |
| D_PETITION | Imagine that a government income support scheme for farmers similar to farmer X would be discontinued. How willing would you be to write to your local MSP to lobby on behalf of this farmer for the continuation of their support payments? (1: Not willing at all; 11: Very willing) | 1–11 | 5.55 | 2.85 |
| Attributes and levels | ||||
| Male farmer | Gender: male (ref: female) | 0,1 | 0.56 | 0.50 |
| Experience: 5 years | Experience: 5 years (ref: 10 years) | 0,1 | 0.16 | 0.36 |
| Experience: 20 years | Experience: 20 years (ref: 10 years) | 0,1 | 0.47 | 0.50 |
| Agric. Qualification | Agricultural qualification (ref: no relevant qualification) | 0,1 | 0.17 | 0.37 |
| Business Qualification | Business degree (ref: no relevant qualification) | 0,1 | 0.37 | 0.48 |
| Farm Size: small | Size of farm: small sized (ref: large) | 0,1 | 0.31 | 0.46 |
| Farm Size: moderate | Size of farm: moderate (ref: large) | 0,1 | 0.32 | 0.47 |
| Production type: Organic | Production type: organic (ref: conventional) | 0,1 | 0.45 | 0.50 |
| Production Level: average | Production level: average (ref: lower than average) | 0,1 | 0.34 | 0.47 |
| Production Level: above average | Production level: above average (ref: lower than average) | 0,1 | 0.34 | 0.48 |
| A. Welfare/Prod Quality: good | Animal welfare: good (ref: standard) | 0,1 | 0.33 | 0.47 |
| Product quality: decent with some used for livestock feed and some for human consumption (ref: poor and is mainly used for livestock feed) | ||||
| A. Welfare/Prod Quality: exceptional | Animal welfare: exceptional (ref: standard) | 0,1 | 0.37 | 0.48 |
| Product quality: exceptional and is mainly used for human consumption (ref: poor and is mainly used for livestock feed) | ||||
| Biodiversity: moderate | Moderate conditions for wildlife (ref: poor conditions for wildlife) | 0,1 | 0.33 | 0.47 |
| Biodiversity: good | Good conditions for wildlife (ref: poor conditions for wildlife) | 0,1 | 0.35 | 0.48 |
| Farm Carbon Footprint: low | Carbon footprint—whole farm: among the lowest compared to farms of similar size (ref: amongst the highest) | 0,1 | 0.31 | 0.46 |
| Farm Carbon Footprint: average | Carbon footprint—whole farm: average compared to farms of similar size (ref: amongst the highest) | 0,1 | 0.35 | 0.48 |
| Carbon Intensity: low | Carbon footprint—intensity per unit of output: low (ref: high) | 0,1 | 0.31 | 0.46 |
| Carbon Intensity: average | Carbon footprint—intensity per unit of output: average (ref: high) | 0,1 | 0.36 | 0.48 |
| Financial Situation: loss | Not profitable (makes a loss) Making a profit (ref: making a profit) | 0,1 | 0.33 | 0.47 |
| Financial Situation: coping | Coping (does not make a profit, does not make a loss) (ref: making a profit) | 0,1 | 0.36 | 0.48 |
| Change in Payment | Percentage change in income support payments to farmer | −0.5,−0.25,0, 0.1, 0.25, 0.5 | 0.10 | 0.30 |
| Respondent-specific variables | ||||
| Production Type: Beef | Version 1: Farmers described in vignettes are beef farmers (ref: Version 4: Cropping farms) | 0,1 | 0.25 | 0.43 |
| Production Type: Dairy | Version 2: Farmers described in vignettes are dairy farmers (ref: Version 4: Cropping farms) | 0,1 | 0.25 | 0.43 |
| Production Type: Lamb | Version 3: Farmers described in vignettes are lamb farmers (ref: Version 4: Cropping farms) | 0,1 | 0.25 | 0.43 |
| Age | Age of respondent (years) | 47.84 | 17.41 | |
| Age_squared | Age of respondent (years) squared | 2591.5 | 1699.4 | |
| Female | Respondent gender: Female (Reference: Male and non-binary) | 0,1 | 0.53 | 0.50 |
| Education: low | Level of educational attainment: relatively low (ref: Level of educational attainment: relatively high) | 0,1 | 0.42 | 0.49 |
| Education: missing | Answered ‘prefer not to say’ to question on highest level of education obtained (ref: Level of educational attainment: relatively high) | 0,1 | 0.01 | 0.08 |
