15 pages, Advisory services are considered to play an important role in the development of competitiveness and sustainability in agriculture. Advisory services have been studied at policy level, structural level and within case studies, but there is still restricted knowledge about advisors’ and farmers’ view on advisory services in general. This paper presents the views of Swedish advisors and farmers on advisory services. In a survey-based study, perceptions of farm advisors and full-time farmers in commercial Swedish agriculture on advisory services were identified and statistically analysed, comparing differences between and within the groups. The results are structured around three main themes; motives for a farmer using or not using advisory services, preferred approach by the advisor and future demands on advisory services and their importance today. Possible consequences of differences in perceptions for on-farm service delivery were assessed. Similarities in perceptions on advisory services among advisors and farmers, were found in areas characterised by well-defined questions or production-related issues. Significant differences in perceptions of advisors and farmers emerged in less concrete areas and on topics connected to change, management and strategy. Consequences of discrepancies in perceptions are that advisors may deliver too much, too little or off target, especially when expectations on advisory services are not clearly expressed. A strong and proactive back-office supporting the advisors is needed to prevent these possible consequences.
Mills, Jane (author), Gaskell, Peter (author), Ingram, Julie (author), Dwyer, Janet (author), Reed, Matt (author), Short, Christopher (author), and University of Gloucestershire
Format:
Online journal article
Publication Date:
2016-06-15
Published:
United Kingdom: Springer Nature
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 130 Document Number: D11282
16 pages., via online journal, The United Kingdom’s approach to encouraging environmentally positive behaviour has been three-pronged, through voluntarism, incentives and regulation, and the balance between the approaches has fluctuated over time. Whilst financial incentives and regulatory approaches have been effective in achieving some environmental management behavioural change amongst farmers, ultimately these can be viewed as transient drivers without long-term sustainability. Increasingly, there is interest in ‘nudging’ managers towards voluntary environmentally friendly actions. This approach requires a good understanding of farmers’ willingness and ability to take up environmental activities and the influences on farmer behavioural change. The paper aims to provide insights from 60 qualitative farmer interviews undertaken for a research project into farmers’ willingness and ability to undertake environmental management, particularly focusing on social psychological insights. Furthermore, it explores farmers’ level of engagement with advice and support networks that foster a genuine interest, responsibility and a sense of personal and social norm to sustain high quality environmental outcomes. Two conceptual frameworks are presented for usefully exploring the complex set of inter-relationships that can influence farmers’ willingness to undertake environmental management practices. The research findings show how an in-depth understanding of farmer’s willingness and ability to adopt environmental management practices and their existing level of engagement with advice and support are necessary to develop appropriate engagement approaches to achieve sustained and durable environmental management.
6 pages., Via online journal., Strawberry (Fragaria ×ananassa) and caneberries (Rubus sp.) are popular crops that can bring revenue to farms and may improve farm profitability. High and low tunnels can bring a number of benefits to growers, including season extension and improved berry yield and quality, as well as management challenges. Few studies in the literature report directly on grower experiences using tunnels. We report the results of interviews of 10 independent growers who use tunnels to produce strawberries and caneberries. The results echo previous studies finding improved yield and quality, and highlight benefits and challenges around pest, weed, and nutrient management. One novel finding is the role of season extension in creating marketing opportunities. Interviewed growers caution of a learning curve and the need to start on a small scale and grow gradually. Future focus for research should include improved ventilation and mechanization.
Shikuku, Kelvin M. (author), Winowiecki, Leigh (author), Twyman, Jennifer (author), Eitzinger, Anton (author), Perez, Juan G. (author), Mwongera, Caroline (author), and Läderach, Peter (author)
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2017-03-08
Published:
Africa
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 169 Document Number: D08757
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.
