J. Gordon Arbuckle

Farmer beliefs and concerns about climate change and attitudes toward adaptation and mitigation: Evidence from Iowa

Agriculture is both vulnerable to climate change impacts and a significant source of greenhouse gases. Increasing agriculture’s resilience and reducing its contribution to climate change are societal priorities. Survey data collected from Iowa farmers are analyzed to answer the related research questions: (1) do farmers support adaptation and mitigation actions, and (2) do beliefs and concerns about climate change influence those attitudes. Results indicate that farmers who were concerned about the impacts of climate change on agriculture and attributed it to human activities had more positive attitudes toward both adaptive and mitigative management strategies. Farmers who believed that climate change is not a problem because human ingenuity will enable adaptations and who did not believe climate change is occurring or believed it is a natural phenomenon—a substantial percentage of farmers—tended not to support mitigation.

Understanding Farmer Perspectives on Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation The Roles of Trust in Sources of Climate Information, Climate Change Beliefs, and Perceived Risk

Agriculture is vulnerable to climate change and a source of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Farmers face pressures to adjust agricultural systems to make them more resilient in the face of increasingly variable weather (adaptation) and reduce GHG production (mitigation). This research examines relationships between Iowa farmers’ trust in environmental or agricultural interest groups as sources of climate information, climate change beliefs, perceived climate risks to agriculture, and support for adaptation and mitigation responses. Results indicate that beliefs varied with trust, and beliefs in turn had a significant direct effect on perceived risks from climate change. Support for adaptation varied with perceived risks, while attitudes toward GHG reduction (mitigation) were associated predominantly with variation in beliefs. Most farmers were supportive of adaptation responses, but few endorsed GHG reduction, suggesting that outreach should focus on interventions that have adaptive and mitigative properties (e.g., reduced tillage, improved fertilizer management).

Extension′s role in disseminating information about climate change to agricultural stakeholders in the United States

The U.S. Cooperative Extension Service was created 100 years ago to serve as a boundary or interface organization between science generated at the nation′s land grant universities and rural communities. Production agriculture in the US is becoming increasingly complex and challenging in the face of a rapidly changing climate and the need to balance growing crop productivity with environmental protection. Simultaneously, extension budgets are diminishing and extension personnel are stretched thin with numerous, diverse stakeholders and decreasing budgets. Evidence from surveys of farmers suggests that they are more likely to go to private retailers and consultants for information than extension. This paper explores the role that extension can play in facilitating climate change adaptation in agriculture using data from a survey of agricultural advisors in Indiana, Iowa, Michigan and Nebraska and a survey of extension educators in the 12 state North Central Region. Evidence from these surveys shows that a majority of extension educators believe that climate change is happening and that they should help farmers prepare. It also shows that private agricultural advisors trust extension as a source of information about climate change. This suggests that extension needs to continue to foster its relationship with private information providers because working through them will be the best way to ultimately reach farmers with climate change information. However extension educators must be better informed and trained about climate change; university specialists and researchers can play a critical role in this training process.

Farmer Attitudes toward Proactive Targeting of Agricultural Conservation Programs

Calls for improved targeting of conservation resources are increasingly common. However, arguments for improving the effectiveness and efficiency of agricultural conservation programs through proactive targeting are often tempered by questions regarding political feasibility. Such questions rest on an assumption that there will be resistance to these approaches, whether from farmers, farm groups, or elected officials, yet there is little research-based evidence supporting that assumption. Analysis of data on Iowa farmers’ attitudes toward targeted conservation indicates that most farmers support targeted approaches. Specific factors associated with endorsement of targeted approaches include awareness of agricultures environmental impacts, belief that farmers should address water quality problems, having experienced significant soil erosion, belief that extreme weather will become more common, participation in the Conservation Reserve Program, and belief that farmers who have natural resource issues are less likely to seek conservation assistance. Concerns about government intrusion were negative predictors of support for targeted approaches.

Non-operator landowner interest in agroforestry practices in two Missouri watersheds

Land tenure has long been considered a critical factor in determining the adoption and long-term maintenance of agroforestry practices. Empirical evidence from non-US settings has consistently shown that secure land tenure is positively associated with agroforestry adoption. In the US, over 40% of private agricultural land is farmed by someone other than the owner. Given the importance of land tenure in agroforestry decisions in other countries and the magnitude of non-operator landownership in the US, there has been surprisingly little focus on land tenure in the temperate agroforestry literature. Using data from a 1999 survey in Missouri, this study explores factors associated with non-operator landowner interest in agroforestry. Results suggest that differences in farming orientation are linked to interest in agroforestry. Closer ties to farming, stronger financial motivations for landownership, and higher proportion of land planted to row crops were negatively related to interest in agroforestry among non-operator landowners. Environmental or recreational motivations for landownership and contacts with natural resource professionals were positively associated with interest in agroforestry. These results, consistent with earlier qualitative research suggesting that farm operators who have a strong “conventional farming identity” were less interested in agroforestry, point to a divide between landowners for whom environmental and recreational values play an important role in ownership motivation and those for whom financial considerations take precedence. The findings imply that agroforestry development programs in the US should take non-operator landowners and their farming and ownership orientations into account when designing research and outreach efforts.

Microcredit and microenterprise performance: impact evidence from Peru

Ever since researchers began to measure the impact of microcredit in the 1980s, there have been mixed messages: some studies suggest microcredit has a positive effect on the poor, others not. This article adds to the body of evidence: clients receiving microcredit from Mibanco, Peru, were compared with similar businesses not receiving credit. In particular, changes between 1997 and 1999 in enterprise revenue, enterprise fixed assets, employment and transaction relationships were measured for the two groups. The method was based on the household economic portfolio model, which takes into account the resources and activities of the entire household, rather than a single business. For this study, the performance of up to three household enterprises was monitored. Other methodological difficulties, such as selection bias, are discussed. Results show that, in spite of a difficult economic environment, client enterprises performed better than non-client enterprises in terms of enterprise profits, fixed assets a...

