Farmers' Motivations for Adopting Conservation Practices along Riparian Zones in a Mid-western Agricultural Watershed

Abstract

In the agricultural Mid-west, riparian corridors are vital for protecting biodiversity and water quality. The cumulative management decisions of hundreds of private landowners have a tremendous impact on this riparian zone. This study of 268 farmers in a typical Mid-western watershed in Michigan looked at farmer's motivations for adopting conservation practices, their current management practices along their rivers and drains as well as their future management plans. The results of the study showed that farmers are intrinsically motivated to practise conservation by such factors as their attachment to their land, rather than by motivations such as receiving economic compensation. Farmers are also likely to engage in conservation practices that make their farm appear well-managed. Furthermore, those farmers with strong intrinsic motivations were likely to adopt conservation practices that protect streams, such as maintaining a woody vegetative buffer or practicing no-till farming. This study shows that protecting riparian resources in agricultural watersheds requires strategies for conservation that respect farmers' attachment to their land and their desire to practise good stewardship.

Understanding the influence of farmer motivations on changes to soil erosion risk on sites of former serious erosion in the South Downs National Park, UK

“…Only a minority of farmers stressed conservation values as important reasons for adopting soil conservation practices (counter Duff et al, 1991 andRyan et al, 2003). In terms of spatial awareness, our findings generally support those reported by Ingram et al (2010, in relation to Mathieu's French study), that most farmers lack awareness of the wider erosiongenerating processes beyond their farms, focusing instead on risks on their own properties, although there were some notable exceptions.…”

“…Green and Heffernan, 1987), farmer attitudes (e.g. Wauters et al, 2010;Ryan et al, 2003) social symbolism (e.g. Schneider et al, 2010) and institutional support, an increasing number argue for an interdependency of prompts (Sinden and King, 1990;Smit and Smithers, 1992): "it is always a mix of personal, socio-cultural, economic, institutional and even environmental variables that explain [soil conservation adoption] behaviour" (Prager and Posthumus, 2010: 217;Posthumus et al, 2011).…”

Are farmers in England equipped to meet the knowledge challenge of sustainable soil management? An analysis of farmer and advisor views

“…Conceptual approaches to understanding farmers' knowledge in relation to natural resource management have a broad base drawing both on behavioural (Napier et al 1984;Lichtenberg and Zimmerman 1999;Ryan et al 2003) and cultural approaches (Carr and Tait 1991;Long 1992;McEachern 1992;Harrison et al 1998;Tsouvalis et al 2000;Burton 2004); as well as on perspectives that relate knowledge to social and experiential learning (Lyon 1996;Röling and Wagemaker 2000;Russell and Ison 2001 (Röling and Jiggins 1994;Park et al 1997;Tebrugge and Bohrnsen 2001;Coughenour 2003). Implementing these highly technical practices is thought to require some understanding of the underpinning scientific principles and physical processes (Vanclay and Lawrence 1994;Pretty 1995).…”

Understanding perennial wheat adoption as a transformative technology: evidence from the literature and farmers

“…This is similar to the finding by Lahmar (2010) that environmental concerns were not pivotal to European farmers' decisions to adopt conservation agriculture, including no-till. Ryan et al (2003) reported that farmers who are good land stewards and are innately attached to their lands are more likely to adopt no-till, while Andrews et al (2013) found that those who exhibited strong concerns for soil compaction and soil drainage are likely to adopt soil conservation practices, including no-till. However, Vitale et al (2011) reported no clear association between awareness of environmental consequences and the adoption of soil best management practices, including no-till.…”