IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i14p8275-d856951.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Vulnerability of Maize Farming Systems to Climate Change: Farmers’ Opinions Differ about the Relevance of Adaptation Strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Marine Albert

    (INRAE, UMR1248 AGIR, Université de Toulouse, F-31320 Castanet-Tolosan, France)

  • Jacques-Eric Bergez

    (INRAE, UMR1248 AGIR, Université de Toulouse, F-31320 Castanet-Tolosan, France)

  • Magali Willaume

    (INRAE, UR MIAT, Université de Toulouse, F-31320 Castanet-Tolosan, France)

  • Stéphane Couture

    (INPT ENSAT, UMR1248 AGIR, Université de Toulouse, F-31320 Castanet-Tolosan, France)

Abstract

Climate change has negative impacts on maize cultivation in southwestern France, such as soil erosion and water stress. The vulnerability of maize farming systems to climate change must be assessed before considering potential adaptation strategies. This study focused on eliciting and understanding criteria that maize growers use to assess the vulnerability of their farming systems to climate change. To this end, we surveyed maize growers in two consecutive stages: a qualitative stage, to elicit vulnerability criteria, and a quantitative stage, to test the genericity of criteria related to the adaptation strategies. The qualitative stage identified 144 criteria that farmers used to assess vulnerability to climate change, while the quantitative stage showed that farmers’ opinions about the adaptation strategies differed. Many factors explained these differences, including structural (e.g., soil type) and psychological factors (e.g., interest in agroecology). Our typology of farmers revealed that their interest in agroecology and technology, as well as their perceptions of the risks of climate change and their attachment to their production systems, influence the type of adaptations they identify as relevant (i.e., intensification strategies, slight adjustments or agroecological innovations). Farmers’ perceptions should be considered when providing individual advice and assessing vulnerability, by including criteria related to their psychological characteristics.

