Study Jacob & Brinkerhoff (1999): study US 1998

Public

'Back to the landers', USA 1998

Sample

Respondents

N = 565

Non Response

41,8

Assessment

Questionnaire: Paper & Pencil Interview (PAPI)

Correlate

Authors's Label

Discrepancy: HFP-HP gap

Our Classification

Operationalization

Discrepancy between the actual homestead food production and the selfrated importance of homestead production

HFP: percentage of a family's food that the respondents reported was produced on ther mini-homesteads

HP: Selfreport on the importance of homestead production:
- growing your own food
- cutting energy consumption
- growing/eating organic food
Rated 1 (very important) to 4 (not at all important)

GAP: The value scales and performance indexes were dichotomized at their empirical midpoints (medians) and then cross-tabulated with each other. The survey respondents then fell into one of four categories: (1) low values/low performance (“no gap”), (2) high values/low performance (“gap”), (3) low values/high performance (“gap”), and (4) high values/high performance (“no gap”). These gaps (or absence of gaps) are calculated for both performance indicators (TSR Index and HFP) and for each of the three value scales (Country Asceticism, Homestead Production and Ecological Sensitivity).
The first step to the comparability of the variables is to normalize each indicator and then place the respondents’ scores along a normalized distribution as t-scores with means of 50 and standard deviations of 10. With respondents possessing comparable scores for each of the key indicators which constitute the values-performance discrepancies, a “gap score” for each value-performance pair was calculated by subtracting normalized performance scores from normalized value scores.
To faciliate interpretation they just used a subsample with values higher than the median for Technological Self-Reliance Index (TSR), Country Ascetisism (CA), Homestead Production (HP) and Ecological Sensitivity (ES) for further analysis

Observed Relation with Happiness