Writer: Alexander Zahl-Thanem

The link between class origin and educational attainment have been extensively studied in numerous countries. Additionally, a growing body of research shows that place is essential for understanding educational inequalities. Rural youth have been identified as a group commonly underrepresented in higher education in several countries. However, evidence on how class origin and youths’ place of residence are intertwined in higher education participation is scarce. Based on population-wide administrative data of the Norwegian 1996-1998 birth cohorts, this chapter analyses the relationship between youths’ class origin and higher education participation along an urban-rural axis. The results confirm previous research showing that social class, gender, and place are all contributing factors affecting youths’ higher education participation. Further, the main results can be summarized as follows: (i) the relationship between class origin and higher education participation is somewhat stable along the urban-rural axis, (ii) gender inequality in higher education participation is more prominent in rural versus urban areas, disfavoring rural boys, and (iii) boys growing up in rural areas have a considerably lower probability of participating in higher education compared to their urban counterparts, even when comparing youth with the same class background. The findings suggest that place should be considered a significant factor that could affect youths’ educational careers – alongside and in combination with other well-known factors, such as class and gender.

I Mariann Villa, Erik T. Valestrand og Johan Fredrik Rye (red.) Migrasjon og mobilitet - handlinger, mønstre og forståelser i norsk sammenheng.

Writers: Reidun Heggem, Gudveig Gjøsund, Alexander Zahl-Thanem og Anne Margrethe Brigham

Many agricultural researchers are now turning away from the traditional postal surveys to email surveys of farmers – an option that is increasingly viable as digitalisation continues to permeate rural areas. However, email surveys often result in considerably lower response rates. This raises questions about the potential of email surveys to experience non-response bias, where the survey methodology excludes particular sectors of the general population and thus results in responses that do not represent the wider population. In this paper we address the issue of whether agricultural researchers should move from postal surveys to email surveys by comparing the results of two applications of the Norwegian national Trends survey – one to 3000 farmers via email and one to 3000 farmers via standard mail. The postal survey achieved a response rate of 41.1% – almost double that of the email survey at 21.4%. However, analysis of the returns suggested this had not led to greater non-response bias in the email survey. While respondents to the email survey were younger, better educated and more likely to be part-time farmers, comparing the entire survey revealed very few significant differences between the two samples. Where the difference was significant (in particular, attitudes towards technology), the scalar difference was so small that using different survey methods would not have led to different conclusions. Although there was no evidence that the low response rate compromised the email survey, we conclude that postal surveys may still be preferable because (a) there is less scope for non-response bias, and (b) having to double the gross survey size to achieve a sufficient sample size may create additional survey fatigue in the long term. We discuss the applicability of the findings to farm surveys in other countries. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.09.029

I Burton, Rob J.F., Eirik M. Fuglestad, Magnar Forbord og May-Britt Ellingsted (red.) Etter oljen: vår bioøkonomiske fremtid. Oslo: Cappelen Damm

The reappearance of large carnivores in Europe can be viewed as a conservation success, however, the increase in carnivore numbers has also resulted in an increase in livestock predation. While multiple studies have been conducted into farmers’ attitudes to large carnivores, the consequence of predation on farmers’ mental health and wellbeing is under-researched. Using a mixed-method approach, this study examines the potential regional impact of the presence of wolves on farmers’ psychological distress in Norway. Data from the nationally representative Trends in Norwegian Agriculture Survey was analysed using a multiple regression analysis. Psychological distress was measured using a 5 item Hopkins Symptom Checklist. Comparison with register data of livestock losses showed that sheep farmers living in regions where sheep have been killed by wolves within the last 5 years have higher psychological distress scores than (a) sheep farmers elsewhere in Norway, and (b) farmers in the same region without sheep. What makes our study different from others is that the Trends survey was not targeted at the wolf issue directly, meaning that accusations of farmer bias against wolves when responding to surveys cannot explain our results. We support this conclusion by exploring (and, ultimately, dismissing) alternative explanations and through 20 qualitative interviews with sheep farmers in a predation region (regional county of Hedmark) to investigate how carnivore presence is experienced. Stress, anxiety, sleep deprivation, and reduced quality of life were reported as key consequences of the carnivore pressure. The findings suggest that farmers do not need to experience animal deaths and injuries personally to experience the distress of predation. Living nearby and assisting farmer colleagues make this a shared condition. Journal of Rural Studies 78:1-11