19 pages., ISSN: 2168-3565 (Print)
2168-3573 (Online), Via online journal, Biodiversity conservation outside designated protected areas remains challenging in South Africa, where 80% of the biodiversity resources occur on private and communal lands. This applies to the KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) province, which is the focus of this study. Landholders logically choose agricultural production ahead of conservation, which they often perform using non-ecological methods. Extension is well positioned to promote ecological agriculture, but its current contribution is unknown. This study examined the role of extension in ecological agriculture in KZN by investigating extension’s promotion of ecological agriculture among smallholder farmers and the factors impacting their employment of ecologically compatible practices. Data was collected through semistructured interviews with 44 respondents, comprising 5 provincial biodiversity conservation practitioners, 1 national biodiversity conservation manager, and 1 national and 4 provincial agricultural extension managers, selected by purposive sampling; as well as 25 extension officers and 8 farmers, selected by convenience sampling. The study found that extension mainly engages in technology transfer and distribution of production inputs, which poses challenges to biodiversity conservation. Extension shows little concern for biodiversity, and effectively promotes its degradation. Four sets of factors impacting extension’s capacity to promote ecological agriculture emerged: household/community-level, governmental, extension management, and ecological factors. Key among these were inadequate involvement of youth and men in agriculture; inadequate household production resources; poor collaboration and coordination between extension and biodiversity conservation institutions; top-down extension intervention; poor extension management and delivery capacities; and irregular and inadequate rainfall, as well as droughts and flooding. The study concluded that there is a need for a clearly articulated extension and biodiversity conservation policy supporting appropriate linkages and better coordination and integration of services among extension and biodiversity agencies within the National and Provincial Departments of Agriculture and with farmers; more effective agricultural education in schools; strengthening extension support systems; and creating conducive atmospheres for effective extension.
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.
