Roy Murray-Prior

Modelling farmer behaviour: a personal construct theory interpretation of hierarchical decision models

Abstract Hierarchical decision models based on a two-stage decision process (Gladwin, 1977, 1989) have proved useful for describing and predicting individual decisions with a minimum of theoretical bias. The model has two weaknesses. First, it does not incorporate an explanation of the underlying motivation for behaviour. Second, the empirical techniques for building the decision models are based on ethnographic approaches that are time consuming and difficult to implement when multiple visits are a problem. In this article it is shown personal construct psychology (Kelly, 1955), which assumes people behave as ‘scientists’, can overcome these weaknesses. The combination provides a theory and an empirical model of behaviour that explains the motivation and reasons for behaviour, allows for learning, and describes and predicts individual decisions. In addition, it has associated interviewing techniques that complement the ethnographic techniques and overcome some of their limitations.

Micro and macro-level approaches to modelling decision making

Abstract Farm households form a significant unit of study for the rural policy analyst as it is at this level of aggregation that the decisions to participate in government policy initiatives and to adopt new technologies are taken, although the true micro-level impacts of such decisions might be felt more acutely at the intra-household level. This paper describes a range of modelling approaches that have been used to represent micro-level decision making related to sustainable agricultural development. While none of the examples was undertaken in a pluralistic framework, they illustrate that two or more methodologies can be integrated so that the complementarity and/or conflict between the results would enhance the quality of the outcomes. The paper argues that because of the integrated nature of the relationship between the farm household (or the decision-making unit), the farming system, and the environment, more progress can be made by using more than one methodology even though their assumptions may be incompatible and their results imply different solutions to the problem. The dialogue created by this diversity will provide better solutions than a reliance on one paradigm and its associated methodologies. One methodological approach will not be sufficient to capture the decision-making process and its subsequent impacts and a pluralist approach is advocated.

Influence of strategies and heuristics on farmers’ response to change under uncertainty

Hierarchical Decision Models of woolproducers’ decisions provide unique insights into the impact of major price changes. Producers’ lagged response in some contexts appear to be due to the ambiguous decision environment they face, their strategic goals and responses to that environment apart from lags caused by factors such as attitude to risk, expectations adjustment, adjustment costs and learning costs. Much of the response to major price changes comes from strategic decisions to change enterprises rather than marginal changes to existing enterprises. In ambiguous environments, methods may need to be found that incorporate simplifying behavioral rules and strategies.

Five reasons why it is difficult to talk to Australian farmers about the impacts of, and their adaptation to, climate change

Abstract Some recent funding programmes in Australia on climate adaptation have expected active engagement with farmers in research projects. Based on our direct experience with 30 farmers and their advisors, we list five reasons why it is difficult to gain traction with farmers in discussing the likely impacts of climate change on their farms and the possible adaptation options they should be considering in preparation for a future changed climate. The reasons concern the slow and uncertain trajectory for changes in climate relative to the time horizon for farm decision-making, when set against short-term fluctuations in weather, prices, costs and government policy. Farmers have optimism for ongoing technological progress keeping abreast of any negative impacts of climate on their production. As one moves from incremental to transformational adaptation options, biophysical research has less to offer because decisions become based more on business structure, portfolio management, off-farm investments and geographical diversification. Some farmers also doubt the intentions of climate change researchers and are wary of anything they may have to offer. We propose there is an actionable decision space where agricultural science and economics can contribute to meaningful analysis of impacts and adaptation to climate change by farmers. This will involve emphasising the principles of farm management rather than defining optimal farm plans; the use of scenario planning to explore possible futures in a turbulent environment for farming; a focus on short-term adjustments as a path to longer term adaptation; re-gaining the trust of some farmers towards climate change scientists through better communication strategies; and understanding the linkages between adaptation options and enabling factors and technologies.

Lucerne improves some sustainability indicators but may decrease profitability of cropping rotations on the Jimbour Plain

Long-run rotational gross margins were calculated with yields derived from biophysical simulations in a crop simulation model over a period of 100 years and prices simulated in @Risk based on subjective triangular price distributions elicited from the Jimbour Plain farmer group. Rotations included chickpeas, cotton, lucerne, sorghum, wheat and different lengths of fallow. The aim was to assess the profitability of rotations with and without lucerne. Output presented to the farmers included mean annual gross margins and distributions of gross margins with box and whisker plots found to be suitable. Mean–standard deviation and first- and second-degree stochastic dominance efficiency measures were also calculated. The paper outlines a method for combining biophysical and price simulations that can be understood by farmers. Including lucerne in the rotations improved some sustainability indicators but reduced profitability.

Increasing the Economic Role for Smallholder Farmers in the World Market for Horticultural Food

Smallholder farmers will be critical to meeting the growing demand for food in the next 40 years. However, currently they face many challenges in meeting the changing demands of modern markets, including the effects of climate change, deficiencies in their enabling environment, resources, capacities and institutional models for change and development. In this chapter we set the context by defining these deficiencies and their implications for development of the smallholder horticultural sector. We present a dualistic agribusiness systems framework that helps focus analysis on the interactions in the system and the complexity of the problems. This framework helps highlight the need to develop new institutional approaches to link smallholder farmers to markets and to improve their productivity. We then review some options for linking them to markets and conclude that a range of solutions will be required, but that contract farming and traditional cooperatives will only be relevant to a limited range of contexts. We suggest that cluster marketing arrangements will be another important solution, because they are suited better to smallholder resources and capacities. They can also be used as a means to develop a horticultural innovation system that meets the needs of smallholder farmers rather than just the needs of larger enterprises.