Decision support tools, usually considered to be software-based, may be an important part of the quest for evidence-based decision-making in agriculture to improve productivity and environmental outputs. These tools can lead users through clear steps and suggest optimal decision paths or may act more as information sources to improve the evidence base for decisions. Yet, despite their availability in a wide range of formats, studies in several countries have shown uptake to be disappointingly low. This paper uses a mixed methods approach to investigate the factors affecting the uptake and use of decision support tools by farmers and advisers in the UK. Through a combination of qualitative interviews and quantitative surveys, we found that fifteen factors are influential in convincing farmers and advisers to use decision support tools, which include usability, cost-effectiveness, performance, relevance to user, and compatibility with compliance demands. This study finds a plethora of agricultural decision support tools in operation in the UK, yet, like other studies, shows that their uptake is low. A better understanding of the fifteen factors identified should lead to more effective design and delivery of tools in the future
Until now the main instrument to counteract the loss of biodiversity and landscape quality in the European countryside has been agri-environment schemes (AES), which offer short-term payments for performing prescribed environmental management behaviors. In our opinion this approach is, in its current set-up, not a sustainable way of enhancing biodiversity and landscape quality. Here we will argue that conservation in agricultural areas is also a social challenge. To change farmers' behaviors toward more sustainable conservation of farmland biodiversity, instruments should aim to influence individual farmer's motivation and behavior. We should aim to place farmland biodiversity "in the hands and minds of farmers."
a b s t r a c tOrganic farming has experienced considerable growth in recent years. Proponents of organic farming point to the environmental and nutritional benefits of organic systems, although these are contested by some. More recently, it has been argued that organic farming can provide rural development benefits through enhanced employment and through closer connections with the local economy, reconnecting consumers with producers and stimulating positive economic multipliers. Against the background of claims made for the rural development potential of organic farming, this paper considers the generation and retention of income, purchasing patterns, and direct employment impacts of a large sample of organic and nonorganic farmers in England. The paper reveals some important distinctions between the characteristics of organic and non-organic farms and farmers. It is argued that most of these differences do not stem directly from differences in farming systems but, rather, reflect considerable differences in the people who operate organic farms as well as the distinctive business configurations they frequently adopt.In confirmation of previous findings, organic farms are shown to employ more people, but the data reveal few differences between the local economic connections of organic and non-organic farms. In turn, this suggests that simply comparing organic and non-organic farm businesses is too blunt an approach. Instead, it is important to consider other factors such as the type of enterprises found on the farm and the marketing routes adopted by the business. It is argued that commentators need to adopt a more nuanced approach, recognising differences between farming systems, farm types, the configuration of farm businesses towards different marketing strategies and the inclinations of those who operate such businesses. This shifts the focus of the debate away from simplistic notions that equate organic production with local supply and assume a local economic benefit, towards a broader conception of the local agro-food economy in which some farms have strong local connections while others focus their efforts elsewhere and earn important export income for the local economy.
The increasing age of farmers and the reluctance to transfer management from the owning generation to the successor generation has been well documented by several studies. In this article we review the literature relating to the succession of farm businesses. Drawing on data from the international FARMTRANSFERS project, we explore attitudes toward retirement and also rates and patterns of succession in several contrasting countries and states in the United States. Lastly, we (0)1752 585913 discuss the implications of the research and provide recommendations for public policies that would enhance the opportunities for successors to succeed in the continuation of the farm family business.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.