Soil quality is in decline in many parts of the world, in part due to the intensification of agricultural practices. Whilst economic instruments and regulations can help incentivise uptake of more sustainable soil management practices, they rarely motivate long-term behavior change when used alone. We are now beginning to pay attention to the complex social factors that affect uptake of sustainable soil management practices. To understand why some communities try these practices whilst others do not, we undertook a narrative review to understand how social capital influences adoption. We found that the four components of social capitaltrust, norms, connectedness and power -can all influence the decision of farmers to change their soil management. Specifically, information flows more effectively across trusted, diverse networks where social norms exist to encourage innovation. Uptake is more limited in homogenous, close-knit farming communities that do not have many links with non-farmers and where there is a strong social norm to adhere to the status quo. Power can enhance or inhibit uptake depending on how it is managed. Future research, policy and practice should consider whether a lack of effective social capital could hinder uptake of new practices and, if so, which aspects of social capital could be developed to increase adoption of sustainable soil management practices. Enabling diverse, collaborative groups (including farmers, advisers and government officials) to work constructively together could help build effective social capital, where they can co-define, -develop and -enact measures to sustainably manage soils.

Diffuse Water Pollution from Agriculture (DWPA) and its governance has received increased attention as a policy concern across the globe. Mitigation of DWPA is a complex problem that requires a mix of policy instruments and a multi-agency, broad societal response. In this paper, opportunities and barriers for developing co-governance, defined as collaborative societal involvement in the functions of government, and its suitability for mitigation of DWPA are reviewed using seven case studies in Europe (Poland, Denmark, Sweden, The Netherlands and UK), Australia (Murray-Darling Basin) and North America (State of Minnesota). An analytical framework for assessing opportunities and barriers of co-governance was developed and applied in this review. Results indicated that five key issues constitute both opportunities and barriers, and include: (i) pressure for change; (ii) connected governance structures and allocation of resources and funding; (iii) leadership and establishment of partnerships through capacity building; (iv) use and co-production of knowledge; and (v) time commitment to develop water co-governance.

The most significant source of nitrate pollution in the European Union (EU) is attributed to agricultural activities, which threaten drinking water, marine, and freshwater resources. The Nitrates Directive is a key feature of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), which seeks to reduce nitrate pollution from agricultural sources. Yet, weak compliance by Member States (MS) diminishes the legitimacy of the EU environmental acquis and undermines efforts to achieve environmental objectives. This study examines the nitrate management discourse in Poland to identify influencing factors that impact governance capacity and overall compliance performance. The empirical investigation is based on nine stakeholder interviews, three written correspondences, and a literature review that collectively comprise an evaluation study. A comparison in governance approaches between Poland and Denmark provides a calibration in assessing performance respective to another MS. The findings categorize both Poland and Denmark as “laggard” in WFD compliance. This case contributes new insights in identifying 6 enabling and 13 constraining factors affecting the ability of MS to fulfill their implementation duties. The findings demonstrate that divergent stakeholder views based on historical and cultural norms require a differentiated approach tailored to domestic conditions for effective fulfillment of the objectives set forth in EU environmental legislation.

Soil quality is in decline in many parts of the world, in part due to the intensification of agricultural practices. Whilst economic instruments and regulations can help incentivise uptake of more sustainable soil management practices, they rarely motivate long-term behavior change when used alone. There has been increasing attention towards the complex social factors that affect uptake of sustainable soil management practices. To understand why some communities try these practices whilst others do not, we undertook a narrative review to understand how social capital influences adoption in developed nations. We found that the four components of social capital – trust, norms, connectedness and power – can all influence the decision of farmers to change their soil management. Specifically, information flows more effectively across trusted, diverse networks where social norms exist to encourage innovation. Uptake is more limited in homogenous, close-knit farming communities that do not have many links with non-farmers and where there is a strong social norm to adhere to the status quo. Power can enhance or inhibit uptake depending on its characteristics. Future research, policy and practice should consider whether a lack of social capital could hinder uptake of new practices and, if so, which aspects of social capital could be developed to increase adoption of sustainable soil management practices. Enabling diverse, collaborative groups (including farmers, advisers and government officials) to work constructively together could help build social capital, where they can co-define, -develop and -enact measures to sustainably manage soils.

No abstract