The Environmental Behaviour of Farmers – Capturing the Diversity of Perspectives with a Q Methodological Approach

Walder, Peter; Kantelhardt, Jochen

doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.06.018

Cited by 68 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Effective governance anticipates how stakeholders will respond to changes in rules, norms, regulations and policies (Schoon and te Grotenhuis 2000). Extensive research explores how farmers and others in the food system respond to agricultural rules and regulations, yet less is known about what motivates these actors to become involved in governance themselves (Schoon andte Grotenhuis 2000, Walder andKantelhardt 2018). Our typology indicates that stakeholders engage in governance differently depending on the particular agricultural values that they prioritize.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One clear finding from such social-ecological research is that urban agriculture is multifunctional (Lovell 2010, McClintock andSimpson 2018); it provides a wide range of ecological, economic, and social benefits, such as promoting biodiversity (Lin et al 2015) and building community (Carolan and Hale 2016). These wide-ranging benefits have attracted diverse stakeholders whose participation in urban agriculture is motivated by complex values and subjectivities (McClintock 2014, Classens 2015, and whose participation ranges from farming and community gardening to food-related nonprofits and university outreach and engagement (Colasanti et al 2012, Walder andKantelhardt 2018). For example, McClintock and Simpson's (2018) study of 251 urban agriculture organizations and businesses in 84 U.S. and Canadian cities reveals the diverse values motivating these stakeholders.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We follow Brodt et al (2006) in conceiving of environmental stewardship in this way. Typologies of farmers frequently recognize environmental or stewardship motivational frames (Fairweather andKeating 1994, Walder andKantelhardt 2018). Others have highlighted the importance of stewardship for urban planning and governance of sustainable infrastructure (Andersson et al 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ostensibly, urban agriculture is governed according to the state's Right to Farm Act, which protects generally accepted agricultural management practices unless preempted by ordinances at the municipal level. Many stakeholders find both the generally accepted agricultural management practices and their protection in urban contexts to be ambiguous, however, with groups like the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development's Urban Livestock Workgroup recommending specific guidelines for urban agriculture in 2015, and leading to the proposal (but not ratification) of an "Urban Agriculture Act" in the state senate in 2016(Urban Livestock Workgroup 2015. As these comprehensive regulations take form, piecemeal regulations have filled the niche, such as a county ordinance in 2009 permitting backyard chickens and 2017 reinterpretations of city ordinances regarding permanent structures on properties to permit hoop houses.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Types of urban agricultural stakeholders and their understandings of governance

Piso¹,

Goralnik²,

Libarkin³

et al. 2019

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urban agriculture is a significant driver of urban sustainability and resilience, yet the contribution of urban agriculture to resilience is complicated by governance systems that require further investigation. This study deploys a mixed-methods approach to investigate the agricultural values and understandings of urban agricultural governance among farmers, garden leaders, and other actors in urban agriculture in Lansing, Michigan. Drawing from semistructured interviews and Q-methodology, agricultural values are used to identify four types of urban agriculture stakeholders: urban agricultural stewards, risk managers, food desert irrigators, and urban agricultural contextualists. These groups differ in terms of their agricultural values as well as their participation in local governance and general understandings of the purpose of governance. Urban agricultural stewards place comparatively higher priority on community building, environmental sustainability, and food sovereignty; they participate in the city's formal governance systems and view governance as an opportunity to codify shared norms. Risk managers place comparatively higher priority on safety, and they largely view governance in the traditional mold of state-legislated regulations to which stakeholders should comply. Food desert irrigators place comparatively higher priority on environmental sustainability, health, food access, and convenience; they expect governance to support stakeholders with the greatest needs, and though not active in formal governance, work to craft empathetic policies in their particular organizations. Urban agricultural contextualists place comparatively higher priority on community building and health, and hold that the prioritization of additional values should be determined through local and inclusive governance. The coupling of agricultural values with understandings of governance can support effective and legitimate policy making attentive to the process through which, and scale at which, stakeholders expect their values to inform decision making.Ecology and Society 24(2): 18 https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol24/iss2/art18/ recognition of communities' diverse values and identities (Walker et al. 2002, Anderies et al. 2004).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Types of urban agricultural stakeholders and their understandings of governance

Piso¹,

Goralnik²,

Libarkin³

et al. 2019

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The limitation of land-use change through spatial plans and regulations could oblige farmers to not sell their lands (Andersson & D'Souza, 2014;Walder & Kantelhardt, 2018). Ricefield areas in Denpasar has shrunk 230,6 hectares from 2018 to 2019.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainable development model of subak in Denpasar City

Wijayanti

Windia

Darmawan

et al. 2020

ijls

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Subak is a unique irrigation system in Bali that is based on Hinduism and the philosophy of tri hita karana that consists of elements of parhyangan, pawongan, and palemahan, are three balances and harmonies that are still maintained for sustainability. This study aims to identify changes in four dimensions of subak, which may threaten its sustainability in the city of Denpasar; identify the most sensitive dimension that influences the sustainability of subak in Denpasar; as well as formulate a development model of subak that will ensure its sustainability in Denpasar. Based on MDS analysis on the changes of different dimensions of subak that threaten its sustainability in Denpasar, it is known that the “dimension of mindset” is the most sensitive in processes of sustainability of subak. Sensitivity in this context relates to the awareness of the importance of farmer's mindset as a variable to ensure the sustainability of subak, considering the mindset of farmers will determine the success of sustainability processes on existing land management. Following that result, ISM analysis was done to formulate a development model for the sustainability of subak.

show abstract

Stakeholder discourse and opinion towards a charismatic non‐native lizard species: Potential invasive problem or a welcome addition?

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Analysis of discourse between stakeholders is becoming increasingly recognised for its importance in resolving conflicts of opinion regarding complex environmental issues such as the human-mediated spread of invasive non-native species-one of the major drivers of biodiversity loss world-wide. Species' attributes, stakeholders' level of knowledge, perceptions of threat, attitudes towards intervention and nature values all have subjective influence on opinion, often creating highly opposed interests and perspectives that can create barriers preventing effective management.2. Using a Q method approach towards analysis of subjective opinion among stakeholders, this study aimed to identify emerging viewpoints regarding the presence of Common Wall Lizards (Podarcis muralis) in the UK-an introduced, non-native species with which there are high levels of human interaction but low levels of knowledge regarding potential negative ecological impacts. It explores the ways in which different stakeholder groups (i.e., public, land managers, conservationists) might share views and the reasoning behind shared or opposing discourse between groups.

show abstract

The Environmental Behaviour of Farmers – Capturing the Diversity of Perspectives with a Q Methodological Approach

Cited by 68 publications

References 51 publications

Types of urban agricultural stakeholders and their understandings of governance

Types of urban agricultural stakeholders and their understandings of governance

Sustainable development model of subak in Denpasar City

Stakeholder discourse and opinion towards a charismatic non‐native lizard species: Potential invasive problem or a welcome addition?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About