Next Article in Journal
Automatic Fault Plane Solution for the Provision of Rapid Earthquake Information in South Korea
Previous Article in Journal
Big Data Analysis and Prediction of Electromagnetic Spectrum Resources: A Graph Approach
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 1
10.3390/su15010511
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Developing a Model for Building Farmers’ Beliefs in the Sufficiency Economy Philosophy to Accommodate Sustainable Agricultural Practices in the Highlands of Chiang Mai Province, Thailand

by
Papob Jeerat
,
Phutthisun Kruekum
*,
Phahol Sakkatat
,
Nakarate Rungkawat
and
Saisakul Fongmul
Division of Resources Development and Agricultural Extension, Faculty of Agricultural Production, Maejo University, Chiang Mai 50290, Thailand
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(1), 511; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010511
Submission received: 13 October 2022 / Revised: 11 December 2022 / Accepted: 22 December 2022 / Published: 28 December 2022
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The sufficiency economy philosophy (SEP) has been proven to be the best practical concept for helping a country survive poverty and sustain economic growth. However, establishing a sustainable and practical agriculture strategy based on the sufficiency economy philosophy in the highland region of Thailand is not so simple because of various traditional beliefs among the ethnic groups. The theory of panned behavior (TPB) is a generic fact concerning human behavior and belief, regardless of ethnics. This study adapted this theory to capture and develop a belief model for farmers in the highland region. Data from 375 sampled farmers in the highland communities of the Chiang Mai Province were collected by using a multi-stage sampling technique with a questionnaire and analyzed by applying the method of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). It was found that having a belief in the goal of the sufficiency economy philosophy was the most influential factor for applying this philosophy to sustainable agriculture. The second and third most influential factors were having a belief in the opinions from a group of respectful or trustworthy persons as well as federal organizations, and a belief in self-efficacy, respectively. These three factors of belief were assessed by 10 key information indicators. The results of the assessment and analysis could help local federal agencies make a strategic plan for enhancing farmers’ beliefs in and realization of the usefulness of the sufficiency economy philosophy in highland agriculture.

1. Introduction

Highland regions occupy 27% of the Earth’s surface with a vast biodiversity, as reported by the UN Convention on Biological Diversity [1]. These regions are also essential for farming as a main source of food production [2]. Thus, maintaining the subsistence and sustenance in highland regions is very important for a country to sustainably survive [3]. Approximately 53% of the land in Thailand (26.58 million acres) are in the highland region, with fertile soil. In 2018, about 1,070,355 persons from 270,886 households were officially recorded as living in the highland areas of Thailand. Among them, 87% of the households were primarily in the farming sector [4]. Both the public and private sectors have also placed a priority on improving the livelihoods of the highland population, including various government agencies at the national, regional, and local levels [5]. The Royal Project Foundation and the Highland Research and Development Institute (Public Organization) have put especially serious efforts into driving the agricultural-based livelihood of the highland population toward achieving sustainable socio-economic development and environmental improvement [6]. The running cost of sustainable development and improvement must be kept to a minimum. The simplest approach to this investment is to stimulate the highland people to realize the philosophy of sufficiency economy and its adaptation to improve their efficacy in various farming activities.
The sufficiency economy philosophy was conceived and developed by the late King Rama IX in 1974 [7] to guide the Thai population to balance and secure the smoothness of life in terms of the principles of moderation, reasonableness, self-immunity, and the necessary conditions of knowledge and morality [8]. This philosophy has been proven as the best shield to protect anyone from poverty and occupation failure. In particular, the Royal Project Foundation has applied this philosophy to help improve people’s livelihoods in the highland communities, as well as to maintain and restore the environmental conditions for sustainable highland development. Moreover, the Highland Research and Development Institute (HRDI) has adopted the practice of this philosophy to improve the income and livelihoods of people in highland communities along with cooperative research with the Royal Project Foundation’s operation [4]. The sequel of these joint activities and the collaboration between the Royal Project Foundation and the HRDI resulted in achieving the goal of making the highland communities self-reliant and restoring the conditions of soil, water, and forest resources in the highlands to the original richness [9]. However, the implementation of various extension activities to actualize the sustainable development of highland agriculture faces challenges and difficulties. Remarkably, 80% of the upper northern region of Thailand, especially in the Chiang Mai Province, are mountains, making this region infertile. This area has significant ecological functions due to it being the origin of one of the country’s major river systems, which is the Ping River. Most of its upland and highland plateaus are exploited by people pursuing farming as their main occupation [10]. Another prominent feature of the highlands in the Chiang Mai Province is the presence of a large diversity of ethnic groups forming the highest-populated highland village community among all the highland provinces. This has caused Chiang Mai to have the largest number of highland development agencies working in the local highland communities compared to other provinces [11,12]. The obvious consequences of high population pressure on the highlands include the paucity of important farming inputs, such as water for dry-season irrigation, water storage, good-quality plant seeds and animal breeds, and enough farming labor. Furthermore, the highland villagers have been shown to lack the effort needed to take part in the conservation and rehabilitation of natural resources that are degraded by their farmland expansion for mono-cropping. They have also encountered problems of land insecurity from the lack of agricultural land use rights [13] because their homestead and farmland have trespassed on the National Forest Reserve or National Park. Besides, a limited number of highland villagers who were granted land use rights often lost their rightful land by selling the land to external investors. Moreover, natural disasters and sudden or calamitous events, such as droughts, floods, and the COVID-19 outbreak, have caused crop loss, lower farm yields, and low-quality agricultural output. Meanwhile, highland farmers also lack the technological knowledge and skills necessary for them to improve their farming process and quality and to deal with the rapid global changes at present [14].
Many federal and private organizations, such as Royal Projection Foundation and the Chiang Mai Provincial Highland People Development Center, are involved in solving the addressed problems and have set goals to achieve 17 sustainable development goals under the philosophy of sufficiency economy principles [15]. Such agriculture extension processes could help enable highland farmers to strengthen their self-reliance capacity and deal with changes to economic, social, and environmental domains. However, a well-defined framework must be figured out first to ensure the success of concrete development. This research was based on issues stated in the theory of planned behavior (TPB) proposed by Azjen and Fishbein [16,17]. Regardless of any ethnics, it was primarily determined by individual behavioral intentions influenced or shaped by the following three factors: (1) attitude; (2) subjective norms; and (3) perceived behavioral control as the core beliefs of each individual [18]. The theory indicates that various beliefs are important as the primary factors in an individual’s consideration or evaluation process of actual human behavior. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify and understand the starting point of farmers’ decisions to practice sustainable farming based on sufficiency economy principles.
This paper concentrates on the model development of farmers’ faith in sufficiency economy philosophy for sustainable agricultural practices along with the theory of planned behavior and the FAO’s principles of food and agriculture sustainability. It is a principle that takes into account the cost-effective use of agricultural input, the conservation and restoration of natural resources, economic stability, self-reliance, and an agricultural approach that can cope with new challenges. [19]. The model can provide significant information for various local-level highland development agencies in the Chiang Mai Province to begin and promote the implementation of agricultural extension activities. Specifically, the beginning of SEP-based farming practices should lead to positive attitudes towards applying the principles to farming, the readiness to acquire technological transfer, the capacity to make a change, and the adoption of the SEP as a regular practice.

