Assessing the productivity consequences of agri-environmental practices when adoption is endogenous

Bostian, Aj Allen; Bostian, Moriah; Laukkanen, Marita; Simola, Antti

doi:10.1007/s11123-019-00564-7

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…European farmers in less favoured areas and receiving payments for less‐favoured land are often more likely to participate in AESs or at least not significantly different likely than farmers who do not use such land or receive such payments (Table 6). Bostian et al (2020) found that Finnish farmers receiving payments for less‐favoured areas are more likely to enrol their land to accurate (i.e., reduced) nitrogen application (which might already confirm with lower nitrogen targets) but not to winter cover crops and reduced tillage (where adoption is not linked to a less‐favoured classification).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, farmers were more likely to participate in an AES when it was recommended by other farmers (Villamayor-Tomas et al, 2019) or when the participation of others was important (Calvet et al, 2019). Furthermore, Bostian et al (2020) showed that, for Finnish farmers, the adoption of either one of two incentivised environmentally friendly practices ('accurate nitrogen application and winter cover crops' or 'reduced tillage') depends on which of those practices were implemented by other farmers in the municipality. Similar spatial diffusion patterns were found in Italy for two out of three incentivised practices, which the authors linked to social learning (Pagliacci et al, 2020).…”

Section: Clusters and Peer Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The role of behavioural factors and opportunity costs in farmers' participation in voluntary agri‐environmental schemes: A systematic review

Schaub

Ghazoul

Huber

et al. 2023

J Agricultural Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agri‐environmental schemes (AESs) are increasingly implemented to promote the adoption of environmentally friendly practices by farmers. We use a systematic review to explore the role of behavioural factors and opportunity costs in farmers' decisions to participate in AESs in Australia, Europe and North America. Behavioural factors influence how farmers value and perceive options, while opportunity costs relate to farmers' forgone utility when choosing to participate in schemes. We synthesise insights from 79 articles and over 700 factors explaining the participation in AESs. We find that a set of behavioural factors seem consistently connected to participation, including agricultural training, advice and having positive attitudes towards AESs. Moreover, several factors related to opportunity costs also have a rather consistent relationship with AES participation, including market conditions, implementation efforts, profitability, and management and contract flexibility. However, many relationships of behavioural factors and opportunity costs with AES participation are not as consistent and generalizable as sometimes portrayed and require context‐specific interpretation. Those factors with mixed results can still provide insights into farmers' participation decisions as several of them are either ‘positively and insignificantly’ or ‘negatively and insignificantly’ related to participation, such as environmental attitude, trust and farm size. These results suggest that their relationship with AES participation depends on other factors or the setting, highlighting interactions and raising important new research questions. Overall, our results provide several entry points for both researchers and policy‐makers, highlighting uncertainties in relationships between factors and participation that should be considered when designing policies.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Clusters and Peer Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of behavioural factors and opportunity costs in farmers' participation in voluntary agri‐environmental schemes: A systematic review

Schaub

Ghazoul

Huber

et al. 2023

J Agricultural Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1 In the agricultural context, the assessment of the role of beliefs about peers is relevant, as evidenced by the literature that has emphasized the pivotal role of social norms for farmers, in particular as a driver for the adoption of new environmentally-friendly practices (Dessart et al, 2019;Schaub et al, 2023;Wuepper et al, 2023). A key insight from this literature is that farmers' decisions to adopt sustainable practices are influenced by their neighbours' behaviours or opinions (Bostian et al, 2020;Di Falco et al, 2020;Moritz et al, 2023;Wang et al, 2023). Central to these decisions is the dissemination of information through the observation of peer choices and social interactions, which highlights the crucial role of peer influence in shaping agricultural practices.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Re-Calibrating Beliefs About Peers: Direct Impacts and Cross-Learning Effects in Agriculture

REYNAUD,

Ouvrard

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate-smart agricultural practices for enhanced farm productivity, income, resilience, and greenhouse gas mitigation: a comprehensive review

Zheng,

Ma,

2024

Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reviews the literature published between 2013 and 2023 to comprehensively understand the consequences of adopting climate-smart agricultural (CSA) practices. We categorize the literature into three categories based on the scopes of climate-smart agriculture: (a) sustainably increase agricultural productivity and incomes; (b) adapt and build the resilience of people and agrifood systems to climate change; and (c) reduce or where possible, avoid greenhouse gas emissions. The review demonstrates that adopting CSA practices, in many instances, improves farm productivity and incomes. This increase manifests in increasing crop yields and productivity, income and profitability, and technical and resource use efficiency. Moreover, adopting CSA practices reinforces the resilience of farmers and agrifood systems by promoting food consumption, dietary diversity, and food security and mitigating production risks and vulnerabilities. Adopting CSA practices is environmentally feasible as it reduces greenhouse gas emissions and improves soil quality. An integrative strategy encompassing diverse CSA practices portends an optimized avenue to chart a trajectory towards agrifood systems fortified against climatic change.

show abstract

Assessing the productivity consequences of agri-environmental practices when adoption is endogenous

Cited by 7 publications

References 28 publications

The role of behavioural factors and opportunity costs in farmers' participation in voluntary agri‐environmental schemes: A systematic review

The role of behavioural factors and opportunity costs in farmers' participation in voluntary agri‐environmental schemes: A systematic review

Re-Calibrating Beliefs About Peers: Direct Impacts and Cross-Learning Effects in Agriculture

Climate-smart agricultural practices for enhanced farm productivity, income, resilience, and greenhouse gas mitigation: a comprehensive review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About