What drives farmers’ decision-making? To inform effective, efficient, and legitimate governance of agricultural soils, it is important to understand the behaviour of those who manage the fields. This article contributes to the assessment and development of innovative soil governance instruments by outlining a comprehensive understanding of the determinants of farmers’ behaviour and decision-making. Our analysis synthesises empirical literature from different disciplines spanning the last four decades on various farm-level decision-making problems. Based on a conceptual framework that links objective characteristics of the farm and the farmer with behavioural characteristics, social-institutional environment, economic constraints, and decision characteristics, empirical findings from 87 European studies are presented and discussed. We point out that economic constraints and incentives are very important, but that other factors also have significant effects, in particular pro-environmental attitudes, goodness of fit, and past experience. Conversely, we find mixed results for demographic factors and symbolic capital. A number of potentially highly relevant yet understudied factors for soil governance are identified, including adoption of technologies, advisory services, bureaucratic load, risk aversion and social capital, social norms, and peer orientation. Our results emphasise the importance of a broad behavioural perspective to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and legitimacy of soil governance.
In the last decade, the regeneration of derelict or underused sites, fully or partly located in urban areas (or so called "brownfields"), has become more common, since free developable land (or so called "greenfields") has more and more become a scare and, hence, more expensive resource, especially in densely populated areas. Although the regeneration of brownfield sites can offer development potentials, the complexity of these sites requires considerable efforts to successfully complete their revitalization projects and the proper selection of promising sites is a pre-requisite to efficiently allocate the limited financial resources. The identification and analysis of success factors for brownfield sites regeneration can support investors and decision makers in selecting those sites which are the most advantageous for successful regeneration. The objective of this paper is to present the Timbre Brownfield Prioritization Tool (TBPT), developed as a web-based solution to assist stakeholders responsible for wider territories or clusters of brownfield sites (portfolios) to identify which brownfield sites should be preferably considered for redevelopment or further investigation. The prioritization approach is based on a set of success factors properly identified through a systematic stakeholder engagement procedure. Within the TBPT these success factors are integrated by means of a Multi Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) methodology, which includes stakeholders' requalification objectives and perspectives related to the brownfield regeneration process and takes into account the three pillars of sustainability (economic, social and environmental dimensions). The tool has been applied to the South Moravia case study (Czech Republic), considering two different requalification objectives identified by local stakeholders, namely the selection of suitable locations for the development of a shopping centre and a solar power plant, respectively. The application of the TBPT to the case study showed that it is flexible and easy to adapt to different local contexts, allowing the assessors to introduce locally relevant parameters identified according to their expertise and considering the availability of local data.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.