Suggested Citation

  • Marine Albert & Jacques-Eric Bergez & Magali Willaume & Stéphane Couture, 2022. "Vulnerability of Maize Farming Systems to Climate Change: Farmers’ Opinions Differ about the Relevance of Adaptation Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-23, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8275-:d:856951
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8275/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8275/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rooholla Moradi & Alireza Koocheki & Mehdi Nassiri Mahallati & Hamed Mansoori, 2013. "Adaptation strategies for maize cultivation under climate change in Iran: irrigation and planting date management," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 265-284, February.
    2. Arnaud Reynaud & Stéphane Couture, 2012. "Stability of risk preference measures: results from a field experiment on French farmers," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(2), pages 203-221, August.
    3. Olivier Lopez & Xavier Milhaud & Pierre-Emmanuel Thérond, 2015. "Arbres de régression et de classification (CART)," Post-Print hal-01152263, HAL.
    4. Juhola, Sirkku & Glaas, Erik & Linnér, Björn-Ola & Neset, Tina-Simone, 2016. "Redefining maladaptation," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(P1), pages 135-140.
    5. Juliana D. B. Gil & Avery S. Cohn & John Duncan & Peter Newton & Sonja Vermeulen, 2017. "The resilience of integrated agricultural systems to climate change," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(4), July.
    6. Dardonville, Manon & Urruty, Nicolas & Bockstaller, Christian & Therond, Olivier, 2020. "Influence of diversity and intensification level on vulnerability, resilience and robustness of agricultural systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    7. Senthilkumar, Kalimuthu & Bergez, Jacques-Eric & Leenhardt, Delphine, 2015. "Can farmers use maize earliness choice and sowing dates to cope with future water scarcity? A modelling approach applied to south-western France," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 125-134.
    8. Schlüter, Maja & Baeza, Andres & Dressler, Gunnar & Frank, Karin & Groeneveld, Jürgen & Jager, Wander & Janssen, Marco A. & McAllister, Ryan R.J. & Müller, Birgit & Orach, Kirill & Schwarz, Nina & Wij, 2017. "A framework for mapping and comparing behavioural theories in models of social-ecological systems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 21-35.
    9. Tina-Simone Neset & Sirkku Juhola & Lotten Wiréhn & Janina Käyhkö & Carlo Navarra & Therese Asplund & Erik Glaas & Victoria Wibeck & Björn-Ola Linnér, 2020. "Supporting Dialogue and Analysis on Trade-Offs in Climate Adaptation Research With the Maladaptation Game," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 51(3), pages 378-399, June.
    10. 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.
    11. Yves Croissant, 2020. "mlogit: Random Utility Models in R," Post-Print hal-03019603, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Robert Huber & Hang Xiong & Kevin Keller & Robert Finger, 2022. "Bridging behavioural factors and standard bio‐economic modelling in an agent‐based modelling framework," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 35-63, February.
    2. 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).
    3. Finger, Robert & Möhring, Niklas, 2022. "The adoption of pesticide-free wheat production and farmers' perceptions of its environmental and health effects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    4. Sergei Schaub & Jaboury Ghazoul & Robert Huber & Wei Zhang & Adelaide Sander & Charles Rees & Simanti Banerjee & Robert Finger, 2023. "The role of behavioural factors and opportunity costs in farmers' participation in voluntary agri‐environmental schemes: A systematic review," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 617-660, September.
    5. Traxler, Emilia & Li, Tongzhe, 2020. "Agricultural Best Management Practices, A summary of adoption behaviour," Working Papers 305271, University of Guelph, Institute for the Advanced Study of Food and Agricultural Policy.
    6. Huber, Robert & Späti, Karin & Finger, Robert, 2023. "A behavioural agent-based modelling approach for the ex-ante assessment of policies supporting precision agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    7. Bourceret, Amélie & Amblard, Laurence & Mathias, Jean-Denis, 2022. "Adapting the governance of social–ecological systems to behavioural dynamics: An agent-based model for water quality management using the theory of planned behaviour," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    8. Drechsler, Martin, 2021. "Impacts of human behaviour in agri-environmental policies: How adequate is homo oeconomicus in the design of market-based conservation instruments?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    9. Drechsler, Martin & Wätzold, Frank & Grimm, Volker, 2022. "The hitchhiker's guide to generic ecological-economic modelling of land-use-based biodiversity conservation policies," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 465(C).
    10. Philippos Karipidis & Sotiria Karypidou, 2021. "Factors that Impact Farmers’ Organic Conversion Decisions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-24, April.
    11. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Zagórska, Katarzyna & Letki, Natalia & Tryjanowski, Piotr & Wąs, Adam, 2021. "Drivers of farmers’ willingness to adopt extensive farming practices in a globally important bird area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    12. Ranganathan, Kavitha & Lejarraga, Tomás, 2021. "Elicitation of risk preferences through satisficing," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).
    13. Mercedes Rodríguez & José Antonio Camacho, 2023. "The importance of agriculture and rural areas for the future in the European Union: An exploration of public opinion," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 69(10), pages 394-403.
    14. Mingyue Li & Jingjing Wang & Kai Chen & Lianbei Wu, 2020. "Willingness and Behaviors of Farmers’ Green Disposal of Pesticide Packaging Waste in Henan, China: A Perceived Value Formation Mechanism Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-18, May.
    15. Greene, Claire & Prescott, Brian & Shy, Oz, 2022. "How people pay each other: Data, theory, and calibrations," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    16. Meike Weltin & Silke Hüttel, 2023. "Sustainable Intensification Farming as an Enabler for Farm Eco-Efficiency?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(1), pages 315-342, January.
    17. Bocqueho, Geraldine & Jacquet, Florence & Reynaud, Arnaud, 2011. "Expected Utility or Prospect Theory Maximizers? Results from a Structural Model based on Field-experiment Data," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114257, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Haoge Chang & Yusuke Narita & Kota Saito, 2022. "Approximating Choice Data by Discrete Choice Models," Papers 2205.01882, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
    19. Qianchun Dai & Kequn Cheng, 2022. "What Drives the Adoption of Agricultural Green Production Technologies? An Extension of TAM in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-18, November.
    20. Zubanov, Nick & Cadsby, Bram & Song, Fei, 2017. "The," IZA Discussion Papers 10542, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8275-:d:856951. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.