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

Abstract

DisclaimerThe University of Gloucestershire has obtained warranties from all depositors as to their title in the material deposited and as to their right to deposit such material.The University of Gloucestershire makes no representation or warranties of commercial utility, title, or fitness for a particular purpose or any other warranty, express or implied in respect of any material deposited.The University of Gloucestershire makes no representation that the use of the materials will not infringe any patent, copyright, trademark or other property or proprietary rights.The University of Gloucestershire accepts no liability for any infringement of intellectual property rights in any material deposited but will remove such material from public view pending investigation in the event of an allegation of any such infringement. PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR TEXT.This is a peer-reviewed, post-print ( DisclaimerThe University of Gloucestershire has obtained warranties from all depositors as to their title in the material deposited and as to their right to deposit such material.The University of Gloucestershire makes no representation or warranties of commercial utility, title, or fitness for a particular purpose or any other warranty, express or implied in respect of any material deposited.The University of Gloucestershire makes no representation that the use of the materials will not infringe any patent, copyright, trademark or other property or proprietary rights.The University of Gloucestershire accepts no liability for any infringement of intellectual property rights in any material deposited but will remove such material from public view pending investigation in the event of an allegation of any such infringement. Bill Slee, James Hutton Institute, Aberdeen, Scotland AbstractIn this paper, we present a broad conceptualisation of 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 empirical examples of major on-farm change processes, drawn from qualitative interviews with organic and conventional farmers in two English case study areas.

Spatial diversification of agroecosystems to enhance biological control and other regulating services: An agroecological perspective

“…Experiments led by scientific institutions can produce knowledge that can help famers to adopt innovative practices. However, experiments conducted by farmers themselves in their farms are known to convince them and their neighbours better (Sutherland et al, 2012). recently reviewed the current theories used to analyse changes in farmers'…”

“…Transition has been described as being a succession of steps (i.e. the 'triggering change cycle' of Sutherland et al 2012), with different levels of risks (i.e. robust vs. reversible transitions, Lamine, 2011) related to gradual levels of changes (i.e.…”

Is one path enough? Multiple paths and path interaction as an extension of path dependency theory

“…However, in empirical studies these multiple technological paths only seem to appear across a population of firms, industries, regions or countries and not within individual entities in this population, i.e. each firm, industry, region or country chooses one path and sticks to that (cf., e.g., Mazzoleni, 1997;Essletzbichler and Winther, 1999;Fai, 2003;Cantwell and Vertova, 2004;Sutherland et al, 2012).…”

How to implement biodiversity-based agriculture to enhance ecosystem services: a review

“…However, management practices and ecological principles falling within either efficiency/substitution-or biodiversity-based agriculture are usually not distinguished in the literature, even though they strongly differ in their underpinning ecological principles and necessary knowledge and way to manage it. Furthermore, applied research integrating the above-mentioned knowledge and principles into methods and tools that can support farmers' decision-making processes during the transition from conventional specialized to biodiversity-based agriculture remains to be developed (Brussaard et al 2010;Sutherland et al 2012).…”