2. Review of Literature

2.1. The Theory of Planned Behavior: TPB

The theory of planned behavior is a psychological theory applied to predict human behavior at the individual level. The TPB presumes that human social behavior is primarily determined by an individual’s behavioral intentions, which are in turn influenced or shaped by three factors: (1) attitude; (2) subjective norms; and (3) perceived behavioral control [20,21]. These three factors may indirectly lead to actual behavior through their influence on behavioral intentions and perceived behavioral control, varied positively with self-efficacy. They are also likely to have a greater and more direct influence on behavioral intentions and actual behavior. The factors, however, are linked to three types of personal beliefs, namely the attitude relating to behavioral beliefs, the subjective norms relating to normative beliefs (or beliefs in the opinions of respectful people or trustworthy organizations), and the perceived behavioral control relating to control beliefs [16,22,23,24].

2.2. The Sufficiency Economy Philosophy

In Thailand, the “sufficiency economy philosophy” has been adopted as the main guideline in the formulation of the 9th (for 2002–2006) to the 12th (for 2017–2021) National Economic and Social Development Plans. This philosophy, conceived and developed by the late King Rama IX in 1974 [7], provides a practical and conceptual procedure to protect one’s lifestyle from poverty and to firmly achieve a state of self-reliance. The sufficiency economy philosophy has many prominent features [25] and is widely applicable to any occupation or organization, regardless of race, nationality, gender, or social status. It focuses on developing interconnectedness during changes between, for example, individuals, communities, countries, and even international bodies under the forces of globalization and rapid economic, technological, and cultural changes, as well as changes in social values [26]. There are three concepts in the SEP for individuals or any entity to consider holistically in the decision-making process: (1) Moderation. This aims at urging people to assess their capacity and live within their means by considering their actual economic, social, cultural, and environmental surroundings. (2) Reasonableness. This suggests that people should lead their life based on righteousness and actuality as permitted by one’s knowledge condition (to be prudent and careful) as well as one’s moral condition (to have integrity, morality, and diligence), and as justified by social values. (3) Built-in resilience or self-immunity. This advises one to be prepared for an efficient adaptation to meet the challenges arising from external physical, economic, social, environmental, and cultural impacts and changes. To be “sufficient”, one has to possess two basic qualifications, namely: (1) a basic knowledge of various relevant subject areas for careful and prudent use as well as integrated applications; (2) morality with due consideration to ethics, honesty, patience, diligence, and brains in leading one’s life [8]. Therefore, the practices and conducts guided by the principles of the sufficiency economy philosophy can contribute to achieving more balanced development and a greater ability to deal with economic, social, environmental, and cultural shocks to reach sustainable development [27].

2.3. FAO’s Principles of Sustainable Food and Agriculture

This research used the FAO principles of sustainable food and agriculture as the basis for developing the indicators to measure how realistic the SEP is with farmers’ beliefs to support the development of sustainable agriculture in the highland region of Thailand. According to a report published by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [28], titled “Transforming Food and Agriculture to Achieve the SDGs: 20 Interconnected Actions to Guide Decision-Makers”, the five basic principles that the FAO has established to guide the agricultural sector toward sustainability are: (1) increase productivity, employment, and value addition in food systems; (2) protect and enhance natural resources; (3) improve livelihoods and foster inclusive economic growth; (4) enhance the resilience of people, communities, and ecosystems; and (5) adapt governance to new challenges [29]. The mentioned principles aim to create a transition in food production to sustainable agriculture. In addition, they can balance the operation of agricultural activities in economic, social, and environmental dimensions. This includes the ability to support policy development, strategies, and various rules/regulations leading to the sustainability of the livelihoods of farmers as food producers, as illustrated in Figure 1.

3. Research Methodology

3.1. Research Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework consisted of two parts. The first part was the belief in the SEP as being supportive to sustainable agriculture, which was clarified into three domains of belief. The first domain concerns the behavioral belief in the merit of the SEP as being capable of contributing to sustainable farming practices. The second domain is the normative belief influenced by the opinions from a group of respectful or trustworthy persons as well as federal organizations urging the application of the SEP to achieve sustainable agriculture. The last domain regards the control belief in self-efficacy to achieve sustainable agriculture. The second part was a set of indicators in each belief domain which included 3 indicators in the first domain, 4 indicators in the second domain, and 3 indicators in the last domain. The indicators of these three domains of belief were developed by adopting various attributes from the SEP and the FAO’s principles of sustainable food and agriculture, as presented in Table 1. The relationship between the SEP and beliefs is illustrated in Figure 2.

3.2. Population and Samples

The target population in this research was a group of people engaging in farming occupations and living in the operational area of the Chiang Mai Province’s Highland People Development Center. The studied samples were identified by using a multi-stage sampling method [39] with the following four stages:
Stage 1. Randomly select 7 out of 14 districts of the Chiang Mai Province where sub-district(s) and village(s) are located in the highland. These 7 districts were (1) Om Koi, (2) Chiang Dao, (3) Mae Chaem, (4) Samoeng, (5) Mae Taeng, (6) Mae Rim, and (7) Chom Thong.
Stage 2. Randomly select 2 sub-districts from each district in Stage 1, resulting in a total of 14 sample sub-districts.
Stage 3. Randomly select 3 highland villages from each selected sub-district in Stage 2, resulting in a total of 42 highland villages.
There were a total of 5547 households in the sample set. The sample size for a confirmatory factor analysis as the measurement part of structural equation modeling was determined according to the suggestion of Kline [40]. Here, there should be at least 10 samples for each variable of interest. As there were 23 parameters to be estimated in this study, the sample size became at least 230 samples.
Stage 4. Select sampled farming households from each sample village to represent the unit of analysis at a number proportional to the population. The selection of samples was achieved with the simple random method by using the random table until the number of sampled farming households reached the calculated sample size for each village. Then, the household head or his/her representative in the farming household registration of each selected sample farming household became a unit of analysis and an informant for this study. However, 375 samples were collected to increase the number of parameters for model modification. Thus, there were 375 questionnaire respondents in this study.

