Technical and Social Dimensions of Farmer Learning: An Analysis of the Emergence of Reduced Tillage Systems in England

Factors influencing the financing behavior of large professional households engaged in green agricultural production in China

Green agriculture is the direction of sustainable development of China's modern agriculture and the inherent requirement of taking the road of characteristic new agricultural modernization. As one of the main bodies of new agricultural management, professional large households are of great significance to lead the development of efficient agriculture and accelerate the development of green agricultural economy in Heilongjiang. Therefore, based on the theory of planned behavior, this article includes 275 major professional households in Heilongjiang Province as a sample of demonstration counties (cities) for green, high-quality, and efficient creation, combined with field research data and structural equation model, and discusses the willingness of large professional households to participate in green agricultural production financing and behavioral factors and mechanisms of action. The perceived behavior control (PBC), attitude toward the behavior (AB), and subjective norms (SNs) of large professional households to engage in green agricultural production determine their financing intentions (FNs), which further determines their financing behavior (FB). The results show that PBC, AB, and SN have a significant positive impact on the FN of large professional households, and further indirectly affect the FB. It should be noted that SNs have the most significant impact on the FN of large professional households to participate in green agricultural production. Therefore, it is necessary to establish effective government propaganda measures and preferential policies, improve the awareness of the importance of green agricultural production financing, and create a good social atmosphere for agricultural sustainable development and active participation in financing. The purpose of this study is to provide a reference for policymakers to formulate relevant policies to cultivate major professional households and develop green agricultural economy in Heilongjiang Province.

Do Agricultural Advisory Services in Europe Have the Capacity to Support the Transition to Healthy Soils?

The need to provide appropriate information, technical advice and facilitation to support farmers in transitioning towards healthy soils is increasingly clear, and the role of the Agricultural Advisory Services (AAS) in this is critical. However, the transformation of AAS (plurality, commercialisation, fragmentation, decentralisation) brings new challenges for delivering advice to support soil health management. This paper asks: To what extent do agricultural advisory services have the capacity to support the transition to healthy soils across Europe? Using the ‘best fit’ framework, analytical characteristics of the AAS relevant to the research question (governance structures, management, organisational and individual capacities) were identified. Analysis of 18 semi-structured expert interviews across 6 case study countries in Europe, selected to represent a range of contexts, was undertaken. Capacities to provide soil health management (SHM) advice are constrained by funding arrangements, limited adviser training and professional development, adviser motivations and professional cultures, all determined by institutional conditions. This has resulted in a narrowing down of access and content of soil advice and a reduced capacity to support the transition in farming to healthy soils. The extent to which emerging policy and market drivers incentivise enhanced capacities in AAS is an important area for future research.

Have farmers had enough of experts?

The exponential rise of information available means we can now, in theory, access knowledge on almost any question we ask. However, as the amount of unverified information increases, so too does the challenge in deciding which information to trust. Farmers, when learning about agricultural innovations, have historically relied on in-person advice from traditional 'experts', such as agricultural advisers, to inform farm management. As more farmers go online for information, it is not clear whether they are now using digital information to corroborate in-person advice from traditional 'experts', or if they are foregoing 'expert' advice in preference for peer-generated information. To fill this knowledge gap, we sought to understand how farmers in two contrasting European countries (Hungary and the UK) learnt about sustainable soil innovations and who influenced them to innovate. Through interviews with 82 respondents, we found farmers in both countries regularly used online sources to access soil information; some were prompted to change their soil management by farmer social media 'influencers'. However, online information and interactions were not usually the main factor influencing farmers to change their practices. Farmers placed most trust in other farmers to learn about new soil practices and were less trusting of traditional 'experts', particularly agricultural researchers from academic and government institutions, who they believed were not empathetic towards farmers' needs. We suggest that some farmers may indeed have had enough of traditional 'experts', instead relying more on their own peer networks to learn and innovate. We discuss ways to improve trustworthy knowledge exchange between agricultural stakeholders to increase uptake of sustainable soil management practices, while acknowledging the value of peer influence and online interactions for innovation and trust building.

Learning for Sustainability in Horticultural Production in Arctic Norway

Sustainability learning is gaining popularity as an important field within sustainability research, where farm sustainability can be understood as a learning process. In this study, we seek to reveal the sustainability learning process of farmers, utilizing a framework distinguishing contextual factors (where? and when?), knowledge (what?), motivation (why?), and process (how?). The article presents a participatory inquiry mixed-methods approach, utilizing results from sustainability assessments on five farms with the SMART-farm tool as a unifying starting point for further discussions on sustainability learning in farmers' interviews and stakeholder workshops. Empirically the study is set in the horticultural production in Arctic Norway, where few studies on sustainability have been undertaken. The study shows how both the complexity of the concept of farm sustainability and contextual factors influence the sustainability learning process, for instance by giving rise to a vast number of conflicting issues while working toward farm sustainability. The sustainability learning process is found to be predominantly a social learning process. The theoretic contribution of the study lies in its novel framework that can be used to reveal important aspects of the sustainability learning process, as well as to contribute to the literature on how to proceed from sustainability assessments to implementation. A key finding from the study is that farmers will require continuous assistance in their processes toward farm sustainability, but for this to be possible, knowledge, sources of knowledge, and learning platforms for holistic sustainability need to be established.