| Place of residence: rural | Respondent lives in rural area (Settlement of 3,000 to 9,999 people, and with a drive time of over 30 minutes to a settlement of 10,000 or more; area with a population of less than 3,000 people, and with a drive time of over 30 minutes to a settlement of 10,000 or more) according to 6-fold rural-urban classification (ref: respondent lives in larger town ≥ 10,000 or smaller town but ≤ 30-minute drive to a larger town) | 0,1 | 0.13 | 0.34 |
| Children | Respondent lives in household with children | 0,1 | 0.40 | 0.49 |
| EU Brexit vote: leave | Respondent voting intention for EU exit if referendum was repeated. ‘If you were given the chance to vote again, how would you vote—to remain a member of the European Union, to leave the European Union, or would you not vote?’ (ref: Remain in EU or would not vote) | 0,1 | 0.29 | 0.45 |
| Perceived financial situation | Subjective perception of financial situation: ‘How well would you say you are managing financially these days? Would you say you are …?’ (1: Living very comfortably; 5: Finding it very difficult) | 1 to 5 | 2.63 | 1.01 |
| Political Affinity: SNP | Affinity to political party ‘Do you generally think of yourself as a little closer to one political party than to the others? If yes, which party?’: Scottish national party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.38 | 0.49 |
| Political Affinity: Conservatives | Affinity to political party: Conservative party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.16 | 0.36 |
| Political Affinity: Liberal Democrats | Affinity to political party: Liberal democratic party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.06 | 0.23 |
| Political Affinity: Labour | Affinity to political party: Labour party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.11 | 0.32 |
| Political Affinity: Green Party | Affinity to political party: Green party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.04 | 0.18 |
| Political Affinity: Other | Affinity to political party: Other party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.05 | 0.21 |
| Environmental activism indicator | Indicator of environmental civic activism; sum of three activities, each taking 1 if undertaken in past 5 years, 0 otherwise. Activities: 1) signed a petition about an environmental/rural/agricultural issue; 2) given money to an environmental group; 3) taken part in a protest or demonstration about an environmental issue? | 0 to 3 | 0.62 | 0.91 |
| Label . | Description . | Coding . | Mean† . | Standard deviation† . |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dependent variables | ||||
| D_ACCEPT | How acceptable are the described changes in payments to this farmer for you? (1: Fully unacceptable; 11: Fully acceptable) | 1–11 | 6.02 | 2.64 |
| D_FAIR | The farmer described, farmer X, will obtain Y per year in support payments. Do you think this amount is an unfairly low level of income support, a fair level of income support, or an unfairly high level of income support? (reverse coded; 1: Unfairly high level of income support; 11: Unfairly low level of income support) | 1–11 | 5.47 | 2.27 |
| D_SUPPLY | How happy would you be for farmer X to supply you (through a shop or market) with Y? (1: Very unhappy; 11: Very happy) | 1–11 | 7.08 | 2.61 |
| D_PETITION | Imagine that a government income support scheme for farmers similar to farmer X would be discontinued. How willing would you be to write to your local MSP to lobby on behalf of this farmer for the continuation of their support payments? (1: Not willing at all; 11: Very willing) | 1–11 | 5.55 | 2.85 |
| Attributes and levels | ||||
| Male farmer | Gender: male (ref: female) | 0,1 | 0.56 | 0.50 |
| Experience: 5 years | Experience: 5 years (ref: 10 years) | 0,1 | 0.16 | 0.36 |
| Experience: 20 years | Experience: 20 years (ref: 10 years) | 0,1 | 0.47 | 0.50 |
| Agric. Qualification | Agricultural qualification (ref: no relevant qualification) | 0,1 | 0.17 | 0.37 |
| Business Qualification | Business degree (ref: no relevant qualification) | 0,1 | 0.37 | 0.48 |
| Farm Size: small | Size of farm: small sized (ref: large) | 0,1 | 0.31 | 0.46 |
| Farm Size: moderate | Size of farm: moderate (ref: large) | 0,1 | 0.32 | 0.47 |
