Time scales as a factor in decision-making by French farmers on weed management in annual crops

Macé, Karen; Morlon, Pierre; Munier‐Jolain, Nicolas; Quéré, Lionel

doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2006.04.007

Cited by 57 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…experiential and experimental knowledge (Scoones and Thompson, 1994), from expanding from knowledge of structure to knowledge of function, from understanding about the dynamics of complex systems, and from understanding the complementarities of different knowledge systems such as scientific and traditional knowledge . Indeed, local knowledge systems can be based on a different conceptualisation of the world compared to sciencebased farm management (EEA, 2001;Olsson and Folke, 2001;Macé et al, 2007). It is thus important not to dilute, homogenise or diminish the diversity of knowledge systems, but to nurture diversity .…”

Section: Learning Through Experimenting and Monitoringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptiveness to enhance the sustainability of farming systems. A review

Darnhofer

Bellon²,

Dedieu³

et al. 2010

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

319

225

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-During the last decade the context in which farmers must manage their farm has changed rapidly, and often with little warning. Dramatic price swings for agricultural commodities, more stringent quality requirements, new environmental regulations, the debates surrounding genetically modified crops, extreme climatic events, the demand for energy crops, the revision of the Common Agricultural Policy and the consequences of the financial crisis all create uncertainty regarding future threats and potentials. During such turbulent times, a one-sided focus on efficient production is no longer enough. Farmers also need to be able to cope with unexpected events and to adapt to new developments. Based on a literature review, we identify three strategies that strengthen the adaptive capacity of a farm: learning through experimenting and monitoring its outcomes, ensuring a flexible farm organisation to increase the options for new activities by the farm family, and diversifying to spread risks and create buffers. Implementing these strategies enlarges the farmer's room to manoeuvre and allows identifying transition options. These options do not depend only on the farm itself, but also on the farmer's ability to mobilise external resources and to engage in collective action. Change is then no longer seen as a disturbance, but as a trigger for the reorganisation of resources, and for the renewal of the farm organisation and activities. Implementing these strategies comes at a cost, so that farmers need to tackle the inevitable trade-offs between efficiency and adaptability. However, unless farmers master this challenge they cannot ensure the sustainability of their farms.adaptive farm management / adaptive capacity / evolutionary approach / complex adaptive systems

show abstract

Section: Learning Through Experimenting and Monitoringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptiveness to enhance the sustainability of farming systems. A review

Darnhofer

Bellon²,

Dedieu³

et al. 2010

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

319

225

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By contrast, conventional producers obtained information primarily from periodicals. Previous studies conducted in Europe and the North East region of the United States have also suggested that producers do not place as much importance on gathering information from scientific research compared with their own experiences [43,45,48]. As such, future research and outreach efforts aimed at promoting sustainable agro-ecosystem management decisions should incorporate producers' experiences and priorities and consider alternative approaches to disseminate information.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptions, Experiences, and Priorities Supporting Agroecosystem Management Decisions Differ among Agricultural Producers, Consultants, and Researchers

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sustainability of agriculture depends as much on the natural resources required for production as it does on the stakeholders that manage those resources. It is thus essential to understand the variables that influence the decision-making process of agricultural stakeholders to design educational programs, interventions, and policies geared towards their specific needs, a required step to enhance agricultural sustainability. This study employed a survey of multiple-choice and open-ended questions to examine the perceptions, experiences, and priorities that influence management decisions of agricultural stakeholders across Montana, United States. A total of 272 respondents completed a survey, representing five distinct agricultural stakeholder groups: 103 (34.9%) conventional producers, 78 (28.7%) consultants, 37 (13.6%) researchers, 33 (12.1%) organic grain producers, and 21 (7.7%) organic vegetable producers. The results revealed that, while stakeholder groups have distinct perceptions, experiences, and priorities, there were similarities across groups (pseudo-F = 22.92, p = 0.001). Specifically, organic vegetable and organic small-grain producers showed similar responses that were, in turn, divergent from those of conventional producers, researchers, and crop consultants. Conventional small-grain producers and researchers showed overlapping response patterns, while crop consultants formed an isolated group. Six clusters resulting from the classification of the multiple-choice response dataset associated with specific agricultural professions (χ2 = 549.72, p = 0.001). The classification of open-ended questions that assessed agronomic challenges and research needs resulted in six distinctive clusters, with specific associations between clusters and agricultural stakeholder groups (χ2 = 164.41, p = 0.001). These results reinforce the need for agricultural education and programs that address unique and shared experiences, priorities, and concerns of multiple stakeholder groups. This study endorses the call for a paradigm shift from the traditional top-down agricultural extension model to one that accounts for participants’ socio-ecological contexts to facilitate the adoption of sustainable agricultural systems that support environmental and human wellbeing.

show abstract

“…The key techniques for harmfulness control were crop-related timing variables (i.e., the frequency of different sowing and harvest seasons) whereas curative weed control variables presented less effect, indicating that weed prevention was much more important than weed destruction (Storkey and Cussans, 2007;Chikowo et al, 2009;Koocheki et al, 2009), as it is often anticipated by farmers when designing their programme of weed management (Macé et al, 2007).…”

Section: A Methods For Advising Stakeholdersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, harvest purity is crucial for crop seed production (Macé et al, 2007). Moreover, profiles could also be combined in space to investigate the advantages of landsparing vs. landsharing, i.e., by managing high-production and low-biodiversity cropping systems in fields adjacent to other plots managed with low-production and high-biodiversity systems, rather than trying to reconcile both biodiversity and production in each field.…”

Section: A Methods For Advising Stakeholdersmentioning

confidence: 99%