3.3. Data Collection

A research tool used in this study was a questionnaire for collecting primary information from 375 sampled farmers to assess their beliefs in the sufficiency economy philosophy. A 5-level scoring system [41,42,43], i.e., 1 = very low, 2 = low, 3 = moderate, 4 = high, and 5 = very high, was used to record the degree of belief. The questionnaire was composed of sections relevant to the beliefs according to the theory of planned behavior (TPB), the SEP, and the FAO five principles of sustainable food and agriculture. The structure and topics of the questionnaire are presented in Table 2.

3.4. Quality Testing of Research Tool

A reliability and quality test of the questionnaire was conducted by preliminarily questioning 30 farmers with similar characteristics to the studied sample farmers. The calculated Cronbach’s coefficient alphas of the question items related to the three aspects of beliefs were in the range of 0.716–0.814. The sets of question items were considered to be good or acceptable if Cronbach’s α ≥ 0.70, as suggested by Peterson [44], Taber [45], and Hair et al. [46]. (Table 3).

3.5. Data Analysis

The investigation was conducted by using the confirmatory factor analysis method as the measurement part of the structural equation modeling (SEM) technique [47,48], and the calculation was performed with the IBM SPSS AMOS 28.0 software program. The analysis consisted of 3 steps according to Mulaik and Millsap [49]. Step 1 involved the construction of a model (or path diagram) for building farmers’ beliefs in applying the sufficiency economy philosophy to support their sustainable agricultural practices. Step 2 dealt with testing the measurement model through the measures of composite reliability, CR; standardized factor loadings; average variance extracted, AVE; and discriminant validity. Step 3 was the implementation of the confirmatory factor analysis as the measurement part of the structural equation model (SEM) to determine whether there was any consistency between the constructed model and the empirical outcomes using the following criteria: χ2/df ≤ 2.00 [40], p-value of chi-square > 0.05 [50], goodness-of-fit index (GFI) > 0.95, adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI) > 0.95, comparative fit index (CFI) > 0.95, norm fit index (NFI) > 0.95, and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) < 0.06 [51,52,53,54].

4. Results

4.1. Constructing Farmers’ Belief Model under Sufficiency Economy Philosophy

A questionnaire was developed based on (1) the core elements in the theory of planned behavior addressing the three components of beliefs, (2) the sufficiency economy philosophy, and (3) the FAO’s principles for sustainable food and agriculture. After passing the quality test at an acceptable level, the questionnaire was filled in by the sample group. There were 10 indicators involved in the development of the model based on the following three kinds of beliefs: (1) belief in the goal of the SEP leading to sustainable agricultural practices (three indicators), (2) belief in the opinions of a group of respectful or trustworthy persons as well as federal organizations that apply the SEP to accommodate sustainable agricultural practices (four indicators), and (3) belief in one’s own ability to apply the SEP to support sustainable agricultural practices (three indicators). Table 3 lists the indicators and shows the statistical analysis of each indicator.

4.2. Testing of Measurement Model

The test results indicated that the internal consistency among the indicators passed the composite reliability test (CR) of 0.70, as suggested by Hair et al. [55], with composite reliability scores of [0.8109–0.858]. Furthermore, according to the acceptable values of standardized factor loadings above 0.06 by Kline [56], our estimates for the 10 indicators were in the range of 0.686–0.900. Besides, the average variance extracted (AVE) values were in the range of 0.596–0.656, which is higher than the minimum threshold of 0.50 for acceptance as suggested by Hair et al. [46]. These numbers are reported in Table 4 to indicate the convergent validity of all kinds of beliefs. In addition, the values of the square root of the AVE for all three kinds of beliefs were higher than the corresponding values of internal consistency. This indicated that there was discriminant validity for all kinds of beliefs according to Fornell and Larcker [57] and Hair et al. [55], as summarized in Table 5.

4.3. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Model

All indices in the model fitting indicated that the model constructed in this study was appropriate for building farmers’ beliefs in the sufficiency economy philosophy in order to make them pursue sustainable farming practices (χ2/df = 1.404, χ2 = 26.669, df = 19, p = 0.113, GFI = 0.986, AGFI = 0.960, CFI = 0.996, NFI = 0.987, RMSEA = 0.033, and RMR = 0.019). Thus, it can be inferred that the model developed in this study is well compatible with the observed data.
Table 3 presents the results of the first-order confirmatory factor analysis, showing the influencing factor of each specific indicator. The first aspect of belief (BEL1: belief in the merit of the SEP) was influenced mostly by the belief that a sufficiency economy can contribute to self-reliance (β = 0.817). It was followed by the belief about economic security (β = 0.798) and then by the belief about food safety (β = 0.696). The second aspect of belief (BEL2: belief in opinions from respectful people or trustworthy organizations) arose primarily from the influence of indicators about the knowledge and extension advice given by officers/workers of agricultural development agencies (β = 0.834). This was followed by influence from family members (β = 0.799), a local wise man, or an agricultural expert as a role model (β = 0.755), and influence from a community leader or leading farmer (β = 0.711), in a descending order, respectively. The third aspect of belief (BEL3: belief involving one’s own ability) was influenced firstly by the belief in a person’s own ability to preserve the cultural heritage related to farming (β = 0.900). The second was the belief about the ability to build up the fertility of agricultural resources (β = 0.830). The third was the belief about the ability to build readiness to deal with agricultural problems unexpectedly occurred in the future (β = 0.686). All indicators of the three kinds of belief had statistically significant beta coefficients at the level of 0.001.
Table 4 shows the results of the second-order confirmatory factor analysis. It can be seen that the first kind of belief, in the merit of the SEP, was the most influential factor in building farmers’ beliefs about applying the sufficiency economy philosophy to sustainable farming practices (β = 0.891). It was followed by the second kind of belief, in opinions from respectful people or trustworthy organizations (β = 0.856), and then by the third kind of belief, involving one’s own ability (β = 0.767). All kinds of belief were found to have influences at the statistically significant level of 0.001, as shown in Figure 3.

