8 pages, The use of digital technologies in agriculture offers various benefits, such as site-specific application, better monitoring, and physical relief. The handling of these technologies requires a specific skill set. Therefore, the question arises of when and how farm managers learn about digital technologies. Aiming to analyse the current situation, the present research investigated the role that digital technologies play in vocational training for future farm managers. Taking the example of farm management information systems (FMIS), the present study also analysed various predictors of adoption, including the effect of training. To investigate these research questions, an online survey among teachers and students of the farm management vocational programme across Switzerland was conducted in the spring of 2021. In total, 150 individuals participated, 41 of whom were teachers. Participants answered questions about the learning content in the farm management programme and their perception of digital technologies in general. Students further reported whether they already had a farm they would be managing in the future and how they perceived FMIS. The results indicate that both teachers and students are convinced that digital technologies play an important role in agriculture and will gain more importance in the future. A substantial part of 43% of the students who participated indicated that they had learned neither about digital technologies during their basic agricultural training nor the subsequent farm management programme. In terms of FMIS, 51% of the student sample indicated that they had never heard about FMIS during their agricultural training. While having learned about FMIS was not a significant predictor for adoption, gender, perceived ease of use, and intention to use more digital technologies in the future significantly predicted the adoption of FMIS. The paper concludes that, to support the adoption of digital technologies and FMIS specifically, training for future farm managers should focus on how to operate an FMIS to increase the perceived ease of use of this technology.
9 pages, In agricultural research for development adoption of new technology tends to be cast in categories: adoption, partial adoption, dis-adoption or non-adoption. While these may serve for pragmatic classification and measures for project success or impact they fail to properly acknowledge the ongoing and independent efforts of farmers (and others) in experimentation and integration of knowledge across a range of sources. This paper explores responses to practices for cattle management introduced during a research project, at project close, and five years after the project has finished. We consider the perceptions and application of new knowledge by farmers, extension staff, and policy makers. By taking a longer-term view, we demonstrate how farming households adapt and integrate knowledge from different sources into their daily practice, influenced by local institutions and changing cultural expectations, as well as external researchers. We also consider the influence of changing government priorities and incentives in steering farm-management decisions. Results suggest that a focus on measures to build capacity and empower farmers with information to adapt and respond to change, regardless of project activities, is a much more important goal and indicator of impact than measuring adoption.
3pgs, With volatility being an integral part of farming, electric ag equipment could bring some predictability to farmers’ energy use and consumption, say experts. Efforts to electrify transportation in urban areas have been underway for years now, but rural advocates say electric vehicle needs in rural areas have long been misunderstood and ignored.
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.
