Toward a Synthesis: Lessons from Thirteen Cropland Watershed-Scale Studies

Woods, Brad R.; Luloff, A. E.; Osmond, Deanna L.; Hoag, Dana L.

doi:10.1080/08941920.2013.861551

Cited by 13 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Economics were important but could be superseded by other factors, such as yield requirements and ease of management (Table 1). There were also intangibles (Hoag et al, 2012b;Woods et al, 2014), such as the threat of regulation, an ability to see the pollutant of concern (sediment vs. nutrients), land ownership, family dynamics, and the belief systems of the farmer (Reimer et al, 2011), which affected conservation practice adoption. Further, some of these factors increased or decreased adoption depending on individual farming conditions.…”

Section: Nifa Ceap Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Conservation practice implementation was a multifaceted decision (Hoag et al, 2012b;Woods et al, 2014), just as Prokopy et al (2008) found. Economics were important but could be superseded by other factors, such as yield requirements and ease of management (Table 1).…”

Section: Nifa Ceap Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As one farmer put it, "Conservation competes with the time the farmer could be using to make money." Farmers often cited time savings as the reason they adopted conservation tillage (Woods et al, 2014), along with costs and technological developments.…”

Section: Nifa Ceap Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lessons were developed from each of the 13 projects using a systematic project outline filled out by watershed project personnel, project literature (peerreviewed publications, fact sheets, and reports), presentations, site visits, and key informant interviews conducted in each watershed. For the purposes of this paper, we focus on the socioeconomic lessons learned relative to the adoption of conservation practices, particularly nutrient management (Hoag et al, 2012b;Luloff et al, 2012;Woods et al, 2014). …”

Section: Nifa Ceapmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Farmers’ Use of Nutrient Management: Lessons from Watershed Case Studies

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nutrient enrichment of water resources has degraded coastal waters throughout the world, including in the United States (e.g., Chesapeake Bay, Gulf of Mexico, and Neuse Estuary). Agricultural nonpoint sources have significant impacts on water resources. As a result, nutrient management planning is the primary tool recommended to reduce nutrient losses from agricultural fields. Its effectiveness requires nutrient management plans be used by farmers. There is little literature describing nutrient management decision-making. Here, two case studies are described that address this gap: (i) a synthesis of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, the Conservation Effects Assessment Project, and (ii) field surveys from three nutrient-impaired river basins/ watersheds in North Carolina (Neuse, Tar-Pamlico, and Jordan Lake drainage areas). Results indicate farmers generally did not fully apply nutrient management plans or follow basic soil test recommendations even when they had them. Farmers were found to be hesitant to apply N at university-recommended rates because they did not trust the recommendations, viewed abundant N as insurance, or used recommendations made by fertilizer dealers. Exceptions were noted when watershed education, technical support, and funding resources focused on nutrient management that included easing management demands, actively and consistently working directly with a small group of farmers, and providing significant resource allocations to fund agency personnel and cost-share funds to farmers. Without better dialogue with farmers and meaningful investment in strategies that reward farmers for taking what they perceive as risks relative to nutrient reduction, little progress in true adoption of nutrient management will be made.

show abstract

Section: Nifa Ceap Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Nifa Ceap Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Nifa Ceap Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Nifa Ceapmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Farmers’ Use of Nutrient Management: Lessons from Watershed Case Studies

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Costs for introducing technologies for specific actions are also kept low, by applying existent technologies from the members' livelihoods. Thus, options and opportunities are provided to new participants, who might not have entered into practice if these options were not readily available [55]. The Society offers multiple forms of institutions, with such knowledge being used in the manner of tools in a box of bricolage [19].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Formation of a Community of Practice in the Watershed Scale, with Integrated Local Environmental Knowledge

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rural communities around the world face formidable problems such as resource depletion, environmental degradation and economic decline. While the term 'community' is often used without clear definition or context, it can be viewed as a group of people emerging through social interaction. Through a series of collaborative action toward a shared goal, a community of practice can be formed. This paper proposes a hypothetical framework of integrated local environmental knowledge (ILEK), and applies it to analyze the processes of collaborative actions in the case of the Nishibetsu Watershed in Hokkaido, Japan. The case study identified several phases of actions, all initiated by a group of local residents on a grassroots and voluntary basis. These local resident-initiated collaborative actions had a particular confluence of elements to facilitate gradual strengthening of formal and informal institutions in the watershed scale beyond jurisdictional boundaries, making this a worthy case to study. The local residents used diverse types of knowledge, including livelihood-based technologies and skills of working as a group and with local governments, for establishing and strengthening various institutions for collaborative actions, with such knowledge being used in the manner of tools in a box of bricolage for community formation.

show abstract

Incorporating the benefits of vegetative filter strips into risk assessment and risk management of pesticides

Chen,

Carley,

Muñoz‐Carpena

et al. 2023

Integr Envir Assess & Manag

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The pesticide registration process in North America, including the United States and Canada, involves conducting a risk assessment based on relatively conservative modeling to predict pesticide concentrations in receiving waterbodies. The modeling framework does not consider some commonly adopted best management practices that can reduce the amount of pesticide that may reach a waterbody, such as vegetative filter strips (VFS). Currently, VFS are being used by growers as an effective way to reduce off‐site movement of pesticides and they are being implemented on pesticide labels as a mitigation measure. Given the regulatory need, a pair of multi‐stakeholder workshops were held in Raleigh, North Carolina to discuss how to incorporate VFS into pesticide risk assessment and risk management procedures within the North American regulatory framework. Because the risk assessment process depends heavily on modeling, one key question was how to quantitatively incorporate VFS into the existing modeling approach. Key outcomes from the workshops include the following: VFS have proven effective in reducing pesticide runoff to surface waterbodies when properly located, designed, implemented and maintained; Vegetative Filter Strip Modeling System (VFSMOD), a science‐based and widely validated mechanistic model, is suitable for further vetting as a quantitative simulation approach for pesticide mitigation with VFS in current regulatory settings; and VFSMOD parametrization rules need to be developed for the North American aquatic exposure assessment.

show abstract

Toward a Synthesis: Lessons from Thirteen Cropland Watershed-Scale Studies

Cited by 13 publications

References 11 publications

Farmers’ Use of Nutrient Management: Lessons from Watershed Case Studies

Farmers’ Use of Nutrient Management: Lessons from Watershed Case Studies

Formation of a Community of Practice in the Watershed Scale, with Integrated Local Environmental Knowledge

Incorporating the benefits of vegetative filter strips into risk assessment and risk management of pesticides

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About