5. Discussion

Our study provides an empirical confirmation that three core components of belief put forward in the theory of planned behavior by Ajzen [18] can be used as a basis for building farmers’ beliefs in the SEP. Our results reveal that the belief in the merit of the SEP is the most important in influencing farmers to actually adopt sustainable farming practices. This finding is consistent with that of Haden [58], who pointed out that with the perception of the likely agricultural changes, farmers will make the adjustment to cope with the impacts of changes that might fall on them. Furthermore, our results call attention to the realistic and concrete outcomes of adherence to the SEP, which has enabled farmers to gain self-reliance [8], to achieve economic security [30], and to bring about food safety [31]. These expected outcomes tend to make farmers believe in the merit of the SEP, which in turn motivates farmers to adapt their agricultural practices away from chemical-based farming and toward alternative approaches that are supportive of sustainability and environmentally friendly, such as organic farming systems and integrated farming systems [59]. The second most important kind of belief is the trust in the opinions of a group of respectful or trustworthy persons as well as federal organizations to make farmers perceive the benefits of the SEP in their achievement of farming practices. Farmers can be motivated by being referred to the national objective of implementing the use of the sufficiency economy philosophy in promoting sustainable farming practices to achieve effective outcomes by the end of the 12th National Social and Economic Development Plan for 2017–2021 [60]. The application of the SEP has been advocated to improve the quality of farmers’ lives for those who also receive other development inputs to improve their production capability and agricultural output management, attain food security, and orient themselves toward environmentally friendly production practices. This development process reflects a reality that farmers’ beliefs in the SEP also arises from the knowledge and extension advice given by officers/workers of agricultural development agencies [61]. Furthermore, support from family members is another crucial indicator because, according to the principles of the SEP, family members are considered important and to have a part in sharing ideas about farming as well as other activities, as they are the closest persons to the farmer [32]. Moreover, the findings from this study confirm the importance of locally known wise men or agricultural experts in applying the SEP to sustainable farming practices. This also includes community leaders or leading farmers acting as a coordinating agent to promote and extend the concepts of sufficiency economy for the development of sustainable agriculture in the local community [36]. Meanwhile, the belief in one’s own ability to apply the SEP was found to be least important to sustainable farming practices. However, the confidence in having the ability to preserve the cultural heritage related to farming will be the most important in this kind of belief for a farmer to use his/her efficacy in this way when applying the SEP [62]. This is because the SEP also aims to encourage farmers to create a balance between engaging in farming activities and preserving the cultural identities of the local community where they live [63]. It can stimulate the inheritance of farmland and farming techniques to their offspring to continue the farming occupation [64,65]. The belief in a person’s ability to build fertility in agricultural resources is regarded as a critical factor for the farmer to become confident that he/she can actually pursue sustainable agricultural practices [66] using the SEP as the guiding principle. This is because the SEP, when applied in new theory agriculture, stresses farming practices that produce no harm or damage to natural resources or productive ecological systems such that these resources and systems can be conserved for productive use in future farming [67]. The belief in one’s own ability to build readiness to deal with problems that might occur in agriculture in the future was given the lowest scale in indicating farmers’ beliefs in using the SEP effectively for sustainable farming. However, farmers may adopt sustainable farming practices to cope with unknown problems and changes in the future within the scope of their capabilities [8]. The results of this study can support the initiation of the promotion of farming to meet the sustainable development goals (SDGs) of the United Nation. This is on the basis of high highland agriculture in each country under the policy of the “sufficiency economy philosophy for sustainable development goals partnership” [68]. With respect to this issue, a development is a strategy to build the credibility of agricultural extension workers to strengthen the agricultural sector and achieve SDGs, in particular Goal 2 (end hunger, achieve food security, enhance nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture), Goal 12 (ensure a sustainable pattern of production and consumption), and Goal 15 (protect, restore, and support the sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems; support sustainable forest management and fight desertification; end soil deterioration but support rehabilitation; and stop the loss of bio-diversity) [28,69].

6. Conclusions

The first aspect of belief, corresponding to the belief in the merit of the SEP, has three indicators. The indicator expressed as the belief that the SEP contributes to self-reliance showed the highest influence, followed by the indicator expressed as the belief that the SEP helps build economic security and create food safety. The second aspect of belief, involving trust in the opinions of a group of respectful or trustworthy persons as well as federal organizations, motivated the use of the SEP to achieve sustainable farming. In this aspect, the most influence was from the extension officers/workers of agricultural development agencies, followed in descending order by family members, local wise men and agricultural experts, and community leaders or leading farmers. The third aspect of self-efficacy had three indicators. The belief in one’s own ability to preserve the cultural heritage related to farming was the most influential factor. The next two influences were the belief in the ability to build up the fertility of agricultural resources and the belief in one’s own ability to build readiness to deal with problems that might occur in agriculture in the future. Figure 4 schematically illustrates the essence of the model for building farmers’ beliefs in the SEP applicable to sustainable agriculture.

