Where Do Agricultural Producers Get Safety and Health Information?

ABSTRACT

There is little empirical guidance regarding communication sources and channels used and trusted by agricultural producers. The goal of this study was to characterize frequency of use and levels of trust in agricultural safety and health information sources and channels accessed by agricultural producers. A sample of 195 agricultural producers was surveyed at county fairs in Iowa. Information was collected about the frequency of use and level of trust in 14 information sources and channels. Associations between age, gender, and education level and use and trust of each information source or channel were estimated using logistic regression. The sample consisted of 72% men with a mean age of 50.1 (SD = 15.6) years. Newspaper and magazine articles were the most commonly used agricultural safety and health information source or channel; 77% (n = 140) of respondents reporting using them at least monthly. Among those reporting monthly or more frequent use, 75% reported trusting mostly or completely, compared with 58% using and 49% trusting the Internet. High levels of use and trust of newspaper and magazine articles did not vary significantly by age, gender, or education level. Age in the highest tertile (57–83 years) was marginally associated with lower odds of using, as well as using and trusting, all the information sources and channels studied except for medical clinics (use only: odds ratio [OR], 3.51, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79–15.64; use and trust: OR, 5.90, 95% CI, 0.91–38.42). These findings suggest that traditional media may be more effective than digital media for delivering agricultural safety and health information to agricultural producers. Medical clinics may be an untapped venue for communicating with older agricultural producers.

KEYWORDS:

• Agriculture
• communication
• health
• safety

Additional information

Funding

This study was supported by a supplemental award to the Great Plains Center for Agricultural Health at the University of Iowa. Funding was provided by the US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (5-U54-OH007548).