| Production type: Organic | Production type: organic (ref: conventional) | 0,1 | 0.45 | 0.50 |
| Production Level: average | Production level: average (ref: lower than average) | 0,1 | 0.34 | 0.47 |
| Production Level: above average | Production level: above average (ref: lower than average) | 0,1 | 0.34 | 0.48 |
| A. Welfare/Prod Quality: good | Animal welfare: good (ref: standard) | 0,1 | 0.33 | 0.47 |
| Product quality: decent with some used for livestock feed and some for human consumption (ref: poor and is mainly used for livestock feed) | ||||
| A. Welfare/Prod Quality: exceptional | Animal welfare: exceptional (ref: standard) | 0,1 | 0.37 | 0.48 |
| Product quality: exceptional and is mainly used for human consumption (ref: poor and is mainly used for livestock feed) | ||||
| Biodiversity: moderate | Moderate conditions for wildlife (ref: poor conditions for wildlife) | 0,1 | 0.33 | 0.47 |
| Biodiversity: good | Good conditions for wildlife (ref: poor conditions for wildlife) | 0,1 | 0.35 | 0.48 |
| Farm Carbon Footprint: low | Carbon footprint—whole farm: among the lowest compared to farms of similar size (ref: amongst the highest) | 0,1 | 0.31 | 0.46 |
| Farm Carbon Footprint: average | Carbon footprint—whole farm: average compared to farms of similar size (ref: amongst the highest) | 0,1 | 0.35 | 0.48 |
| Carbon Intensity: low | Carbon footprint—intensity per unit of output: low (ref: high) | 0,1 | 0.31 | 0.46 |
| Carbon Intensity: average | Carbon footprint—intensity per unit of output: average (ref: high) | 0,1 | 0.36 | 0.48 |
| Financial Situation: loss | Not profitable (makes a loss) Making a profit (ref: making a profit) | 0,1 | 0.33 | 0.47 |
| Financial Situation: coping | Coping (does not make a profit, does not make a loss) (ref: making a profit) | 0,1 | 0.36 | 0.48 |
| Change in Payment | Percentage change in income support payments to farmer | −0.5,−0.25,0, 0.1, 0.25, 0.5 | 0.10 | 0.30 |
| Respondent-specific variables | ||||
| Production Type: Beef | Version 1: Farmers described in vignettes are beef farmers (ref: Version 4: Cropping farms) | 0,1 | 0.25 | 0.43 |
| Production Type: Dairy | Version 2: Farmers described in vignettes are dairy farmers (ref: Version 4: Cropping farms) | 0,1 | 0.25 | 0.43 |
| Production Type: Lamb | Version 3: Farmers described in vignettes are lamb farmers (ref: Version 4: Cropping farms) | 0,1 | 0.25 | 0.43 |
| Age | Age of respondent (years) | 47.84 | 17.41 | |
| Age_squared | Age of respondent (years) squared | 2591.5 | 1699.4 | |
| Female | Respondent gender: Female (Reference: Male and non-binary) | 0,1 | 0.53 | 0.50 |
| Education: low | Level of educational attainment: relatively low (ref: Level of educational attainment: relatively high) | 0,1 | 0.42 | 0.49 |
| Education: missing | Answered ‘prefer not to say’ to question on highest level of education obtained (ref: Level of educational attainment: relatively high) | 0,1 | 0.01 | 0.08 |
| Place of residence: rural | Respondent lives in rural area (Settlement of 3,000 to 9,999 people, and with a drive time of over 30 minutes to a settlement of 10,000 or more; area with a population of less than 3,000 people, and with a drive time of over 30 minutes to a settlement of 10,000 or more) according to 6-fold rural-urban classification (ref: respondent lives in larger town ≥ 10,000 or smaller town but ≤ 30-minute drive to a larger town) | 0,1 | 0.13 | 0.34 |
| Children | Respondent lives in household with children | 0,1 | 0.40 | 0.49 |
| EU Brexit vote: leave | Respondent voting intention for EU exit if referendum was repeated. ‘If you were given the chance to vote again, how would you vote—to remain a member of the European Union, to leave the European Union, or would you not vote?’ (ref: Remain in EU or would not vote) | 0,1 | 0.29 | 0.45 |
| Perceived financial situation | Subjective perception of financial situation: ‘How well would you say you are managing financially these days? Would you say you are …?’ (1: Living very comfortably; 5: Finding it very difficult) | 1 to 5 | 2.63 | 1.01 |