7. Policy Recommendations

Based on the findings from the model built for Chiang Mai as a prototype, we propose the following policy recommendations:
Principal policy. It is imperative to develop (1) a teaching and learning system, and (2) information dissemination channels for a greater number of farmers to understand more about the sufficiency economy philosophy, of which principles can be applied for sustainable farming practices. Examples are an online learning system and particularly the social lab (arranged by various community sustainable agriculture learning centers), which can help farmers gain experience in implementing sustainable agricultural practices, following the guiding principles of the SEP. The overall policy objective is to build a learning process for farmers to apply the SEP in their farming practices such that these farmers can improve their capacity to acquire self-reliance, economic security, and food safety.
Immediate policy. It is necessary to build up the strength of farmers and workers in the agricultural development agencies in disseminating knowledge and experience concerning sustainable farming practices. There is also a need to elevate the knowledge and skill level of officers/workers of related agricultural development agencies. This includes training them in the areas of information and technology transfer and diffusion using modern techniques, media, and platforms to timely assist farmers in production, marketing, and risk management against pests and climate vagaries. The next need should be the provision of support to encourage the family members of farmers to participate in SEP-based sustainable farming practices. An attempt should be made at the development of a process for transferring knowledge from local wise men or agricultural experts to highland farmers. Finally, the development of the strength of community leaders or local leading farmers is equally important to help promote the expansion of SEP-based sustainable farming practices and environmentally friendly production.
Support policy. It is critical to develop the basic potentiality of farmers to enable them to be ready for applying the SEP for sustainable agricultural practices. The following policy actions should be implemented to support the major and immediate policy measures proposed above: (1) Embedding the capability to preserve the cultural heritage related to farming, particularly the local cultural rituals and traditional beliefs related to agriculture. This capability should be embedded to create value-added farming products. Farmers should be inventively encouraged to transfer their farming knowledge and farmland to their offspring to continue the family farming occupation. (2) Providing support to facilitate activities at the community level to elevate the community’s capability to restore and increase the fertility and productivity of agricultural resources, including soil, water, and forest area. (3) Building farmers’ skills and abilities to enable them to handle problems possibly arising in agriculture in the future, such as economic volatility, climate change (natural disasters), a shortage of farm laborers, and the lack of younger family members to inherit the farming occupation.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, P.J., P.K. and S.F.; methodology, P.J. and P.S.; validation, P.J., P.K., P.S., N.R. and S.F.; formal analysis, P.J., P.K. and P.S.; investigation, P.J. and P.K.; resources, P.J. and P.K.; data curation, P.J., P.K. and P.S.; writing—original draft preparation, P.J., P.K. and P.S.; writing—review and editing, P.J., P.K., P.S. and N.R.; visualization, P.J., P.K., P.S. and N.R.; supervision, P.J. and P.K.; project administration, P.J. and P.K.; funding acquisition, P.J. and P.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Royal Golden Jubilee Ph. D Programme Scholarship.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This research received approval from the Research Ethics Committee of Chiang Mai Rajabhat University (Project ID: IRBCMRU 2021/141.16.12).

