Out-of-state, out of mind? Non-operating farmland owners and conservation decision making

Synthesizing Conservation Motivations and Barriers: What Have We Learned from Qualitative Studies of Farmers’ Behaviors in the United States?

“…Like other research, our findings suggest rented farmland is a barrier to CPP adoption (Petrzelka, Ma, and Malin 2013;Ulrich-Schad et al 2016). More specifically, communication between tenant farmers, NOLs, and farm managers, as well as NOLs' support for tenant farmers' conservation decision-making, emerged as aspects of land tenure that both motivated and hindered adoption.…”

Why do farmers care about rented land? Investigating the context of farmland tenure

“…In addition to this general mechanism, recent literature suggests that it may make a difference for tenants' conservation behavior whether their landlords live close by or far away: absentee landlords have been found to differ from residential landlords, with consequences for conservation measures (Petrzelka and Armstrong 2015;Ulrich-Schad et al 2016). The physical distance between landlord and tenant may not only have an impact on the personal relationship between both parties but also on how closely landowners can monitor farmers' conduct.…”

“…One lesson that can be drawn from this is that a potential tenure effect is probably highly contextual, depending on the farming practice under question, the region investigated, as well as details of renting, among other factors. Details of rental arrangements are taken up in few studies, including differentiating between share renters and cash renters (Ervin 1982;Soule et al 2000), considering information on lease length (Fraser 2004;Deaton et al 2018), or focusing on absentee landlords (Petrzelka et al 2013;Petrzelka and Armstrong 2015) and how they and their relationships with tenants differ from residential landlords (Dillman and Carlson 1982;Ulrich-Schad et al 2016). In addition, other aspects such as the personal relationship between landlords and tenants have been investigated in the context of rental prices (Bryan et al 2015;Taylor and Featherstone 2018), but have also been suggested as a potentially important aspect for conservation by Carolan (2005) and Leonhardt et al (2019).…”

“…Due to the shorter planning period associated with a lease, renters are less likely than owners to reap the benefits of conservation investments, particularly those with a long pay-back period. However, we further assume-and know from previous research-that the following factors may influence the existence or intensity of this tenure effect: the length and security of renting (Deaton et al 2018), plot characteristics such as its distance to the farmhouse or farming difficulties (e.g., sloping land and soil quality) (Deaton et al 2018;Leonhardt et al 2019), the rental price (Ranjan et al 2019b), and the relationship tenants have with their landlords (including kinship or other personal ties as well as whether the landlord is residential or absentee) (Ulrich-Schad et al 2016;Bryan et al 2015;Taylor and Featherstone 2018;Leonhardt et al 2019). In addition, we posit that conservation requirements specified in the rental contract may also influence a tenure effect (Derr 1987), as may farm-level aspects such as participation in AES that need to be applied to an entire farm operation (Sklenicka et al 2015).…”

Rented farmland: A missing piece of the nutrient management puzzle in the Upper Mississippi River Basin?

“…While there is still more to learn about this heterogeneous group , such as their farming experience and engagement with operators, the fact remains that conservation programs are rarely tailored toward NOLs despite their potential importance in nutrient management. Who owns the land can affect the way it is managed (Ulrich-Schad et al 2016;Robinson et al 2017). In comparison to owner-operators, renting operators have different incentives and barriers shaping their agricultural practices.…”