The respondents were asked to select the two most important reasons for the conversion from a predefined list of 13 options ; one option also enabled an open response. The reasons listed in the question were obtained from previous studies and surveys. The marketing channels question addressed how their organic produce sales were divided into seven categories of channels : direct marketing, sales to primary production, sales to the processing sector, sales to the retail and wholesale trade, sales to private kitchens, sales to the public sector, and other channels. In addition, they were asked to provide their sales distribution divided as shares in their own region , the rest of Finland, and abroad. The results of the survey highlighted economic and environmental factors as significant drivers for converting from conventional to organic farming. The most important reason given by the farmers was smaller production costs leading to better viability, with 36% selecting this as their first option. The second most popular reason was ecology or sustainability, with 19% of farmers selecting this as their primary motivation. These two options were highlighted as significant in every region. Other reasons that were also frequently mentioned were healthiness and cleanness, a better price for their produce, subsidies, and the farm’s production already approximating organic farming practices. In addition, the survey revealed a wide variety of other reasons, from principles and ideology to specialisation and an interest in organic production. As anticipated, the results varied between the regions. One significant difference related to the importance of subsidies in the decision to convert from conventional to organic farming . Over 40% of the organic farmers in Kainuu stated that subsidies were among the two most important reasons for their farm conversion. In contrast, none of farmers from Satakunta selected this as an important option. It is interesting to note that Kainuu had the highest organic share and Satakunta had the lowest organic share. Indeed,roll bench the four regions where subsidies were given the highest importance were among the regions with the highest organic shares.
The development or availability of markets for organic products is also an important factor affecting farmers’ conversion decisions . The use of a broad range of marketing channels in a particular region indicates diverse demand and better sales opportunities. The results of the survey showed considerable variation in the utilised marketing channels . One of the regions used all seven categories, and in most of the regions, farmers sold their products to five or six of the marketing channels. The share of sales to the processing industry varied between 20% and 57%; primary production sales were between 25% and 57%; and direct sales varied between 0% and 20%. The proportion of sales to the retail and wholesale trade was the highest in Southwest Finland and the lowest in North Ostrobothnia.Other smaller markets included, for example, sales to abattoirs and sales through food collectives. According to the survey, the majority of the sales took place within the producer’s own region, 66% on average. In order to reveal regional differences in market concentration, the market concentration index was calculated for all the regions. A higher share was associated with more concentrated organic farmers’ markets in a region. The results also revealed that the least concentrated markets were located in some southern regions, such as Southwest Finland, H¨ ame, and Uusimaa . In contrast, the highest concentrations were found in Western Finland . For most of the conditions , we used the national average level to establish the position of demarcation between 0.33 and 0.67. This was a natural cut-off point to highlight cases below and above the average, as the studied cases covered all the mainland Finnish regions. The values 0.33 and 0.67 concern equal value ranges from the average national level. These value ranges were formed statistically: values of 0.67–1 and 0–0.33 were divided so that averages above or below 0.5 served as devisors. A value of 1 indicates that it is closest to the theory explaining the regional differences in organic farming. Fuzzy-set scores were set to the outcome and to all of the selected conditions in every case . The data indicated that a total of three regions have a clearly high organic share , while four are slightly above the average , four are slightly below the average , and the remaining four are clearly below the average .
The necessity analysis revealed that none of these conditions are necessary for a high organic share of total cultivated land when using a score of 0.90 as a consistency threshold for a necessary condition, a method similar to Marks et al. . Overall, the necessity analysis scores for consistency varied from 0.55 to 0.80 , with the highest scores associated with sectors as well as subsidies and the smallest markets. Our conceptual approach implies that different factors impact different regions; therefore, even the lowest score conditions were included in the sufficiency analysis. Table 5 presents the pathway results of the sufficiency analysis. The results showed three different pathways and covered five of the seven regions with a high organic share. None of the conditions are present in every pathway leading to a high organic share, which confirms that none of the conditions are necessary for a high organic share. The most common pathway to a high proportion of organic farming includes a long organic heritage, a concentration on dairy farming, and a region that places a high importance on subsidies. Pathway 1 represents the three highest organic shares in Finland . Pathway 2 differs from the first pathway in only one factor. Instead of a long heritage, it includes a larger farm size. Pathway 2 covers two regions, North Ostrobothnia and North Karelia. Pathway 3 is represented by one region . In pathway 3, a long organic heritage and larger farms and markets enable the high organic share. These pathways do not apply to two Finnish regions with higher organic shares, Pirkanmaa and Southeast Finland. In our results, consistency scores for all pathways are over the recommended 0.8. In two of the pathways, the consistency score is 1.00. The coverage scores are highest in pathways 1 and 2 . In the third pathway, the coverage score is 0.15. The solution score of 0.89 for solution consistency is over the threshold score of 0.75. Thus, the results can be considered sufficient to establish a set-theoretical relation. The solution score for coverage is 0.80, indicating that the three pathways apply to 80% of Finnish regions with an above-average organic share. The analyses for the low share organic farming regions confirmed the logic of the results for regions with a high organic share. One of the most common pathways to a low organic share was the mirror image of pathway 1: a lack of an organic heritage, a concentration on cereals production, and a low value placed on subsidies.