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

This research received support as a part of the Royal Golden Jubilee Ph. D Programme Scholarship under the supervision of the Thailand Research Fund (PHD/0208/2561). Our gratitude also goes to those farmers in the highland areas of Chiang Mai Province who participated in the research activities and thoughtfully provided us with all the needed information.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Mountain Biodiversity Matters. Let’s Protect Our Future. 2020. Available online: https://www.fao.org/3/cb1930en/cb1930en.pdf (accessed on 25 September 2022).
  2. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. #MountainsMatter. 2019. Available online: https://www.fao.org/3/ca6779en/ca6779en.pdf (accessed on 4 December 2022).
  3. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Mountains Are Vital for Our Lives. 2018. Available online: https://www.fao.org/3/CA2244EN/ca2244en.pdf (accessed on 4 December 2022).
  4. Highland Research and Development Institute. 8-Year Highland Research and Development Plan for 2020–2027. 2019. Available online: https://www.hrdi.or.th/public/files/Planning/ResDevelopPlanning2563-2570.pdf (accessed on 25 September 2022).
  5. United Nations. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. 2015. Available online: https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/resource-pdf/Resolution_A_RES_70_1_EN.pdf (accessed on 25 September 2022).
  6. Royal Project Foundation. The Historical Background of the Royal Project Foundation. 2021. Available online: https://royalproject.org/page/history/ (accessed on 25 September 2022).
  7. Pavarolarvidya, S. Sufficiency Economy: A New Philosophy in the Global World; Thai Chamber of Commerce and Amarin Publishing Company: Bangkok, Thailand, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  8. Kansuntisukmongkol, K. Philosophy of sufficiency economy for community-based adaptation to climate change: Lessons learned from Thai case studies. Kasetsart J. Soc. Sci. 2017, 38, 56–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Highland Research and Development Institute. 5-Year Master Plan of the Highland Research and Development Institute for 2017–2021. 2016. Available online: https://www.hrdi.or.th/public/files/modelscheme/5YearsRoyalProjectModelScheme(2560-2564).pdf (accessed on 25 September 2022).
  10. Chiang Mai Provincial Office. Chiang Mai Provincial Development Plan for 2018–2022 (revised 2020). 2020. Available online: https://www.chiangmai.go.th/managing/public/D2/2D14Jan2020084026.pdf (accessed on 24 September 2022).
  11. Sruamsiri, P.A. Handbook on Strategic Design and Approaches to Sustainable Highland Development: Strategies and Guidelines for Farmers’ and Development Workers’ Practices; Faculty of Agriculture, Chiang Mai University: Chiang Mai, Thailand, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  12. Sruamsiri, P. Village Communities in the Global Setting: Guidelines for Building Self-immunity in Highland Communities under the Globalized Economic Development Trends Considering the Findings from an Integrated Research Addressing the Inter-Linkage among Economic, Social, and Environmental Domains, under the Thai-German (NRCT-DFG) Highland Development Project; Wanida Printing: Chiang Mai, Thailand, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  13. Sutthinarakorn, W. Economic Problems Solving for Better Living of Ethnic Groups in Highland. Dusit Thani Coll. J. 2019, 13, 56–73. [Google Scholar]
  14. Jeerat, P.; Kruekum, P.; Sakkatat, P.; Rungkawat, N.; Fongmul, S. Vision for the Development of International Sustainable Agriculture: A Case Study on Guidelines for the Management of Agricultural Problems on Highland at the Local Level, Chiang Mai, Thailand. In Proceedings of the UBRC 15th: Future Trends of Research and Innovation, Ubon Ratchathani, Thailand, 22–23 July 2021. [Google Scholar]
  15. Highland Research and Development Institute. 5-Year Action Plan for Sustainable Highland Development for 2023–2027. 2022. Available online: https://www.hrdi.or.th/public/files/Planning/HRDI_Development/5Year-HighlandSustainableDevelopmentActionPlan66-70.pdf (accessed on 25 September 2022).
  16. Fishbein, M.; Ajzen, I. Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behaviour: An Introduction to Theory and Research; Addison-Wesley Reading: Boston, MA, USA, 1975. [Google Scholar]
  17. Ajzen, I.; Fishbein, M. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior; Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1980. [Google Scholar]
  18. Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Building a Common Vision for Sustainable Food and Agriculture. Principles and Approaches. 2014. Available online: https://www.fao.org/3/i3940e/i3940e.pdf (accessed on 24 September 2022).
  20. Ajzen, I.; Fishbein, M. The Influence of Attitudes on Behavior. In The handbook of Attitudes; Albarracín, D., Johnson, B.T., Zanna, M.P., Eds.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2005; pp. 173–221. [Google Scholar]
  21. Ajzen, I.; Cote, N.G. Attitudes and the prediction of behavior. In Attitudes and Attitude Change; Crano, W.D., Prislin, R., Eds.; Psychology Press: New York, NY, USA, 2008; pp. 289–311. [Google Scholar]
  22. Schifter, D.E.; Ajzen, I. Intention, perceived control, and weight loss: An application of the theory of planned behavior. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1985, 49, 843–851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Madden, T.J.; Ellen, P.S.; Ajzen, I.A. Comparison of the Theory of Planned Behavior and the Theory of Reasoned Action. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 1992, 18, 3–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Theory of Planned Behavior with Background Factors. Available online: https://people.umass.edu/aizen/tpb.background.html (accessed on 4 December 2022).
  25. Piboolsravut, P. Asian Financial Crisis and the Historical Development of Sufficiency Economy to Bring About Sustainable Development. In The Philosophy of Sufficiency Economy and Thai Society; Thongpakdee, N., Ed.; Sustainable Development and Sufficiency Economy Studies Center: Bangkok, Thailand, 2011; pp. 38–39. [Google Scholar]
  26. Thailand Sustainable Development Foundation. Sufficiency for Sustainability; Pen Thai Publishing: Bangkok, Thailand, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  27. Thongpakdee, N. Sufficiency Economy Philosophy: Historical Background and Interpretation. NIDA Dev. J. 2012, 47, 1–25. [Google Scholar]
  28. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Transforming Food and Agriculture to Achieve the SDGs: 20 Interconnected Actions to Guide Decision-Makers. 2018. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/I9900EN/i9900en.pdf (accessed on 24 September 2022).
  29. Briamonte, L.; Pergamo, R.; Arru, B.; Furesi, R.; Pulina, P.; Madau, F.A. Sustainability Goals and Firm Behaviours: A Multi-Criteria Approach on Italian Agro-Food Sector. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Jungell-Michelsson, J.; Heikkurinen, P. Sufficiency: A systematic literature review. Ecol. Econ. 2022, 195, 107380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kurz, R. Post-growth perspectives: Sustainable development based on efficiency and on sufficiency. Public Sect. Econ. 2019, 43, 401–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Choochom, O.A. Causal Relationship of Living Behavior Based on Sufficiency Economy Philosophy for Thai University Students. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015, 177, 260–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Yoelao, D.; Sombatwattana, P.; Mohan, K.P. Development and Validation of the Sufficiency Living Wage Scale for Workers in Thailand. Thail. World Econ. 2021, 39, 23–38. [Google Scholar]
  34. Wattanakornsiri, A.; Pukkalanun, N.; Phimphanthavong, H. Sufficiency Economy Philosophy for Community Driven Development Approach on Sustainable Local Development: Lessons Learned and Success Factors from Sufficiency Economy Villages, Surin Province, Thailand. J. Local Gov. Innov. 2020, 4, 15–35. [Google Scholar]
  35. Mongsawad, P. The philosophy of the sufficiency economy: A contribution to the theory of development. Asia-Pac. Dev. J. 2012, 17, 123–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Sufficiency Economy Philosophy: Thailand’s Path towards Sustainable Development Goals. 2016. Available online: https://thaiembdc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Ebook-Sufficiency-Economy-Philosophy.pdf (accessed on 24 September 2022).
