Search

Common-pool resource theory suggests that the direct participation of local natural resource users in the management of common-pool resources can lead to effective management regimes. Nevertheless, the drivers of participation in common-pool resource management, including policy decision processes, and the effects of participation on stakeholder attitudes and policy preferences are relatively understudied. Here, we combine the social-ecological system (SES) framework with the political science concept of political efficacy to examine both contextual and personal drivers of farmer participation in California, USA’s 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), as well as the effect of participation on support for policy mechanisms from the SGMA. We surveyed a total of 553 farmers in three counties across the California Central Valley and Central Coast. Overall, we find that < 50% of the farmers surveyed have participated in any SGMA-related events, with attending a meeting being the most common (45%), and testifying before a board being the least common (6%). Participation in any type of SGMA policy event was associated with multiple characteristics of the groundwater SES context, including the resource system (farm size) and actor attributes (farm bureau membership and receiving information about the policy), that likely combine to indicate a higher level of social, financial, and built capital. Higher participation was also associated with higher internal efficacy ratings, i.e., an individual’s self-assessment of their ability to understand and participate in the political process. Higher levels of internal efficacy were also correlated with support for both incentive- and regulatory-based policy mechanisms, as well as the perception that groundwater impacts are occurring now or soon, and exclusive reliance on groundwater. These results demonstrate that political competence and experience with policy processes and programs are not only associated with participation in current policy issues, which is widely recognized in existing research, but are also associated with policy mechanisms, in particular, with potentially more costly regulatory-based mechanisms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The plot-level decisions of land managers (i.e., farmers, ranchers, and forest owners) influence landscape-scale environmental outcomes for biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. The impacts of their decisions often develop in complex, non-additive ways that unfold over time and space. Behavioral science offers insights into ways decision-makers manage complexity, uncertainty, choice over time, and social influence. We review such insights to understand the plot-level conservation actions of farmers that impact biodiversity. To make these connections concrete, we provide a case study of the decision to adopt biodiversity management practices in the heavily cultivated region of the Central Valley, California, USA. We use results from a survey of 122 farmers in the region to test whether adoption is related to farm tenure arrangements or peer influence. We find farmers who are more sensitive to peer influence are three times more likely to adopt practices that support biodiversity, including wildflowers, native grasses, cover crops, hedgerows, and wetlands. This relationship could have important implications for how plot-level decisions aggregate to landscape-scale outcomes. Finally, we suggest priorities for future research and program design to integrate behavioral science into biodiversity conservation in agricultural landscapes. By considering land managers' plot-level conservation decisions with the lens of behavioral science, we identify barriers and opportunities to promote environmental benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Agriculture is the largest human use of water in California, which gives farmers a critical role in managing water to meet the goals of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). To explore farmers' perspectives on SGMA, we held focus groups with 20 farmers in Yolo County, where the groundwater basin has been given a high/medium priority under SGMA. The farmers had varying perspectives about the factors that led to SGMA and varying responses to the regulation. They suggested that drought, competing agricultural and urban uses, and an increase in perennial crops were factors in recent water use, resulting in changes to water quality and quantity. Impacts of those changes included variable well levels, increased infrastructure costs, and ecosystem impacts, which farmers had responded to by implementing multiple management strategies. Additional research in other regions is imperative to provide farmers' viewpoints and strategies to policymakers, irrigation districts, farmer cooperatives, and the agricultural industry and give farmers a voice at the table. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to agriculture's vulnerability and contribution to climate change, many governments are developing initiatives that promote the adoption of mitigation and adaptation practices among farmers. Since most climate policies affecting agriculture rely on voluntary efforts by individual farmers, success requires a sound understanding of the factors that motivate farmers to change practices. Recent evidence suggests that past experience with the effects of climate change and the psychological distance associated with people's concern for global and local impacts can influence environmental behavior. Here we surveyed farmers in a representative rural county in California's Central Valley to examine how their intention to adopt mitigation and adaptation practices is influenced by previous climate experiences and their global and local concerns about climate change. Perceived changes in water availability had significant effects on farmers' intention to adopt mitigation and adaptation strategies, which were mediated through global and local concerns respectively. This suggests that mitigation is largely motivated by psychologically distant concerns and beliefs about climate change, while adaptation is driven by psychologically proximate concerns for local impacts. This match between attitudes and behaviors according to the psychological distance at which they are cognitively construed indicates that policy and outreach initiatives may benefit by framing climate impacts and behavioral goals concordantly; either in a global context for mitigation or a local context for adaptation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Across the world, an increasing number of farmers are piloting agroecological systems. The recoupling of crops and livestock is one type of agroecological practice that has potential to help reduce the use of off-farm inputs, improve soil quality, and reduce costs for farmers. Yet, a major part of the world's agricultural landscapes remain dominated by conventional specialized crop and livestock practices. In particular, grazing animals in perennial cropping systems may reduce pesticide and fuel use, decrease labor, and build soil organic carbon and soil fertility. In this study, we examined adopters and non-adopters' perceptions of a niche system, integrated sheep-vineyard systems (ISVS) in California. We aimed at understanding the conditions under which ISVS, a specific case of ICLS (integrated crop-livestock systems), could be mainstreamed. We then contextualized these interviews using the Multi-Level Perspective framework to analyze the levers favoring or impeding mainstreaming of this niche system. We considered both pull factors arising from changes in the landscape, and push factors arising through decentralized, grassroot processes. Our inductive analysis is a promising first insight into farmers' perceptions and motivations toward ISVS adoption in California, considering both vineyard managers and contractors (i.e. shepherds renting their sheep to vineyard managers). We found a positive perception of ISVS among both current adopters and non-adopters regarding the potential agronomic, environmental and economic benefits of these practices. All adopters were satisfied with this system as they experienced labor and fuel savings, soil quality improvement and marketing advantages. Local push factors (bottom-up levers emerging from the niche systems) were highlighted by interviewees as contributing to adoption. Push factors identified include knowledge exchange and networking between vineyard managers and developing marketing pathways for "carbon-positive" wool, meat and wine products. However, some pull factors (macro-economic and policy levers acting as top-down levers) could help move the system beyond limited adoption. We point out biotechnical and socio-economic research avenues to encourage the scaling-up of ISVS and ICLS more broadly. On the biotechnical dimension, we recommend continuing and scaling-out system experiments to redesign vineyards considering sheep integration and evaluate the effect of grazing on soil quality and fire management. On the socio-economic dimension, we encourage the exploration of relevant spatial scenarios through co-design of collaborative arrangements between vineyard managers and contractors at the landscape level. Greater research on the social, environmental and economic services provided by ISVS is urgently needed to inform state and federal agricultural policies, including whether such systems should be supported through payment for ecosystem services and as part of environmental good practices and fire safety recommendations. • We highlighted positive perception of ISVS among current adopters and non-adopters. • ISVS allowed labor and fuel saving, soil quality improvement and marketing options. • A major barrier was related to the complexity of sheep management in vineyards. • Knowledge exchange between farmers and policy levers are needed to mainstream ISVS. • Biotechnical and socio-economic research is needed to encourage ISVS scaling-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]