| Political Affinity: SNP | Affinity to political party ‘Do you generally think of yourself as a little closer to one political party than to the others? If yes, which party?’: Scottish national party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.38 | 0.49 |
| Political Affinity: Conservatives | Affinity to political party: Conservative party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.16 | 0.36 |
| Political Affinity: Liberal Democrats | Affinity to political party: Liberal democratic party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.06 | 0.23 |
| Political Affinity: Labour | Affinity to political party: Labour party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.11 | 0.32 |
| Political Affinity: Green Party | Affinity to political party: Green party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.04 | 0.18 |
| Political Affinity: Other | Affinity to political party: Other party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.05 | 0.21 |
| Environmental activism indicator | Indicator of environmental civic activism; sum of three activities, each taking 1 if undertaken in past 5 years, 0 otherwise. Activities: 1) signed a petition about an environmental/rural/agricultural issue; 2) given money to an environmental group; 3) taken part in a protest or demonstration about an environmental issue? | 0 to 3 | 0.62 | 0.91 |
Based on 1,951 respondents, omitting respondents with missing information on Perceived financial situation or Environmental activism indicator.
List of variables included in regression models and their summary statistics.
| Label . | Description . | Coding . | Mean† . | Standard deviation† . |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dependent variables | ||||
| D_ACCEPT | How acceptable are the described changes in payments to this farmer for you? (1: Fully unacceptable; 11: Fully acceptable) | 1–11 | 6.02 | 2.64 |
| D_FAIR | The farmer described, farmer X, will obtain Y per year in support payments. Do you think this amount is an unfairly low level of income support, a fair level of income support, or an unfairly high level of income support? (reverse coded; 1: Unfairly high level of income support; 11: Unfairly low level of income support) | 1–11 | 5.47 | 2.27 |
| D_SUPPLY | How happy would you be for farmer X to supply you (through a shop or market) with Y? (1: Very unhappy; 11: Very happy) | 1–11 | 7.08 | 2.61 |
| D_PETITION | Imagine that a government income support scheme for farmers similar to farmer X would be discontinued. How willing would you be to write to your local MSP to lobby on behalf of this farmer for the continuation of their support payments? (1: Not willing at all; 11: Very willing) | 1–11 | 5.55 | 2.85 |
| Attributes and levels | ||||
| Male farmer | Gender: male (ref: female) | 0,1 | 0.56 | 0.50 |
| Experience: 5 years | Experience: 5 years (ref: 10 years) | 0,1 | 0.16 | 0.36 |
| Experience: 20 years | Experience: 20 years (ref: 10 years) | 0,1 | 0.47 | 0.50 |
| Agric. Qualification | Agricultural qualification (ref: no relevant qualification) | 0,1 | 0.17 | 0.37 |
| Business Qualification | Business degree (ref: no relevant qualification) | 0,1 | 0.37 | 0.48 |
| Farm Size: small | Size of farm: small sized (ref: large) | 0,1 | 0.31 | 0.46 |
| Farm Size: moderate | Size of farm: moderate (ref: large) | 0,1 | 0.32 | 0.47 |
| Production type: Organic | Production type: organic (ref: conventional) | 0,1 | 0.45 | 0.50 |
| Production Level: average | Production level: average (ref: lower than average) | 0,1 | 0.34 | 0.47 |
| Production Level: above average | Production level: above average (ref: lower than average) | 0,1 | 0.34 | 0.48 |
| A. Welfare/Prod Quality: good | Animal welfare: good (ref: standard) | 0,1 | 0.33 | 0.47 |
| Product quality: decent with some used for livestock feed and some for human consumption (ref: poor and is mainly used for livestock feed) | ||||
| A. Welfare/Prod Quality: exceptional | Animal welfare: exceptional (ref: standard) | 0,1 | 0.37 | 0.48 |