Overall, the analysis for the low organic regions revealed three different pathways with a solution coverage of 0.88 and a solution consistency of 0.88. These solutions cover all low organic regions as well as some high organic share regions. Thus, the absence of the selected conditions clearly reveals why some regions have a low proportion of organic land. This study reveals new knowledge about the regional differences in the share of organic cultivated land in mainland Finland. This kind of knowledge is needed to achieve the targets to increase organic farming and further promote rural development and a sustainability transition . In addition, our results are similar to those of Cairns et al. , as we show that QCA can be a valuable method for theory-testing regional studies that focus on complex entities. Our findings confirm the assertion of Ilbery et al. that the regional concentration of organic farming is explained by a combination of different factors rather than a single factor. However, our results suggest that the categorisation by Ilbery et al. should be supplemented with clear economic factors, such as the importance of subsidies, to improve coverage of the possible causes of regional concentrations in organic farming. The importance of subsidies has been highlighted in earlier studies ; however, previous research focused on farmers’ general decision-making rather than addressing the connection with regional differences. The location of farms in different Finnish regions affects their economic opportunities, and therefore the role of economic aid can vary. Our findings highlight the importance of economic aspects and align with the results of Lehtim¨ aki and Virtanen on the economisation of organic agriculture in Finland, at least to some extent. A close review of the data reveals that different types of regions utilise different pathways to achieve a high share of organic cultivated land. There are significant regional differences in cultivation conditions in Finland; therefore it is logical that the key factors involved in a high organic land share vary. Pathway 1 applies to the regions in Eastern Finland with the three highest shares of organic farming . This pathway confirms the results of Pietola and Lansik concerning low yields and subsidies, although the authors did not consider relevant educational or development programmes in the earlier decades of organic farming. Our findings suggest that a long organic heritage is one of the key factors affecting regional concentrations of organic farming, commercial greenhouse supplies a result also noted by Ilbery et al. . In comparison to other regions, a long regional organic heritage can represent an early social acceptance and learning from regional organic education actors or neighbours.
As L¨ ahdesm¨ aki et al. concluded, social acceptance is a key factor in achieving sustainability goals. In addition, increased knowledge helps to make the decision about the conversion . The absence of markets in this path may be due to the focus on dairy farming in these regions; dairy farming markets are often national rather than regional and rather concentrated. Although markets can still be important in these regions, they are not particularly versatile and may not be located locally. Overall, pathway 1 covers all the subsystems described in the food system conceptualization by Helenius et al. : socioeconomic subsystems , people as actors/decision-makers , and biophysical subsystems . Despite initially relating to the food system more generally, these three subsystems or categories seem to offer an apt categorisation of the different factors that are connected to the variation in regional organic farming. Pathway 2 describes the relevant factors in Northern Finland and also in one eastern Finnish region . The fact that both the first and second pathways apply to North Karelia reinforces its position as the region with the highest share of organic farming in Finland. In turn, pathway 3 illustrates the situation in Southern Finland , where markets seem to play an important, albeit not singular, role in the development of a high organic share. Our finding that markets are a significant factor aligns with the conclusions of several previous studies . The present study confirms several previous findings regarding the conditions in the regions with a high proportion of organic land. For example, as in other countries , lower agro-ecological conditions seem to play an important role in characterising the regions with the highest organic shares in Finland. However, agro-ecological conditions alone are insufficient to explain the high shares in these regions; instead, it appears to be the result of a combination of several conditions, as noted by Ilbery et al. . In addition, while markets seem to be important, market diversity and close proximity seem to be more relevant in regions that focus on cereals production. Moreover, the absence of these conditions seems to illustrate why some regions have a low share of organic land. Even though the unique characteristics of different countries and regions suggest that the pathways for Finland are not necessarily universally applicable, it is likely that similar factors and especially a combination of several conditions also affect regional differences and the share of organic land in areas outside Finland, particularly in middle-income and high-income countries.