IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v70y2018icp16-26.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An exploration of individual, social and material factors influencing water pollution mitigation behaviours within the farming community

Author

Listed:
  • Inman, Alex
  • Winter, Michael
  • Wheeler, Rebecca
  • Vrain, Emilie
  • Lovett, Andrew
  • Collins, Adrian
  • Jones, Iwan
  • Johnes, Penny
  • Cleasby, Will

Abstract

Diffuse pollution of watercourses from agriculture represents a complex and persistent environmental problem in the UK. This paper provides insights into why UK policy interventions have had limited success to date, drawing on the disciplines of psychology, sociology and behavioural economics to more thoroughly understand farmer attitudes and behaviours towards pollution mitigation. Our analysis is based on eliciting the opinions of commercial farmers through a series of surveys and discussion groups in three catchments: the grassland dominated River Eden catchment; the arable dominated River Wensum catchment and the mixed farming area of the Hampshire River Avon catchment. Results strongly suggest that a fundamental shift in identities, normative behavioural beliefs and social norms is required within the farming community before mitigation behaviours become embedded. Simply offering financial incentives or imposing regulatory penalties is unlikely to achieve the desired results. Double loop learning has the potential to enable farmers to migrate from a productivist to a multifunctional outlook where pollution mitigation becomes internalised within a farm management system. Expert farm advisors will be required to facilitate this process.