| Product quality: exceptional and is mainly used for human consumption (ref: poor and is mainly used for livestock feed) | ||||
| Biodiversity: moderate | Moderate conditions for wildlife (ref: poor conditions for wildlife) | 0,1 | 0.33 | 0.47 |
| Biodiversity: good | Good conditions for wildlife (ref: poor conditions for wildlife) | 0,1 | 0.35 | 0.48 |
| Farm Carbon Footprint: low | Carbon footprint—whole farm: among the lowest compared to farms of similar size (ref: amongst the highest) | 0,1 | 0.31 | 0.46 |
| Farm Carbon Footprint: average | Carbon footprint—whole farm: average compared to farms of similar size (ref: amongst the highest) | 0,1 | 0.35 | 0.48 |
| Carbon Intensity: low | Carbon footprint—intensity per unit of output: low (ref: high) | 0,1 | 0.31 | 0.46 |
| Carbon Intensity: average | Carbon footprint—intensity per unit of output: average (ref: high) | 0,1 | 0.36 | 0.48 |
| Financial Situation: loss | Not profitable (makes a loss) Making a profit (ref: making a profit) | 0,1 | 0.33 | 0.47 |
| Financial Situation: coping | Coping (does not make a profit, does not make a loss) (ref: making a profit) | 0,1 | 0.36 | 0.48 |
| Change in Payment | Percentage change in income support payments to farmer | −0.5,−0.25,0, 0.1, 0.25, 0.5 | 0.10 | 0.30 |
| Respondent-specific variables | ||||
| Production Type: Beef | Version 1: Farmers described in vignettes are beef farmers (ref: Version 4: Cropping farms) | 0,1 | 0.25 | 0.43 |
| Production Type: Dairy | Version 2: Farmers described in vignettes are dairy farmers (ref: Version 4: Cropping farms) | 0,1 | 0.25 | 0.43 |
| Production Type: Lamb | Version 3: Farmers described in vignettes are lamb farmers (ref: Version 4: Cropping farms) | 0,1 | 0.25 | 0.43 |
| Age | Age of respondent (years) | 47.84 | 17.41 | |
| Age_squared | Age of respondent (years) squared | 2591.5 | 1699.4 | |
| Female | Respondent gender: Female (Reference: Male and non-binary) | 0,1 | 0.53 | 0.50 |
| Education: low | Level of educational attainment: relatively low (ref: Level of educational attainment: relatively high) | 0,1 | 0.42 | 0.49 |
| Education: missing | Answered ‘prefer not to say’ to question on highest level of education obtained (ref: Level of educational attainment: relatively high) | 0,1 | 0.01 | 0.08 |
| Place of residence: rural | Respondent lives in rural area (Settlement of 3,000 to 9,999 people, and with a drive time of over 30 minutes to a settlement of 10,000 or more; area with a population of less than 3,000 people, and with a drive time of over 30 minutes to a settlement of 10,000 or more) according to 6-fold rural-urban classification (ref: respondent lives in larger town ≥ 10,000 or smaller town but ≤ 30-minute drive to a larger town) | 0,1 | 0.13 | 0.34 |
| Children | Respondent lives in household with children | 0,1 | 0.40 | 0.49 |
| EU Brexit vote: leave | Respondent voting intention for EU exit if referendum was repeated. ‘If you were given the chance to vote again, how would you vote—to remain a member of the European Union, to leave the European Union, or would you not vote?’ (ref: Remain in EU or would not vote) | 0,1 | 0.29 | 0.45 |
| Perceived financial situation | Subjective perception of financial situation: ‘How well would you say you are managing financially these days? Would you say you are …?’ (1: Living very comfortably; 5: Finding it very difficult) | 1 to 5 | 2.63 | 1.01 |
| Political Affinity: SNP | Affinity to political party ‘Do you generally think of yourself as a little closer to one political party than to the others? If yes, which party?’: Scottish national party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.38 | 0.49 |
| Political Affinity: Conservatives | Affinity to political party: Conservative party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.16 | 0.36 |
| Political Affinity: Liberal Democrats | Affinity to political party: Liberal democratic party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.06 | 0.23 |
| Political Affinity: Labour | Affinity to political party: Labour party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.11 | 0.32 |
