No abstract

Attempts to understand farmer conservation behavior based on quantitative socio-demographic, attitude, and awareness variables have been largely inconclusive. In order to understand fully how farmers are making conservation decisions, 32 in-depth interviews were conducted in the Eagle Creek watershed in central Indiana. Coding for environmental attitudes and practice adoption revealed several dominant themes, representing multi-dimensional aspects of environmental attitudes. Farmers who were motivated by off-farm environmental benefits and those who identified responsibilities to others (stewardship) were most likely to adopt conservation practices. Those farmers who focused on the farm as business and were most concerned about profitability were less likely to adopt practices. The notion of environmental stewardship in particular was found to be much more complex than the way it is traditionally measured in quantitative studies. The interplay between on-farm and off-farm benefits to practice adoption is an issue that quantitative studies largely do not address. This study seeks to increase understanding of farmers' environmental attitudes and the connections to conservation behavior.

Conservation policy in agricultural systems in the United States relies primarily on voluntary action by farmers. Federal conservation programs, including the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, offer incentives, both financial and technical, to farmers in exchange for adoption of conservation practices. Understanding motivations for (as well as barriers to) participation in voluntary programs is important for the design of future policy and effective outreach. While a significant literature has explored motivations and barriers to conservation practice adoption and participation in single programs, few studies in the U.S. context have explored general participation by farmers in one place and time. A mixed-methods research approach was utilized to explore farmer participation in all U.S. Farm Bill programs in Indiana. Current and past program engagement was high, with nearly half of survey respondents reporting participation in at least one program. Most participants had experience with the Conservation Reserve Program, with much lower participation rates in other programs. Most interview participants who had experience in programs were motivated by the environmental benefits of practices, with incentives primarily serving to reduce the financial and technical barriers to practice adoption. The current policy arrangement, which offers multiple policy approaches to conservation, offers farmers with different needs and motivations a menu of options. However, evidence suggests that the complexity of the system may be a barrier that prevents participation by farmers with scarce time or resources. Outreach efforts should focus on increasing awareness of program options, while future policy must balance flexibility of programs with complexity.

Long‐term research in ecology and evolution (LTREE) is considered fundamental for understanding complex ecological and evolutionary dynamics. However, others have argued for revision of LTREE efforts given perceived limitations in current research priorities and approaches. Yet most arguments about the benefits and failings of LTREE could be argued to reflect the views of only the limited number of scientists who have authored reports on the field, and not the wider community of ecological and evolutionary scientists. To more systematically and quantitatively assess the views of the community on LTREE contributions and future activities, we conducted and here report the results of a survey of ecological and evolutionary scientists at primarily U.S.‐based institutions, completed by 1,179 respondents. The survey objectives were to (1) identify and prioritize research questions that are important to address through long‐term, ecological field experiments and (2) understand the role that these experiments might play in generating and applying ecological and evolutionary knowledge. Almost 80% (n = 936) of respondents said that long‐term experiments had contributed “a great deal” to ecological understanding. Compared to other research approaches (e.g., short‐term, single‐site, modeling, or lab), there was overwhelming support that multi‐site, long‐term research was very important for advancing theory, and that both observational and experimental approaches were required. Respondents identified a wide range of research questions for LTREE to address. The most common topic was the impact of global change (n = 1,352), likely because these processes play out over many years, requiring LTREE approaches to fully understand. Another recurrent theme was the potential of LTREE approaches to build evolutionary understanding across all levels of ecological organization. Critical obstacles preventing some scientists from engaging in LTREE included short‐term funding mechanisms and fewer publications, whereas the longer‐term value for advancing knowledge and an individual's career were widely recognized. Substantive advances in understanding ecological and evolutionary dynamics then seem likely to be made through engagement in long‐term observational and experimental research. However, wider engagement seems dependent on a more supportive research environment and funding structure, through increased institutional acknowledgment of the contributions of long‐term research, and greater program support during the establishment and maintenance of research.

No abstract