Suggested Citation

  • Inman, Alex & Winter, Michael & Wheeler, Rebecca & Vrain, Emilie & Lovett, Andrew & Collins, Adrian & Jones, Iwan & Johnes, Penny & Cleasby, Will, 2018. "An exploration of individual, social and material factors influencing water pollution mitigation behaviours within the farming community," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 16-26.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:70:y:2018:i:c:p:16-26
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.09.042
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837716313187
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.09.042?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. A. P. Barnes & J. Willock & L. Toma & C. Hall, 2011. "Utilising a farmer typology to understand farmer behaviour towards water quality management: Nitrate Vulnerable Zones in Scotland," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(4), pages 477-494.
    2. Hayley H. Chouinard & Tobias Paterson & Philip R. Wandschneider & Adrienne M. Ohler, 2008. "Will Farmers Trade Profits for Stewardship? Heterogeneous Motivations for Farm Practice Selection," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(1), pages 66-82.
    3. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    4. Hanley, Nick, 1990. "The Economics of Nitrate Pollution," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 17(2), pages 129-151.
    5. Knowler, Duncan & Bradshaw, Ben, 2007. "Farmers' adoption of conservation agriculture: A review and synthesis of recent research," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 25-48, February.
    6. Daniel Kahneman, 2003. "Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1449-1475, December.
    7. Nick Hanley, 1990. "The Economics of Nitrate Pollution Control in the UK," Working Papers Series 90/5, University of Stirling, Division of Economics.
    8. Lynne, Gary D. & Franklin Casey, C. & Hodges, Alan & Rahmani, Mohammed, 1995. "Conservation technology adoption decisions and the theory of planned behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 581-598, December.
    9. Gintis, Herbert, 2000. "Beyond Homo economicus: evidence from experimental economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 311-322, December.
    10. Jean McGuire & Lois Morton & Alicia Cast, 2013. "Reconstructing the good farmer identity: shifts in farmer identities and farm management practices to improve water quality," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 30(1), pages 57-69, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sabine Duvaleix & Marie Lassalas & Laure Latruffe & Vasilia Konstantidelli & Irene Tzouramani, 2020. "Adopting Environmentally Friendly Farming Practices and the Role of Quality Labels and Producer Organisations: A Qualitative Analysis Based on Two European Case Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Lianju Lyu & Daxue Kan & Wenqing Yao & Weichiao Huang, 2022. "Has China’s Pilot Policy of Water Ecological Civilization City Construction Reduced Water Pollution Intensity?," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-22, November.
    3. Bateman, Ian J. & Balmford, Ben, 2018. "Public funding for public goods: A post-Brexit perspective on principles for agricultural policy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 293-300.
    4. Jannica Krafft & Jenny Höckert & Magnus Ljung & Sara Lundberg & Christina Lunner Kolstrup, 2022. "Delivering too much, too little or off target—possible consequences of differences in perceptions on agricultural advisory services," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(1), pages 185-199, March.
    5. Thomas Vetter, 2022. "Co-producing better land management? An ethnographic study of partnership working in the context of agricultural diffuse pollution," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 103(2), pages 117-141, June.
    6. Kannan Karunakaran & Muhammad Usman & Mika Sillanpää, 2022. "A Review on Superadsorbents with Adsorption Capacity ≥1000 mg g −1 and Perspectives on Their Upscaling for Water/Wastewater Treatment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-19, December.
    7. Murat Okumah & Julia Martin-Ortega & Paula Novo & Pippa J. Chapman, 2020. "Revisiting the Determinants of Pro-Environmental Behaviour to Inform Land Management Policy: A Meta-Analytic Structural Equation Model Application," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-33, April.
    8. Gabriel Medina & Catherine Isley & J. Arbuckle, 2021. "Promoting sustainable agriculture: Iowa stakeholders’ perspectives on the US Farm Bill conservation programs," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 173-194, January.
    9. Leduc, Gaëlle & Hansson, Helena, 2022. "Farmers’ behavioral drivers for adopting agroforestry practices – A study of Swedish agriculture using the theory of planned behavior," 96th Annual Conference, April 4-6, 2022, K U Leuven, Belgium 321174, Agricultural Economics Society - AES.
    10. Okumah, Murat & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Chapman, Pippa J. & Novo, Paula & Cassidy, Rachel & Lyon, Christopher & Higgins, Alex & Doody, Donnacha, 2021. "The role of experiential learning in the adoption of best land management practices," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    11. Charis Linda Braun & Vera Bitsch & Anna Maria Häring, 2022. "Behind the scenes of a learning agri-food value chain: lessons from action research," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(1), pages 119-134, March.
    12. Grilli, Gianluca & Curtis, John, 2021. "An evaluation of public initiatives to change behaviours that affect water quality," Papers WP696, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    13. Murat Okumah & Ata Senior Yeboah & Elias Nkiaka & Richard Apatewen Azerigyik, 2019. "What Determines Behaviours Towards Water Resources Management in a Rural Context? Results of a Quantitative Study," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-19, June.
    14. Wąs, Adam & Malak-Rawlikowska, Agata & Zavalloni, Matteo & Viaggi, Davide & Kobus, Paweł & Sulewski, Piotr, 2021. "In search of factors determining the participation of farmers in agri-environmental schemes – Does only money matter in Poland?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    15. Alcon, Francisco & Zabala, José A. & Martínez-Paz, José M., 2022. "Assessment of social demand heterogeneity to inform agricultural diffuse pollution mitigation policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    16. Bourceret, Amélie & Amblard, Laurence & Mathias, Jean-Denis, 2023. "How do farmers’ environmental preferences influence the efficiency of information instruments for water quality management? Evidence from a social-ecological agent-based model," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 478(C).
    17. Zhaofang Zhang & Weijun He & Juqin Shen & Min An & Xin Gao & Dagmawi Mulugeta Degefu & Liang Yuan & Yang Kong & Chengcai Zhang & Jin Huang, 2019. "The Driving Forces of Point Source Wastewater Emission: Case Study of COD and NH 4 -N Discharges in Mainland China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(14), pages 1-19, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Walder, Peter & Kantelhardt, Jochen, 2018. "The Environmental Behaviour of Farmers – Capturing the Diversity of Perspectives with a Q Methodological Approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 55-63.
    2. Chouinard, Hayley H. & Wandschneider, Philip R. & Paterson, Tobias, 2016. "Inferences from sparse data: An integrated, meta-utility approach to conservation research," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 71-78.
    3. Gabrielle E. Roesch-McNally & J. Gordon Arbuckle & John Charles Tyndall, 2017. "What would farmers do? Adaptation intentions under a Corn Belt climate change scenario," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(2), pages 333-346, June.
    4. François J Dessart & Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & René van Bavel, 2019. "Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: a policy-oriented review," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 417-471.
    5. Kuehne, Geoff & Llewellyn, Rick & Pannell, David J. & Wilkinson, Roger & Dolling, Perry & Ouzman, Jackie & Ewing, Mike, 2017. "Predicting farmer uptake of new agricultural practices: A tool for research, extension and policy," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 115-125.
    6. Otter, Verena & Deutsch, Maximilian, 2023. "Did policy lose sight of the wood for the trees? An UTAUT-based partial least squares estimation of farmers acceptance of innovative sustainable land use systems," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    7. Robert J. Sheeder & Gary D. Lynne, 2011. "Empathy-Conditioned Conservation: “Walking in the Shoes of Others” as a Conservation Farmer," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(3), pages 433-452.
    8. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    9. Ryschawy, Julie & Tiffany, Sara & Gaudin, Amélie & Niles, Meredith T. & Garrett, Rachael D., 2021. "Moving niche agroecological initiatives to the mainstream: A case-study of sheep-vineyard integration in California," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    10. Oscar Montes de Oca Munguia & Rick Llewellyn, 2020. "The Adopters versus the Technology: Which Matters More when Predicting or Explaining Adoption?," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(1), pages 80-91, March.
    11. Venkatachalam, L., 2008. "Behavioral economics for environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 640-645, November.
    12. Shang, Linmei & Heckelei, Thomas & Gerullis, Maria K. & Börner, Jan & Rasch, Sebastian, 2021. "Adoption and diffusion of digital farming technologies - integrating farm-level evidence and system interaction," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    13. Munasib, Abdul B.A. & Jordan, Jeffrey L., 2011. "The Effect of Social Capital on the Choice to Use Sustainable Agricultural Practices," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 213-227, May.
    14. Jane Mills & Peter Gaskell & Julie Ingram & Janet Dwyer & Matt Reed & Christopher Short, 2017. "Engaging farmers in environmental management through a better understanding of behaviour," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(2), pages 283-299, June.
    15. David Parsisson & Nick Hanley & Clive L. Spash, "undated". "Nitrate Pollution Due to Agriculture, Project Report No. 3: Should the Polluter Pay?," Working Papers Series e94/9, University of Stirling, Division of Economics.
    16. Sara Rafael Almeida & Joana Sousa Lourenco & Francois J. Dessart & Emanuele Ciriolo, 2017. "Insights from behavioural sciences to prevent and combat violence against women. Literature review," JRC Research Reports JRC103975, Joint Research Centre.
    17. Daxini, Amar & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary & Buckley, Cathal & Barnes, Andrew P., 2018. "Factors influencing farmers' intentions to adopt nutrient management planning: accounting for heterogeneity," 166th Seminar, August 30-31, 2018, Galway, West of Ireland 276183, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Babcock, Bruce A. & Blackmer, Alfred M., 1992. "The Value Of Reducing Temporal Input Nonuniformities," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 17(2), pages 1-13, December.
    19. Meredith T. Niles & Margaret Brown & Robyn Dynes, 2016. "Farmer’s intended and actual adoption of climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 277-295, March.
    20. Schwanen, Tim & Ettema, Dick, 2009. "Coping with unreliable transportation when collecting children: Examining parents' behavior with cumulative prospect theory," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 511-525, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:70:y:2018:i:c:p:16-26. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.