  37. Barua, P.; Tejativaddhana, P. Impact of Application of Sufficiency Economy Philosophy on the Well-Being of Thai Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Relevant Studies. J. Popul. Soc. Stud. 2019, 27, 198–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Sturiale, L.; Scuderi, A.; Timpanaro, G.; Matarazzo, B. Sustainable Use and Conservation of the Environmental Resources of the Etna Park (UNESCO Heritage): Evaluation Model Supporting Sustainable Local Development Strategies. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Etikan, I.; Bala, K. Sampling and sampling methods. Biom. Biostat. Int. J. 2017, 5, 215–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Kline, R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 3rd ed.; Guilford Press: New York, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  41. Ajzen, I. Constructing a Theory of Planned Behavior Questionnaire. 2006. Available online: https://people.umass.edu/aizen/pdf/tpb.measurement.pdf (accessed on 25 September 2022).
  42. Yukl, G.; Seifert, C.F.; Chavez, C. Validation of the extended Influence Behavior Questionnaire. Leadersh. Q. 2008, 19, 609–621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Rothbart, M.K.; Ahadi, S.A.; Hershey, K.L.; Fisher, P. Investigations of temperament at three to seven years: The Children’s Behavior Questionnaire. Child Dev. 2001, 72, 1394–1408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Peterson, R.A. A Meta-analysis of Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha. J. Consum. Res. 1994, 21, 381–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Taber, K.S. The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education. Res. Sci. Educ. 2018, 48, 1273–1296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed.; Pearson: New York, NY, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  47. Brown, T.A. Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research, 2nd ed.; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  48. Schreiber, J.B.; Nora, A.; Stage, F.K.; Barlow, E.A.; King, J. Reporting Structural Equation Modeling and Confirmatory Factor Analysis Results: A Review. J. Educ. Res. 2006, 99, 323–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Mulaik, S.A.; Millsap, R.E. Doing the Four-Step Right. Struct. Equ. Model. Multidiscip. J. 2000, 7, 36–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Iacobucci, D. Structural equations modeling: Fit Indices, sample size, and advanced topics. J. Consum. Psychol. 2010, 20, 90–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Schumacker, R.E.; Lomax, R.G. A beginner’s Guide to Structural Equation Modeling, 3rd ed.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  52. Schermelleh-Engel, K.; Moosbrugger, H.; Müller, H. Evaluating the Fit of Structural Equation Models: Tests of Significance and Descriptive Goodness-of-Fit Measures. Methods Psychol. Res. 2003, 8, 23–74. [Google Scholar]
  53. Hu, L.; Bentler, P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. Multidiscip. J. 1999, 6, 1–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Jackson, D.L.; Gillaspy, J.A.; Purc-Stephenson, R. Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: An overview and some recommendations. Psychol. Methods 2009, 14, 6–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Hair, J.; Hult, G.T.M.; Ringle, C.; Sarstedt, M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), 3rd ed.; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  56. Kline, P. An Easy Guide to Factor Analysis; Routledge: London, UK, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  57. Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Haden, V.R.; Niles, M.T.; Lubell, M.; Perlman, J.; Jackson, L.E. Global and local concerns: What attitudes and beliefs motivate farmers to mitigate and adapt to climate change? PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e52882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Boonlue, T. Peace Capacity Building and Sustainability of People living by Sufficiency Economy Philosophy. J. Public Relat. Advert. 2018, 11, 43–51. [Google Scholar]
  60. Office of Agricultural Economics. Agricultural Development Plans in the 12th National Economic and Social Development Plan for 2017–2021; Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives: Bangkok, Thailand, 2016.
  61. Kavevon, P.; Ratana-Ubol, A.; Geratiburana, Y. A Model Development for Promoting Long Life Education on Sufficiency Economy Towards Agriculture-based Highland Communication. Panyapiwat J. 2018, 10, 240–250. [Google Scholar]
  62. Salite, D.; Poskitt, S. Managing the impacts of drought: The role of cultural beliefs in small-scale farmers’ responses to drought in Gaza Province, southern Mozambique. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2019, 41, 101298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Tanantpapat, T.; Kuama, A.; Vadhanasindhu, P.; Srimai, S. Community Sufficiency Economy Readiness for Sustainable Agriculture and Tourism Development. PSAKU Int. J. Interdiscip. Res. 2019, 8, 67–79. [Google Scholar]
  64. Veenhuizen, R. Cities Farming for the Future: Urban Agriculture for Green and Productive Cities; RUAF Foundation: The Hague, The Netherlands, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  65. Reijntjes, C.; Haverkort, B.; Waters-Bayer, A. Farming for the Future: An Introduction to Low-External Input and Sustainable Agriculture; Macmillan Education: London, UK, 1992. [Google Scholar]
  66. Gabel, V.M.; Home, R.; Stolze, M.; Birrer, S.; Steinemann, B.; Köpke, U. The influence of on-farm advice on beliefs and motivations for Swiss lowland farmers to implement ecological compensation areas on their farms. J. Agric. Educ. Ext. 2018, 24, 233–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Jenjarrussakul, B.; Senasu, K. Public administration based on the sufficiency economy philosophy. Kasetsart J. Soc. Sci. 2022, 43, 131–138. [Google Scholar]
  68. Thailand International Cooperation Agency. SEP for SDGs Partnership. 2022. Available online: https://sep4sdgs.mfa.go.th/en/page/70261-sep-for-sdgs-partnership?menu=5d6bd9a415e39c1868002d64 (accessed on 3 December 2022).
  69. Romeo, R.; Manuelli, S.R.; Geringer, M.; Barchiesi, V. Mountain Farming Systems–Seeds for the future: Sustainable Agricultural Practices for Resilient Mountain Livelihoods; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2021. [Google Scholar]
Sustainability 15 00511 g001 550
Figure 1. Five key principles of sustainability for food and agriculture, compiled from the data given in [19].
Figure 1. Five key principles of sustainability for food and agriculture, compiled from the data given in [19].
Sustainability 15 00511 g001
Sustainability 15 00511 g002 550
Figure 2. A conceptual framework for model development for building farmers’ beliefs in the sufficiency economy philosophy to support the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices.
Figure 2. A conceptual framework for model development for building farmers’ beliefs in the sufficiency economy philosophy to support the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices.
Sustainability 15 00511 g002
Sustainability 15 00511 g003 550
Figure 3. Analysis of the model for building farmers’ beliefs in applying the sufficiency economy philosophy to sustainable farming practices.
Figure 3. Analysis of the model for building farmers’ beliefs in applying the sufficiency economy philosophy to sustainable farming practices.
Sustainability 15 00511 g003
Sustainability 15 00511 g004 550
Figure 4. A model for building farmers’ beliefs in the sufficiency economy philosophy applicable to sustainable farming practices.
Figure 4. A model for building farmers’ beliefs in the sufficiency economy philosophy applicable to sustainable farming practices.
Sustainability 15 00511 g004
Table
Table 1. Development of indicator model of different aspects for building farmers’ beliefs in applying the sufficiency economy philosophy to sustainable farming practices.
Table 1. Development of indicator model of different aspects for building farmers’ beliefs in applying the sufficiency economy philosophy to sustainable farming practices.
AspectIndicatorConcepts behind the Development of Indicators
Balanced Development for Sustainable Wellness
According to the Sufficiency Economy Philosophy 		Principles of Sustainable Food and AgricultureInformation Source
EconomySocietyEnvironmentCulture
Belief in the merit of SEP as being able to contribute to sustainable farming practices(1) Belief in the support for self-reliance✓✓✓✓Principle 3[8,30,31]
(2) Belief in the support for economic security✓ Principle 3
(3) Belief in the help to build food safety ✓✓ Principle 2
Belief in opinions from respectful people or trustworthy organizations who urge the application of SEP to achieve sustainable agriculture(1) Belief arising from the support of family members✓Principle 1[32,33,34,35,36]
