Identifying the Factors That Influence Farmer Participation in Environmental Management Practices in Switzerland

Karali, Eleni; Brunner, Beat; Doherty, Ruth M.; Hersperger, Anna M.; Rounsevell, Mark

doi:10.1007/s10745-014-9701-5

Cited by 73 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Additional field work is needed to characterize the heterogeneity of farmers (e.g. differences in risk tolerances, prior experiences with extreme weather events such as floods, and perceptions of climate change) and determine the relative importance of social information vs a farmer's own experiences in influencing their adaptation behavior (Berger 2001, Hansen et al 2004, Sabater and Sierra 2005, Withange et al 2009, Karali et al 2014, Pérez et al 2016.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of seasonal forecast use on agricultural income in a system with varying crop costs and returns: an empirically-grounded simulation

Gunda¹,

Bazuin

Nay

et al. 2017

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of seasonal forecast use on agricultural income in a system with varying crop costs and returns: an empirically-grounded simulation

Gunda¹,

Bazuin

Nay

et al. 2017

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This was the case in a study of landholders involved in Agri-Evironmental Schemes in Switzerland. Those undertaking organic farming were generally reliant on direct payments to subsidise the cost of the numerous controls and income loss arising from the restrictions it entailed, and many indicated that they would abandon organic farming if subsidies ceased (Karali et al 2014).…”

Section: It Is Inexpensive To Maintain or There Is Long-term Funding mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Karali et al 2014 This paper identifies the factors that either constrain or facilitate farmer decisions to participate in environmental management practices in Switzerland.…”

Section: Bowyer and Heath 2009mentioning

confidence: 99%

What factors influence the effectiveness of financial incentives on long-term natural resource management practice change?

Swann¹,

Richards²

2016

Evidence Base

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Financial incentives are used by natural resource management organisations to encourage landholders to adopt sustainable practices where the outcomes on a farm scale may be negative or marginal. There is a growing body of research aimed at understanding why landholders do or do not agree to participate in financial incentive programs, however research that considers when and how financial incentives work to bring about long-term behaviour change is relatively immature. The purpose of this review is to answer the question 'What factors influence the effectiveness of financial incentives on long-term natural resource management practice change?' In synthesising the evidence, it was found that there are numerous characteristics of the practice change itself, along with the program design and implementation, which are important to understand long-term behaviour change. These include whether inexpensive maintenance or long-term funding is available; whether the changes are relatively simple to sustain; whether the program involves structural changes; whether there is land use rigidity; and whether the changes have resulting environmental benefits that are highly observable. Additionally, it is advisable for programs that use financial incentives to include the following program features: ongoing extension support and a focus on building relationship and trust; flexibility in how the practice change is applied; active landholder involvement from planning to evaluation; and contract length that is appropriate for the complexity of the NRM practice. These characteristics can be used to guide policy makers in their natural resource management investment decisions. There is a clear need for greatly increased monitoring and evaluation of existing programs, both during the program and after its conclusion, in order to more fully understand its long-term impacts and ultimate effectiveness. Finally, landholders undertaking a practice change generally benefit from ongoing support from government natural resource management extension officers.

show abstract

“…In multifunctional irrigation systems, water is both a biophysical and a social resource in which water resources and end users remake each other like a hydrosocial cycle (Boelens, Hoogesteger, Swyngedouw, Vos, & Wester, 2016;Knieper & Pahl-Wostl, 2016;Ricart et al, 2018;Schulz, Martin-Ortega, Glenk, & Ioris, 2017). Thus, understanding of how key stakeholders are aware of trade-offs derived from ecosystems and multifunctional irrigation systems is essential to promote adaptive governance (Karali, Brunner, Doherty, Hersperger, & Rounsevell, 2014;Loft, Mann, & Hansjürgens, 2015). In other words, if managers aim to effectively constitute and regulate certain behaviors to effectively enhance ES, MFA and irrigation systems as a whole must understand how stakeholders interact with those concepts and what are the obtained benefits and disbenefits (Greiner, Patterson, & Miller, 2009;Newig & Fritsch, 2009).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecosystem services and multifunctional agriculture: Unravelling informal stakeholders' perceptions and water governance in three European irrigation systems

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multifunctional agriculture (MFA) and ecosystem services (ES) are two important concepts in the ongoing debate on sustainable resource use. The aim of the paper is to test the ES and MFA nexus by analyzing the perception and predefined attitudes of key stakeholders in three Southern European irrigation systems. Data were collected through semistructured interviews, and the interview transcripts were codified using the Atlas.ti © qualitative analysis software. Our results illustrate that perceptions of ES go beyond those included in literature, and this provides valuable information about how key stakeholders interact with the environment in MFA systems. Second, most key stakeholders claim to be moving from anthropocentric agriculture to ecocentric rural development in order to ensure the sustainability of agricultural activity and to preserve common pool resources. Finally, the results show that bottom-up tools could identify the nexus between ES and MFA. Given our results, we provide a series of recommendations to managers be able to (a) improve comprehension of environmental services and functions, (b) enhance water user experiences and interests, and (c) encourage pro-environmental attitudes and behaviors in farmers. The paper also provides the research community with a codifying process they can use to define and improve informal and indirect references to MFA and ES standards.

show abstract

Identifying the Factors That Influence Farmer Participation in Environmental Management Practices in Switzerland

Cited by 73 publications

References 72 publications

Impact of seasonal forecast use on agricultural income in a system with varying crop costs and returns: an empirically-grounded simulation

Impact of seasonal forecast use on agricultural income in a system with varying crop costs and returns: an empirically-grounded simulation

What factors influence the effectiveness of financial incentives on long-term natural resource management practice change?

Ecosystem services and multifunctional agriculture: Unravelling informal stakeholders' perceptions and water governance in three European irrigation systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About