Lessons learned from using a decision-support tool for precision placement of conservation practices in six agricultural watersheds in the US midwest

Ranjan, Pranay; Singh, Ajay S.; Tomer, Mark D.; Lewandowski, Ann; Prokopy, Linda Stalker

doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.03.031

Cited by 27 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, the result indicating that farmers whose farm operations were bordered or bisected by streams and other water bodies were twice as likely to be involved in WM has major implications for outreach. This finding suggests that watershed planning efforts that employ GIS, remote sensing, modeling, and innovative tools such as the Agricultural Conservation Planning Framework to facilitate watershed-level conservation planning and action (Ranjan et al, 2019) may find such farmers to be more receptive to targeted outreach.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Factors Influencing Farmers' Engagement in Watershed Management Activities

Upadhaya¹,

Arbuckle²

2021

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies have pointed to a positive relationship between farmers' active engagement in watershed management (WM) and soil and water conservation practice adoption. If farmers' involvement in WM leads to more conservation, what predicts WM participation? This study seeks to answer that question through binomial logistic regression analysis of data from a survey of 6,006 Iowa farmers conducted to support the implementation of the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy (NRS). Results indicate that public and private sector information sources, awareness of and attitudes regarding nutrient loss reduction strategies, farm contiguity to water bodies, and cost-share and technical assistance were positive predictors of farmers' engagement in WM, while lower agronomic self-efficacy, farm press as an information source, greater age, and higher farm sales were negative. Findings point to several potential actions to improve farmer involvement in WM: (1) more effectively engage with the farm press to disseminate information about the benefits of WM, (2) increase outreach to larger-scale farmers, and (3) focus on nutrient loss management capacity building. Further, a continued emphasis on awareness and attitudes related to the NRS and related actions, such as watershed management, may guide efforts to recruit farmers into watershed groups to help improve soil and water conservation outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Factors Influencing Farmers' Engagement in Watershed Management Activities

Upadhaya¹,

Arbuckle²

2021

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The ACPF has the potential to serve as a graphical focal point for collaborative conservation planning, bringing together a diverse set of organizations and individuals in watershed planning (Lewandowski et al., 2020; Ranjan et al., 2019). While the ACPF itself is not a comprehensive conservation toolkit, it provides consistency through rule sets and offers insights into an expanded set of conservation practices through easily executed routines, which consider hydromorphic processes that affect nearly all forms of watershed planning.…”

Section: Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Agricultural Conservation Planning Framework: Opportunities and challenges in the eastern United States

Duncan

Respess

Ryan

et al. 2021

Agricultural & Env Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Agriculture Conservation Planning Framework (ACPF) applies high‐spatial resolution soils and topographic data, now available for many areas of the United States, to precisely locate opportunities for the placement of conservation practices in agricultural watersheds. Application of the ACPF, developed in midwestern landscapes, to watersheds in the eastern United States represents both opportunity and challenge to conservation planning. Based on experience in applying ACPF to eight watersheds in the eastern United States, from Vermont to North Carolina, we assess the toolbox's application in the eastern United States through the lens of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis framework. We see a great future for the ACPF, but its adoption and utility require interaction with scientists and conservation planners familiar with the region to avoid misapplication and ensure appropriate adaptation and interpretation.

show abstract

“…To that end, we made several practitioner-oriented recommendations for both the targeting process and the maps used to share targeted practice-placement options with farmers. Interviews revealed the importance of one-on-one interactions with farmers, emphasizing the importance of having agricultural conservation policy fund the human side of conservation (Osmond et al 2015;Ranjan et al 2019b).…”

Section: Disclaimermentioning

confidence: 99%

Farmer engagement using a precision approach to watershed-scale conservation planning: What do we know?

Ranjan

Singh

Tomer³

et al. 2020

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Farmer engagement is an integral component of conservation planning, with increased emphasis on precision placement of conservation practices. Conservation planners are increasingly turning to tools like the Agricultural Conservation Planning Framework (ACPF)-a decision support tool (DST) that provides a menu-driven approach to conservation planning. Scholarship on human dimensions of precision conservation, also known as conservation targeting, has either examined farmers' general attitudes toward targeting, or when farmers are active participants in generating targeted practice options. However, less is known about farmers' perceptions of targeting when they receive targeted conservation options for fields they farm. With the goal of filling this knowledge gap, we present findings from semistructured in-depth interviews conducted with farmers in four watersheds in the US Midwest. Results suggest that farmers are receptive toward conservation options for their farms. Several factors influenced farmers' receptiveness toward site-specific conservation targeting, such as farmers having autonomy in the targeting process, and perceiving that the process had benefits such as field-scale validation of their natural resource concerns and its potential to encourage watershed thinking. Results also highlight the potential of conservation targeting in motivating conservation behavior. Recommendations for future conservation targeting include being mindful of the scale of the map and the amount of information presented, having boots on the ground, and engaging farmers one-on-one to motivate conservation behavior.

show abstract

Lessons learned from using a decision-support tool for precision placement of conservation practices in six agricultural watersheds in the US midwest

Cited by 27 publications

References 20 publications

Understanding Factors Influencing Farmers' Engagement in Watershed Management Activities

Understanding Factors Influencing Farmers' Engagement in Watershed Management Activities

The Agricultural Conservation Planning Framework: Opportunities and challenges in the eastern United States

Farmer engagement using a precision approach to watershed-scale conservation planning: What do we know?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About