People, place, behavior, and context: A research agenda for expanding our understanding of what motivates farmers' conservation behaviors

Social scientists have explored why farmers engage in conservation activities for a number of decades, yet there is still a large degree of unexplained variation and a lack of understanding about the factors that contribute to, or inhibit, farmer conservation. Our goal with this article is to outline an agenda for future social science research exploring conservation behaviors in agricultural systems. We believe that greater reflection on what avenues need further exploration will lead to improved scientific understanding and ultimately greater uptake in conservation by farmers. Environmentally relevant farmer behaviors, often conceptualized as best management practices (BMPs) or conservation practices, are complex and context specific, making the adoption or use of these practices difficult to measure or predict. Additionally, farmers are a highly diverse group with differing resource endowments and exposures to risk; production needs, tenure arrangements, and ownership goals; environmental motives; personalities; proclivities for engaging in government conservation programs; and social networks. Subsequently, as indicated by earlier reviews of this literature, there are few variables that consistently explain adoption decisions. In addition to high variability in determinants of behavior, physical and temporal variation in the characteristics of the practices themselves complicate research efforts. Farm and farmer-level factors are not…

Agricultural Stakeholder Views on Climate Change: Implications for Conducting Research and Outreach

AbstractUnderstanding U.S. agricultural stakeholder views about the existence of climate change and its causes is central to developing interventions in support of adaptation and mitigation. Results from surveys conducted with six Midwestern stakeholder groups [corn producers, agricultural advisors, climatologists, extension educators, and two different cross-disciplinary teams of scientists funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture–National Institute of Food and Agriculture (USDA–NIFA)] reveal striking differences. Individuals representing these groups were asked in 2011/12 to “select the statement that best reflects your beliefs about climate change.” Three of five answer options included the notion that climate change is occurring but for different reasons (mostly human activities; mostly natural; more or less equally by natural and human activities). The last two options were “there is not sufficient evidence to know with certainty whether climate change is occurring or not” and “climate change is ...

Prairie strips improve biodiversity and the delivery of multiple ecosystem services from corn–soybean croplands

Significance Prairie strips are a new conservation technology designed to alleviate biodiversity loss and environmental damage associated with row-crop agriculture. Results from a multiyear, catchment-scale experiment comparing corn and soybean fields with and without prairie vegetation indicated prairie strips raised pollinator and bird abundance, decreased water runoff, and increased soil and nutrient retention. These benefits accrued at levels disproportionately greater than the land area occupied by prairie strips. Social surveys revealed demand among both farm and nonfarm populations for the outcomes prairie strips produced. We estimated prairie strips could be used to improve biodiversity and ecosystem services across 3.9 million ha of cropland in Iowa and a large portion of the 69 million ha under similar management in the United States. Loss of biodiversity and degradation of ecosystem services from agricultural lands remain important challenges in the United States despite decades of spending on natural resource management. To date, conservation investment has emphasized engineering practices or vegetative strategies centered on monocultural plantings of nonnative plants, largely excluding native species from cropland. In a catchment-scale experiment, we quantified the multiple effects of integrating strips of native prairie species amid corn and soybean crops, with prairie strips arranged to arrest run-off on slopes. Replacing 10% of cropland with prairie strips increased biodiversity and ecosystem services with minimal impacts on crop production. Compared with catchments containing only crops, integrating prairie strips into cropland led to greater catchment-level insect taxa richness (2.6-fold), pollinator abundance (3.5-fold), native bird species richness (2.1-fold), and abundance of bird species of greatest conservation need (2.1-fold). Use of prairie strips also reduced total water runoff from catchments by 37%, resulting in retention of 20 times more soil and 4.3 times more phosphorus. Corn and soybean yields for catchments with prairie strips decreased only by the amount of the area taken out of crop production. Social survey results indicated demand among both farming and nonfarming populations for the environmental outcomes produced by prairie strips. If federal and state policies were aligned to promote prairie strips, the practice would be applicable to 3.9 million ha of cropland in Iowa alone.

Spatially Representing Vulnerability to Extreme Rain Events Using Midwestern Farmers’ Objective and Perceived Attributes of Adaptive Capacity: Spatially Representing Vulnerability to Extreme Rain Events

Potential climate-change-related impacts to agriculture in the upper Midwest pose serious economic and ecological risks to the U.S. and the global economy. On a local level, farmers are at the forefront of responding to the impacts of climate change. Hence, it is important to understand how farmers and their farm operations may be more or less vulnerable to changes in the climate. A vulnerability index is a tool commonly used by researchers and practitioners to represent the geographical distribution of vulnerability in response to global change. Most vulnerability assessments measure objective adaptive capacity using secondary data collected by governmental agencies. However, other scholarship on human behavior has noted that sociocultural and cognitive factors, such as risk perceptions and perceived capacity, are consequential for modulating peoples actual vulnerability. Thus, traditional assessments can potentially overlook peoples subjective perceptions of changes in climate and extreme weather events and the extent to which people feel prepared to take necessary steps to cope with and respond to the negative effects of climate change. This article addresses this knowledge gap by: (1) incorporating perceived adaptive capacity into a vulnerability assessment; (2) using spatial smoothing to aggregate individual-level vulnerabilities to the county level; and (3) evaluating the relationships among different dimensions of adaptive capacity to examine whether perceived capacity should be integrated into vulnerability assessments. The result suggests that vulnerability assessments that rely only on objective measures might miss important sociocognitive dimensions of capacity. Vulnerability indices and maps presented in this article can inform engagement strategies for improving environmental sustainability in the region.