Recreational Multifunctionality and its implications for agroforestry diffusion

Abstract

Recreational Multifunctionality refers to those farms providing at least one recreational service to members of the farm household or the public. Based on the types of recreational services offered, two types of landowners have been identified: Productivists and Ruralists. They differ on their extent of Recreational Multifunctionality, farm household attributes and farm representation. Both types of landowners also have different behavior and understanding of agroforestry. This study builds on the Recreational Multifunctionality construct to identify message content, channels and agencies that can better facilitate the diffusion of agroforestry. In 2006, 353 randomly selected landowners from Missouri were interviewed and clustered in two groups: Productivists (38.0%) and Ruralists (62.0%). These groups were examined to identify differences regarding their perceptions of being a good farmer (i.e., message content); their preferred source of information (i.e., communication channel); and their preferred agencies for learning purposes (i.e., communication agencies). Study results show differences between Productivists and Ruralists in all three aspects of diffusion examined (i.e., message content, channels and agencies), suggesting that all landowners should not be approached in the same way when promoting agroforestry. Messages conveyed to Productivists should emphasize the economic benefits of agroforestry, while messages to Ruralists should emphasize the conservation benefits of agroforestry. Touring farms with active tree management is a good way to disseminate agroforestry practices among Productivists while state and federal extension agents appear to be more suitable to approach Ruralists. Both groups can effectively be reached using printed materials, especially through official conservation magazines.

Recreation and agroforestry: Examining new dimensions of multifunctionality in family farms

“…Although study results show a disconnect between attitudes and values towards agroforestry practices, this should not be discouraging, especially taking into consideration that multifunctionality transition is characterized as being temporally non linear (Wilson, 2008). A diffusion of agroforestry, recognizing differences among landowners based on their multifunctionality status and farming values, can change this disconnect as Barbieri and Valdivia (2009) suggested, facilitating the pursuit of strong multifunctionality as a desired agricultural state (Wilson, 2008).…”

“…Findings also suggest linking the benefits of agroforestry to values the landowner perceives as important, such as planting trees for scenic beauty. In this regard, it is important that diffusion messages should recognize a diversity of landowners, tailoring the diffusion message to the interests and values of the landowners (Barbieri and Valdivia, 2010). For example, those landowners for whom the farmland is a productive resource rather than a rural amenity (i.e., farmers) could be more receptive to agroforestry practices if informed about its several economic values.…”

Willingness to pay for aesthetics associated with field windbreaks in Iowa, United States

“…Additionally, non-production oriented benefits such as biodiversity, wildlife habitat and aesthetics have a status of public or quasi-public goods that are enjoyed, not only by field windbreak owners, but also by the rest of the society (at various scales) and potentially can translate into higher local and regional economic values. Examples include positive impacts on agro-tourism and recreation such as hunting (Barbieri & Valdivia, 2010;Grala et al, 2009).…”

Between Forestry and Farming: Policy and Environmental Implications of the Barriers to Agroforestry Adoption

“…Agroforestry has the capacity to be a sustainable landuse management strategy (Lassoie et al 2009) because it may increase the multifunctionality of the landscape among small landowners (Barbieri and Valdivia 2010a), thus fostering sustainable rural communities (Wilson 2008). For example, agroforestry practices help control wind erosion, protect marginal land, and increase the scenic beauty of rural landscapes, and can diversify aquatic and terrestrial habitats while providing other economic, social, and environmental benefits (Buck 1995; Williams et al 1997; Gold and Garrett 2009; Valdivia and Poulos 2009).…”

“…As landowners are not homogeneous on the roles that farming plays in their income stream, it is expected that the barriers to adopt agricultural practices will also be diverse (Dobbs and Pretty 2004). As a case in point, Barbieri and Valdivia (2010a) found that landowners have different levels of understanding and willingness to adopt agroforestry practices.…”