12 pages., via online journal., Development of extension and outreach that effectively engage farmers in climate
change adaptation and/or mitigation activities can be informed by an improved understanding of farmers’ perspectives on climate change and related impacts. This research employed
latent class analysis (LCA) to analyze data from a survey of 4,778 farmers from 11 US Corn
Belt states. The research focused on two related research questions: (1) to what degree do
farmers differ on key measures of beliefs about climate change, experience with extreme
weather, perceived risks to agriculture, efficacy, and level of support for public and private adaptive and mitigative action; and (2) are there potential areas of common ground
among farmers? Results indicate that farmers have highly heterogeneous perspectives, and
six distinct classes of farmers are identified. We label these as the following: the concerned
(14%), the uneasy (25%), the uncertain (25%), the unconcerned (13%), the confident (18%),
and the detached (5%). These groups of farmers differ primarily in terms of beliefs about
climate change, the degree to which they had experienced extreme weather, and risk perceptions. Despite substantial differences on these variables, areas of similarity were discerned
on variables measuring farmers’ (1) confidence that they will be able to deal with increases
in weather variability and (2) support for public and private efforts to help farmers adapt to
increased weather variability. These results can inform segmented approaches to outreach that
target subpopulations of farmers as well as broader engagement strategies that would reach
wider populations. Further, findings suggest that strategies with specific reference to climate
change might be most effective in engaging the subpopulations of farmers who believe that
climate change is occurring and a threat, but that use of less charged terms such as weather
variability would likely be more effective with a broader range of farmers. Outreach efforts
that (1) appeal to farmers’ problem solving capacity and (2) employ terms such as “weather
variability” instead of more charged terms such as “climate change” are more likely to be
effective with a wider farmer audience.
14 pages, As agricultural conservation priorities evolve to address new complex social-ecological problems and emerging social priorities, new conservation incentive program participation and success can be enhanced by incorporating local stakeholder preferences into program design. Our research explores how farmers incorporate ecosystem services into management decisions, their willingness to participate in payment for ecosystem services programs, and factors beyond compensation level that would influence participation. We conducted three focus groups with 24 participants between January of 2019 and May of 2019 in Vermont. Our study revealed that a strong, intrinsic stewardship ethic motivates farmers to enhance ecosystem service provisioning from their farms, though financial pressures often limit decision-making. These results suggest that programs with sufficient levels of payment may attract participation, at least among some types of farmers, to enhance ecosystem services from farms in Vermont. However, farmers may be deterred from participating by perceived unfairness and distrust of the government based on previous experiences with regulations and conservation incentive structures. Farmers also expressed distrust of information about ecosystem services supply that conflicts with their perceptions of agroecosystem functioning, unless delivered by trusted individuals from the extension system. The delivery of context-specific information on how management changes impact ecosystem service performance from trusted sources could enhance farmers’ decisions, and would aptly complement payments. Additionally, farmers expressed a desire to see a program that both achieves additionality and rewards farms who have been stewards, goals that are potentially at odds. Our findings offer important insights for policy makers and program administrators who need to understand factors that will influence farmers’ willingness to participate in payment for ecosystem service programs and other conservation practice adoption initiatives, in Vermont and elsewhere.