| Political Affinity: Green Party | Affinity to political party: Green party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.04 | 0.18 |
| Political Affinity: Other | Affinity to political party: Other party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.05 | 0.21 |
| Environmental activism indicator | Indicator of environmental civic activism; sum of three activities, each taking 1 if undertaken in past 5 years, 0 otherwise. Activities: 1) signed a petition about an environmental/rural/agricultural issue; 2) given money to an environmental group; 3) taken part in a protest or demonstration about an environmental issue? | 0 to 3 | 0.62 | 0.91 |
| Label . | Description . | Coding . | Mean† . | Standard deviation† . |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dependent variables | ||||
| D_ACCEPT | How acceptable are the described changes in payments to this farmer for you? (1: Fully unacceptable; 11: Fully acceptable) | 1–11 | 6.02 | 2.64 |
| D_FAIR | The farmer described, farmer X, will obtain Y per year in support payments. Do you think this amount is an unfairly low level of income support, a fair level of income support, or an unfairly high level of income support? (reverse coded; 1: Unfairly high level of income support; 11: Unfairly low level of income support) | 1–11 | 5.47 | 2.27 |
| D_SUPPLY | How happy would you be for farmer X to supply you (through a shop or market) with Y? (1: Very unhappy; 11: Very happy) | 1–11 | 7.08 | 2.61 |
| D_PETITION | Imagine that a government income support scheme for farmers similar to farmer X would be discontinued. How willing would you be to write to your local MSP to lobby on behalf of this farmer for the continuation of their support payments? (1: Not willing at all; 11: Very willing) | 1–11 | 5.55 | 2.85 |
| Attributes and levels | ||||
| Male farmer | Gender: male (ref: female) | 0,1 | 0.56 | 0.50 |
| Experience: 5 years | Experience: 5 years (ref: 10 years) | 0,1 | 0.16 | 0.36 |
| Experience: 20 years | Experience: 20 years (ref: 10 years) | 0,1 | 0.47 | 0.50 |
| Agric. Qualification | Agricultural qualification (ref: no relevant qualification) | 0,1 | 0.17 | 0.37 |
| Business Qualification | Business degree (ref: no relevant qualification) | 0,1 | 0.37 | 0.48 |
| Farm Size: small | Size of farm: small sized (ref: large) | 0,1 | 0.31 | 0.46 |
| Farm Size: moderate | Size of farm: moderate (ref: large) | 0,1 | 0.32 | 0.47 |
| Production type: Organic | Production type: organic (ref: conventional) | 0,1 | 0.45 | 0.50 |
| Production Level: average | Production level: average (ref: lower than average) | 0,1 | 0.34 | 0.47 |
| Production Level: above average | Production level: above average (ref: lower than average) | 0,1 | 0.34 | 0.48 |
| A. Welfare/Prod Quality: good | Animal welfare: good (ref: standard) | 0,1 | 0.33 | 0.47 |
| Product quality: decent with some used for livestock feed and some for human consumption (ref: poor and is mainly used for livestock feed) | ||||
| A. Welfare/Prod Quality: exceptional | Animal welfare: exceptional (ref: standard) | 0,1 | 0.37 | 0.48 |
| Product quality: exceptional and is mainly used for human consumption (ref: poor and is mainly used for livestock feed) | ||||
| Biodiversity: moderate | Moderate conditions for wildlife (ref: poor conditions for wildlife) | 0,1 | 0.33 | 0.47 |
| Biodiversity: good | Good conditions for wildlife (ref: poor conditions for wildlife) | 0,1 | 0.35 | 0.48 |
| Farm Carbon Footprint: low | Carbon footprint—whole farm: among the lowest compared to farms of similar size (ref: amongst the highest) | 0,1 | 0.31 | 0.46 |
| Farm Carbon Footprint: average | Carbon footprint—whole farm: average compared to farms of similar size (ref: amongst the highest) | 0,1 | 0.35 | 0.48 |
| Carbon Intensity: low | Carbon footprint—intensity per unit of output: low (ref: high) | 0,1 | 0.31 | 0.46 |
| Carbon Intensity: average | Carbon footprint—intensity per unit of output: average (ref: high) | 0,1 | 0.36 | 0.48 |
