Navigating the Ethical and Methodological Dimensions of a Farm Safety Photovoice Project.

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.

Childcare for farm families: A key strategy to keep children safe yet largely absent from farm programming.

Despite long-standing safety recommendations that non-working children be supervised off the worksite by an adult, little is known about farm families' ability to comply. We conducted a review of 92 documents and 36 key informant interviews in three U.S. states (Ohio, Vermont, and Wisconsin) to assess how farm service providers and farm organizations address the intersection of children and childcare with farm work and farm safety in programming. Through their programming, these two groups deeply influence farm families' social systems, affecting farm safety and farm business decisions. Study design and result interpretations were grounded in the women in agriculture literature, which examines the needs and realities of farm women (often the primary caregivers). Most documents reviewed did not address children, and even fewer addressed childcare. Interviews confirm findings of the document review. Despite awareness that farm families juggle work and children, few interviewees explicitly integrated children and childcare topics due to a messy and complex set of individual- and structural-level factors. We identified four possible, overlapping explanations for this tension: valuation of care vs. farm work; farm programming's traditional emphasis on the farm business; alignment of the programming with the agrarian ideal of the family farm; and the mismatch between farm programming scope, resources available, and childcare challenges. We conclude with two main implications for farm safety programs and farm children safety. First, farm programming's reinforcement of the social and cultural expectations regarding children's involvement in the farm operation from a young age could be counterproductive from a farm safety standpoint and miss an opportunity to provide alternative models of childrearing. Second, the invisibility of the lived realities of raising children may lead farm parents to distrust farm programming and deter them from participating.

Medical economic vulnerability: a next step in expanding the farm resilience scholarship.

In recent years, the long-standing questions of why, how, and which farm families continue farming in the face of ongoing changes have increasingly been studied through the resilience lens. While this body of work is providing updated and novel insights, two limitations, a focus on macro-level challenges faced by the farm operation and a mismatch between the scale of challenges and resilience measures, likely limit our understanding of the factors at play. We use the example of medical economic vulnerability, a micro-level challenge traditionally confined to the household sphere of the agri-family system, as a way to call attention to these limitations. Focusing on United States (U.S.) farm households, we assess: (1) To what extent are they experiencing medical economic vulnerability when using objective and subjective outcome measures? (2) Which demographic and farm characteristics are associated with experiencing medical economic vulnerability? (3) What is the association between institutional arrangements and medical economic vulnerability? Our analysis of over 900 surveys coupled with a conceptual framework merging complementary insights from three bodies of literature revealed seemingly large differences in the prevalence of medical economic vulnerability across the objective and subjective measures with the subjective measure indicating a general sentiment of medical economic vulnerability in a majority of respondents. Conversely, limited variations were noted in who experiences medical vulnerability on the basis of demographic and farm characteristics, with stronger associations being connected to the households' health insurance arrangements. We conclude with three implications of our findings for the farm resilience literature.

Farmer Mental Health in the US Midwest: Key Informant Perspectives.

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.

The invisible labor and multidimensional impacts of negotiating childcare on farms.

Social science inquiries of American agriculture have long recognized the inextricability of farm households and farm businesses. Efforts to train and support farmers, however, often privilege business realm indicators over social issues. Such framings implicitly position households as disconnected from farm stress or farm success. This article argues that systematically tracing the pathways between farm households and farm operations represents a potentially powerful inroad towards identifying effective support interventions. We argue childcare arrangements are an underrecognized challenge through which farm household dynamics directly influence agricultural production. We draw on interviews and focus group data with farmers in the Northeastern United States to understand how farmer-parents access and negotiate childcare. Farmer-parents value raising children on farms, but express reluctance to expect current or future labor from them. Years with young children thus represent an especially vulnerable phase during a farm's trajectory. We identify and analyze social, economic, and cognitive pathways through which childcare impacts farm operations. Social pathways include relationship tensions and gendered on-farm divisions of labor; economic pathways include farm layout and structure; cognitive pathways include how farmers think about and plan for their operations. Explicitly acknowledging such issues can better equip farmer-parents to anticipate and plan for conflicting demands on their time.

Lean on Your Land Grant: One University's Approach to Address the Food Supply Chain Workforce during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

During the spring 2020 COVID-19 outbreak, faculty and staff within Ohio State University's College of Food, Agricultural and Environmental Sciences came together from multiple disciplines to support essential agricultural workers. Concerted leadership from administration provided a framework for this interaction to occur while faculty worked off-campus to address the many issues identified by the agricultural community, the industry sector, and other state agencies. During the onset period, much of our work was reactive; our efforts to address worker safety and health involved three primary areas within: 1) production agricultural workers, 2) produce growers and direct marketing enterprises, and 3) meat supply chain workers. Communication to target audiences relied upon our ability to convert face-to-face programming into virtual webinars, social media, and digital publications. A Food System Task Force mobilized specialists to address emerging issues, with one specific topic related to Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). As we continue to face new seasons in agriculture production, and pockets of COVID-19 outbreaks within our state, we will continue to address the dynamic needs of our food supply systems. There are implications for how we will teach the agricultural workforce within a virtual platform, including the evaluation of the effectiveness of those training programs. There are renewed opportunities to integrate health and safety content into other Extension teams who conventionally focused on production practices and farm management topics. Several research themes emerged during subgroup dialog to pursue new knowledge in workers' cultural attitude and barriers, PPE design, PPE access, and overall attitude toward COVID-19 health practices.

Health Care and Health Insurance Access for Farm Families in the United States during COVID-19: Essential Workers without Essential Resources?

In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, farmers and farm workers have been deemed essential workers across the world. Yet, despite working in one of the most dangerous occupations, and despite being especially vulnerable to the virus (due to existing health risk factors and risk of infection stemming from difficulties adopting control measures), many farmers and farm workers in the United States have long lacked essential resources to ensure they can meet their health needs: affordable and accessible health insurance and health care. In this commentary, we draw on our own research focused on farm families and collective experiences to discuss three main challenges farm families have faced meeting their health needs: reliance on off-farm work for health insurance coverage, the need to forecast income when purchasing a plan on the health insurance marketplace, and barriers to health care in rural areas. As we discuss these challenges, we highlight the ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic is likely exacerbating these pressures. Recognizing that major crises in the past have led to major shifts in economic, social, and political systems, the disruptions brought on by COVID-19 could be leveraged to work toward increasing access to affordable and adequate health insurance and health care. As such, we conclude our commentary by outlining policy reforms and research efforts that are needed to ensure that those working in the farm sector have access to essential resources to preserve their health and safety.