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.
Herrera, Beatriz (author), Gerster-Bentaya, Maria (author), Tzouramani, Irene (author), Knierim, Andrea (author), and University of Hohenheim
Agricultural Economics Research Institute
Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2019
Published:
Germany: Taylor & Francis
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 7 Document Number: D10258
22 pages., Via online journal., Purpose: This study explores the use of advisory services by farm managers and its linkages with the economic, environmental and social performance of farms.
Design/methodology/approach: Using cluster analysis we determined groups of farms according to their sustainability performance and explored the correlations between contacts with advisory services and a set of farm-level sustainability indicators.
Findings: There exist significant differences in the number of farmers’ contacts with advisory services across countries, type of farms, farmers’ degree of agricultural education, utilized agricultural area, legal type of farm ownership and economic size of the farms. We identified three groups of farms that have different sustainability performance, are different in farm characteristics and relate differently to advisory services. The number of contacts with advisory services is positively related to the adoption of innovations, the number of information sources utilized and the adoption of farm risk management measures. We find no clear linear relationship between advisory services and environmental sustainability.
Theoretical implications: This study derives hypotheses to analyze causalities between indicators of farm-level sustainability and advisory services.
Practical implications: Results suggest the importance of taking into account the heterogeneity of farming systems for the design, targeting and evaluation of advisory services. In addition, results confirm the importance of selection of indicators that can be used in multiple sites.
Originality/value: We used a harmonized indicator of advisory services and a harmonized set of farm-level sustainability indicators in nine different EU countries that could be used to evaluate the role of advisory services in the achievement of multiple objectives in different groups of farms in multiple sites.
2pgs, For farmers, filling out the USDA’s Census of Agriculture before the February 6 deadline is more than a legal obligation. It’s a way to keep watch over our farmlands and help bring about necessary changes.
Howard, Wayne H. (author), McEwan, Ken (author), Owen, Lorne (author), and University of Guelph; Ridgetown College of Agriculture; British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Food
Format:
Conference paper
Publication Date:
1994
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 98 Document Number: C08045
Notes:
James F. Evans Collection, In: The Information Age: what it means for extension and its constituents. Columbia, MO: Cooperative Extension Service, University of Missouri, 1994. (Proceedings of a North Central Region Extension workshop for marketing and management specialists, May 24-26, 1994, St. Louis, MO.) p. 77-84.
James F. Evans Collection; Based on parts of an MSc (Agric) thesis by the senior author at the University of Pretoria, Farmers who are financially successful differ from their unsuccessful counterparts in management approach and decision making. Successful farmers use records for planning, they employ cash flow budgeting and analyse costs. They also avoid overtrading and are financially realistic. Unsuccessful farmers exhibit opposite traits. Successful farmers are also better decision-makers: They gather more information, use it better, re-evaluate decisions and are able to change these if necessary. Unsuccessful farmers evaluate decisions incompletely or not at all. There is not much difference in the implementation of decisions. Extensionists should concentrate in teaching farmers a frame of mind conducive to sound management (original).
Bock, I.M. (author / Agricultural Extension Research Unit, School of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Melbourne) and Agricultural Extension Research Unit, School of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Melbourne
Format:
Research paper
Publication Date:
1975
Published:
Australia
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 45 Document Number: B05549
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 75 Document Number: C03842
Notes:
James F. Evans Collection; Contains Abstract and Table of Contents only, Madison, WI : University of Wisconsin, 1989. 369 p. Ph D. dissertation, mass communications
Harmon, R.J. (author), Harsh, S.B. (author), and Department of Agricultural Economics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI
Format:
Conference paper
Publication Date:
1990
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 93 Document Number: C06913
Notes:
In: Zazueta, Fedro S., ed. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Computers in Agricultural Extension Programs; 1990 January 31 - February 1; Grosvenor Resort Hotel, Disney World Village, Lake Buenavista, FL. Gainesville, FL : Florida Cooperative Extension Service, University of Florida, [1990]. p. 383-388
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.