An Ethnographic Look into Farmer Discussion Groups through the Lens of Social Learning Theory

Farmer discussion groups (FDGs) are a collaborative mechanism through which farmers can engage and learn from and with their peers. Participants cite numerous benefits from FDGs, e.g., economic, social, etc., but how learning happens in these contexts from an adult cognitive learning theory perspective is not well understood. Thus, Bandura’s social learning theory was used to study seven FDGs in the South West of England. The objective was to determine whether social learning was occurring through the FDGs’ interactions, examined according to three elements: (1) behaviour modelling, (2) role modelling and (3) self-reflexivity. An ethnographic methodology was utilised to gather rich empirical data through participant observation of 42 meetings and 24 semi-structured interviews. The results from 12 months attending FDG meetings demonstrated that behaviour modelling and role modelling were present in all FDGs. Self-reflexivity, however, was not evidenced as being promoted by all groups’ interactions, which (facilitated) critical discourse amongst the FDG participants was found to foster. Thus, evidence of social learning was not found to be occurring as a result of all the FDGs’ interactions. Collaborative learning processes that aim to promote social learning should build participants’ capacity and skills, structure engagement and train facilitators to foster critical discourse that may help promote self-reflexivity from behaviour modelling and role modelling.

The ‘Invisible’ Subsoil: An Exploratory View of Societal Acceptance of Subsoil Management in Germany

Subsoil, commonly defined as horizons below the working depth of 30 cm, has traditionally received little explicit attention in policy discussions on soils. Recently, however, there has been growing recognition among scientists of the issues of subsoil (re-)compaction and of the role of subsoil as a resource that can offer valuable nutrients and water for plants. Subsoil management could provide an option to sustainably maintain yields in the context of climate change and resource scarcity, and it is a central question in addressing subsoil compaction. Yet how socially acceptable are different methods for subsoil management? Drawing on in-depth interviews with farmers and stakeholders in Germany, we show that biophysical conditions, the timing of operations, economic considerations, and awareness of subsoil functions are key factors in the acceptance of management methods. Views towards methods involving mechanical intervention are more diverse and in some cases more critical because the benefits are not always certain, the costs can outweigh the benefits, and/or because they entail risks for soil structure and functions. Alfalfa cultivation is seen to be beneficial for yields without risks for soil structure and functions; however, economic barriers limit its uptake. Awareness of multiple subsoil functions is associated with more critical views of mechanical interventions.

Implications of climate change predictions for UK cropping and prospects for possible mitigation: a review of challenges and potential responses

The UK, like the rest of the world, is confronting the impacts of climate change. Further changes are expected and they will have a profound effect on agriculture. Future crop production will take place against increasing CO₂ levels and temperatures, decreasing water availability, and increasing frequency of extreme weather events. This review contributes to research on agricultural practices for climate change, but with a more regional perspective. The present study explores climate change impacts on UK agriculture, particularly food crop production, and how to mitigate and build resilience to climate change by adopting and/or changing soil management practices, including fertilisation and tillage systems, new crop adoption and variety choice. Some mitigation can be adopted in the shorter term, such as changes in crop type and reduction in fertiliser use, but in other cases the options will need greater investment and longer adaptation period. This is the case for new crop variety development and deployment, and possible changes to soil cultivations. Uncertainty of future weather conditions, particularly extreme weather, also affect decision-making for adoption of practices by farmers to ensure more stable and sustainable production. Even when there is real potential for climate change mitigation, it can sometimes be more difficult to accomplish with certainty on-farm. Better future climate projections and long-term investments will be required to create more resilient agricultural systems in the UK in the face of climate change challenges. © 2016 Society of Chemical Industry.

How do we cultivate in England? Tillage practices in crop production systems

Reducing tillage intensity offers the possibility of moving towards sustainable intensification objectives. Reduced tillage (RT) practices, where the plough is not used, can provide a number of environmental and financial benefits, particularly for soil erosion control. Based on 2010 harvest year data from the nationally stratified Farm Business Survey and drawing on a sub-sample of 249 English arable farmers, we estimate that approximately 32% of arable land was established under RT, with 46% of farms using some form of RT. Farms more likely to use some form of RT were larger, located in the East Midlands and South East of England and classified as 'Cereals' farms. Application of RT techniques was not determined by the age or education level of the farmer. Individual crops impacted the choice of land preparation, with wheat and oilseed rape being more frequently planted after RT than field beans and root crops, which were almost always planted after ploughing. This result suggests there can be limitations to the applicability of RT. Average tillage depth was only slightly shallower for RT practices than ploughing, suggesting that the predominant RT practices are quite demanding in their energy use. Policy makers seeking to increase sustainable RT uptake will need to address farm-level capital investment constraints and target policies on farms growing crops, such as wheat and oilseed rape, that are better suited to RT practices.

Triggering change: towards a conceptualisation of major change processes in farm decision-making

In this paper, we present a broad conceptualisation of major change in farm level trajectories. We argue that as a result of path dependency, major changes in farming practice primarily occur in response to 'trigger events', after which farm managers intensify their consideration of the options open to them, and may set a new course of action. In undertaking new actions, the farm system enters a period of instability, while new practices become established. Over time these new practices, if successfully achieving anticipated aims, lead to a further period of path dependency. Recognising and capitalising upon this pattern of events is important for the development of policies oriented towards incentivising major change in farming practices, and may explain why similar projects and/or policies influence some 'types' of farmers differently, and at different times. To illustrate our arguments, examples of this process are described in relation to empirical examples of major on-farm change processes, drawn from qualitative interviews with organic and conventional farmers in two English case study areas.