Roberts, Kate (author), England, Danielle (author), and Healy, Daniel (author)
Format:
Abstract
Publication Date:
2013-08
Published:
Australia
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D02422
Notes:
Page 38 - Abstract of a paper presented at the International Conference of the Australasia Pacific Extension Network (APEN), Lincoln University, Christchurch, New Zealand, August 26-28, 2013. 100 pages.
Hochman, Z. (author), Litchfield, R.W. (author), Pearson, C.J. (author), and NSW Agriculture, Wollongbar Agricultural Institute, Wollongbar, Australia; School of Crop Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; School of Crop Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
1994
Published:
UK: Elsevier Science, London
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 96 Document Number: C07723
Research effort to refine and prioritize recommendations for future extension and pasture management activities, based on a survey among Tasmanian dairy farmers. Findings led to recommendations involving pasture management training, identifying motivating values of farmers, and requirements for ongoing on-farm support.
Economic and Social Research Council, Swindon, England.
Format:
News release
Publication Date:
2008-02-24
Published:
UK
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 164 Document Number: C27342
Notes:
2 pages., Survey among large-scale, commodity farmers. Includes a reference to findings that many farmers disapprove of past cuts in public funding for agricultural advisory services. "It is now complicated and expensive for farmers to get good advice."
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.
