ABSTRACT
The farm families interviewed have been divided into six groups on the basis of their primary motivations for remaining in agriculture. The concept of “motivation” refers to the rationale behind the decision of each farm family to remain in agriculture. Though this concept is extremely useful in analysing the phenomenon of persistence, it presents some problems which merit a brief discussion. First, motivations are based on a multiplicity of factors. In the typologies identified in this book, for instance, we find families whose motivations are dictated primarily by economic concerns, others by emotional concerns and still others by varying combinations of the two. Furthermore, the “motivations” behind persistence reflect the rationalizations of the farmers’ life conditions which may appear different to each individual even in the case of similar structural circumstances. In this respect we may find families who experience similar structural situations, but whose interpretation diverges considerably. The latter consideration is connected with the “second” problem, the lack of clear boundaries among the groups considered. As the reader will notice, there is a great deal of overlapping among the groups so that families classified in one group could, with some reinterpretation, be classified in another. Reduction in the number of typologies has been discarded, 87however, because, despite the problem of overlapping, a great deal of information is preserved and important differences are maintained. Though the typologies are not sharply separated, each distinctly contributes to the understanding of the complex and contradictory patterns of the persistence of small farms.
