Measuring Adherence to Alternative vs. Conventional Agricultural Paradigms: A Proposed Scale *

Current debates and conflicts in agriculture appear to reflect the competing perspectives of two increasingly distinct camps of agricultural stakeholders: proponents of “alternative agriculture” and proponents of “conventional agriculture.” Several analysts have argued that members of these two camps hold fundamentally divergent paradigms of agriculture, and thus, literally see the world quite differently. The purpose of this paper is to describe an instrument—the Alternative‐Conventional Agriculture Paradigm Scale (or ACAP Scale)—developed to measure the basic beliefs and values assumed to constitute the two competing perspectives in agriculture. Items designed to tap all of the major dimensions identified in the alternative‐conventional agriculture debate were included in surveys of known groups of alternative and conventional agriculturalists, as well as in a statewide survey of farmers. The items discriminate significantly between the three samples (with the statewide farmer sample taking the intermediate position), suggesting their validity as measures of the elements of the competing agricultural paradigms. The items also exhibit a high degree of internal consistency, indicating the appropriateness of combining them into a single instrument to measure adherence to alternative versus conventional agriculture. As expected, the known groups provide more consistent responses than do the statewide sample of farmers, presumably reflecting the greater ideological coherence of social movement and interest group members. However, the alternative agriculturalists are far more consistent than are the conventional agriculturalists, and potential explanations for this finding are drawn from recent work on social movements.