| Financial Situation: loss | Not profitable (makes a loss) Making a profit (ref: making a profit) | 0,1 | 0.33 | 0.47 |
| Financial Situation: coping | Coping (does not make a profit, does not make a loss) (ref: making a profit) | 0,1 | 0.36 | 0.48 |
| Change in Payment | Percentage change in income support payments to farmer | −0.5,−0.25,0, 0.1, 0.25, 0.5 | 0.10 | 0.30 |
| Respondent-specific variables | ||||
| Production Type: Beef | Version 1: Farmers described in vignettes are beef farmers (ref: Version 4: Cropping farms) | 0,1 | 0.25 | 0.43 |
| Production Type: Dairy | Version 2: Farmers described in vignettes are dairy farmers (ref: Version 4: Cropping farms) | 0,1 | 0.25 | 0.43 |
| Production Type: Lamb | Version 3: Farmers described in vignettes are lamb farmers (ref: Version 4: Cropping farms) | 0,1 | 0.25 | 0.43 |
| Age | Age of respondent (years) | 47.84 | 17.41 | |
| Age_squared | Age of respondent (years) squared | 2591.5 | 1699.4 | |
| Female | Respondent gender: Female (Reference: Male and non-binary) | 0,1 | 0.53 | 0.50 |
| Education: low | Level of educational attainment: relatively low (ref: Level of educational attainment: relatively high) | 0,1 | 0.42 | 0.49 |
| Education: missing | Answered ‘prefer not to say’ to question on highest level of education obtained (ref: Level of educational attainment: relatively high) | 0,1 | 0.01 | 0.08 |
| Place of residence: rural | Respondent lives in rural area (Settlement of 3,000 to 9,999 people, and with a drive time of over 30 minutes to a settlement of 10,000 or more; area with a population of less than 3,000 people, and with a drive time of over 30 minutes to a settlement of 10,000 or more) according to 6-fold rural-urban classification (ref: respondent lives in larger town ≥ 10,000 or smaller town but ≤ 30-minute drive to a larger town) | 0,1 | 0.13 | 0.34 |
| Children | Respondent lives in household with children | 0,1 | 0.40 | 0.49 |
| EU Brexit vote: leave | Respondent voting intention for EU exit if referendum was repeated. ‘If you were given the chance to vote again, how would you vote—to remain a member of the European Union, to leave the European Union, or would you not vote?’ (ref: Remain in EU or would not vote) | 0,1 | 0.29 | 0.45 |
| Perceived financial situation | Subjective perception of financial situation: ‘How well would you say you are managing financially these days? Would you say you are …?’ (1: Living very comfortably; 5: Finding it very difficult) | 1 to 5 | 2.63 | 1.01 |
| Political Affinity: SNP | Affinity to political party ‘Do you generally think of yourself as a little closer to one political party than to the others? If yes, which party?’: Scottish national party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.38 | 0.49 |
| Political Affinity: Conservatives | Affinity to political party: Conservative party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.16 | 0.36 |
| Political Affinity: Liberal Democrats | Affinity to political party: Liberal democratic party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.06 | 0.23 |
| Political Affinity: Labour | Affinity to political party: Labour party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.11 | 0.32 |
| Political Affinity: Green Party | Affinity to political party: Green party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.04 | 0.18 |
| Political Affinity: Other | Affinity to political party: Other party (ref: no closer affinity to any party) | 0,1 | 0.05 | 0.21 |
| Environmental activism indicator | Indicator of environmental civic activism; sum of three activities, each taking 1 if undertaken in past 5 years, 0 otherwise. Activities: 1) signed a petition about an environmental/rural/agricultural issue; 2) given money to an environmental group; 3) taken part in a protest or demonstration about an environmental issue? | 0 to 3 | 0.62 | 0.91 |
Based on 1,951 respondents, omitting respondents with missing information on Perceived financial situation or Environmental activism indicator.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.