(2) Belief arising from the support of a community leader or leading farmer✓Principle 5
(3) Belief arising from having a local wise man or agricultural expert as a role model✓Principle 1
(4) Belief arising from knowledge or extension advice given by officers/workers of agricultural development agencies✓Principle 5
Belief in one’s own ability to apply SEP to achieve sustainable agriculture(1) Belief in one’s own ability to build readiness to deal with the problems that might take place in agriculture in the future✓✓✓✓Principle 4[8,34,37,38]
(2) Belief in one’s own ability to build up the fertility of agricultural resources✓Principle 2
(3) Belief in one’s own ability to preserve the cultural heritage related to farming✓✓Principle 4
Table
Table 2. Suggested probing questions related to the indicator(s) of each aspect of beliefs in applying the sufficiency economy philosophy to sustainable agricultural practices.
Table 2. Suggested probing questions related to the indicator(s) of each aspect of beliefs in applying the sufficiency economy philosophy to sustainable agricultural practices.
AspectIndicatorSuggested Probing Questions
Belief in the merit of SEP as being able to contribute to sustainable farming practices(1) Belief in the support for self-reliance(1) Do you believe that farming using SEP can help farmers become self-reliant?
(2) Belief in the support for economic security(2) Do you believe that SEP can help farmers obtain economic security?
(3) Belief in the help to build food safety(3) Do you believe that SEP-based sustainable agriculture will enable the production of agricultural produce and products that are safe for consumption or are toxin-free?
Belief in opinions from respectful people or trustworthy organizations who urge the application of SEP to achieve sustainable agriculture(1) Belief arising from the support of family members(1) Do you believe that a family member is a person that will encourage or give support to the farmer to implement SEP in his/her farming activities to finally achieve agricultural sustainability?
(2) Belief arising from the support of community leader or leading farmer(2) Do you believe that a community leader or farmers’ group leader is the person that can help promote SEP-based sustainable agricultural practices?
(3) Belief arising from having a local wise man or agricultural expert as a role model (3) Do you believe that a farming guru/senior person/agricultural expert can represent a good role model as a person who pursues SEP-based sustainable agriculture?
(4) Belief arising from knowledge or extension advice given by officers/workers of agricultural development agencies(4) Do you believe that officers/workers of various agricultural development agencies can transfer knowledge about the sufficiency economy principles such that farmers can apply the knowledge in practice that leads to agricultural sustainability?
Belief in one’s own ability to apply SEP to achieve sustainable agriculture(1) Belief in one’s own ability to build readiness to deal with the problems that might take place in agriculture in the future(1) Do you believe that farming using the sufficiency economy principles will help a farmer to prepare himself/herself for readiness or become able to handle problems that might occur in the future?
(2) Belief in one’s own ability to build up the fertility of agricultural resources(2) Do you believe that farming using the sufficiency economy principles will help enable farmers to build up the fertility of such agricultural resources as land, water, and forest area?
(3) Belief in one’s own ability to preserve the cultural heritage related to agriculture(3) Do you believe that sustainable agriculture based on the sufficiency economy principles will be supportive of the preservation or the further development of local wisdom and cultural heritage related to agriculture?
Table
Table 3. Indicators used in the model for building farmers’ beliefs based on the sufficiency economy philosophy to support sustainable agricultural practices.
Table 3. Indicators used in the model for building farmers’ beliefs based on the sufficiency economy philosophy to support sustainable agricultural practices.
Indicators for Building Farmers’ Beliefs in Applying the Sufficiency Economy Philosophy
to Sustainable Agricultural Practices (BEL)		βtr2Reliability
(Cronbach’s α )
Aspect 1 is the belief in the merit of SEP as being able to contribute to sustainable farming practices (BEL1) 0.716
    Indicator 1.1 is the belief that SEP can contribute to self-reliance (BEL1.1)0.817—0.668
    Indicator 1.2 is the belief that SEP can contribute to economic security (BEL1.2)0.79813.349 ***0.636
    Indicator 1.3 is the belief that SEP can help build food safety (BEL1.3)0.69610.862 ***0.485
Aspect 2 is the belief in opinions from respectful people or trustworthy organizations who urge the application of SEP to achieve sustainable agriculture (BEL2) 0.814
    Indicator 2.1 is the belief arising from the support of family members (BEL2.1)0.799—0.638
    Indicator 2.2 is the belief arising from the support of a community leader or leading farmer (BEL2.2)0.71112.689 ***0.506
    Indicator 2.3 is the belief arising from having a local wise man or agricultural expert as a role model (BEL2.3)0.75513.385 ***0.571
    Indicator 2.4 is the belief arising from knowledge or extension advice given by officers/workers of agricultural development agencies (BEL2.4)0.83413.345 ***0.696
Aspect 3 is the belief in one’s own ability to apply SEP to achieve sustainable agriculture(BEL3) 0.752
    Indicator 3.1 is the belief in one’s own ability to build readiness to deal with the problems that might take place in agriculture in the future (BEL3.1)0.686—0.470
    Indicator 3.2 is the belief in one’s own ability to build up the fertility of agricultural resources (BEL3.2)0.83014.207 ***0.689
    Indicator 3.3 is the belief in one’s own ability to preserve the cultural heritage related to farming (BEL3.3)0.90014.709 ***0.809
Note: the coefficients are standardized (β) values; *** statistically significant at the 0.001 level.
Table
Table 4. Aspects of beliefs in the model for building farmers’ beliefs in the sufficiency economy philosophy to support sustainable agricultural practices.
Table 4. Aspects of beliefs in the model for building farmers’ beliefs in the sufficiency economy philosophy to support sustainable agricultural practices.
Core components of Belief in Implementing Sustainable Farming Practices
Based on Sufficiency Economy Principles (BEL)		βtR2CRAVE
Aspect 1 is the belief in the merit of SEP as being able to contribute to sustainable farming practices (BEL1)0.891—0.7930.8150.596
Aspect 2 is the belief in opinions from respectful people or trustworthy organizations that urge the application of SEP to achieve sustainable agriculture (BEL2)0.85610.941 ***0.7320.8580.602
Aspect 3 is the belief in one’s own ability to apply SEP to achieve sustainable agriculture (BEL3)0.76710.092 ***0.5880.8100.656
Note: the coefficients are standardized (β) values; *** statistically significant at the 0.001 level; CR is composite reliability; AVE is average variance extraction.
Table
Table 5. Discriminant validity analysis.
Table 5. Discriminant validity analysis.
Aspect of BeliefBEL1BEL2BEL3
The belief in the merit of SEP (BEL1)0.772
The belief in opinions from respectful people or trustworthy organizations (BEL2)0.762 ***0.776
The belief in one’s own ability (BEL3)0.683 ***0.656 ***0.810
Note: The bold values represent the square root of AVE; *** correlation is significant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Jeerat, P.; Kruekum, P.; Sakkatat, P.; Rungkawat, N.; Fongmul, S. Developing a Model for Building Farmers’ Beliefs in the Sufficiency Economy Philosophy to Accommodate Sustainable Agricultural Practices in the Highlands of Chiang Mai Province, Thailand. Sustainability 2023, 15, 511. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010511

AMA Style

Jeerat P, Kruekum P, Sakkatat P, Rungkawat N, Fongmul S. Developing a Model for Building Farmers’ Beliefs in the Sufficiency Economy Philosophy to Accommodate Sustainable Agricultural Practices in the Highlands of Chiang Mai Province, Thailand. Sustainability. 2023; 15(1):511. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010511

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jeerat, Papob, Phutthisun Kruekum, Phahol Sakkatat, Nakarate Rungkawat, and Saisakul Fongmul. 2023. "Developing a Model for Building Farmers’ Beliefs in the Sufficiency Economy Philosophy to Accommodate Sustainable Agricultural Practices in the Highlands of Chiang Mai Province, Thailand" Sustainability 15, no. 1: 511. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010511

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop