IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v159y2020i1d10.1007_s10584-019-02595-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A new approach to explain farmers’ adoption of climate change mitigation measures

Author

Listed:
  • Albert Moerkerken

    (Netherlands Enterprise Agency RVO
    Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)

  • Julia Blasch

    (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)

  • Pieter Beukering

    (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)

  • Erik Well

    (CLM Research and Advisory)

Abstract

The determinants of farmers’ decisions to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are currently not well understood. This study takes several new angles in investigating farmers’ climate change mitigation behaviour. Based on two identical surveys among representative samples of Dutch farmers, this study examines the underlying determinants and motivating factors for three different types of climate change mitigation measures on farms: energy saving, the production of renewable energy and reduction of emissions of methane and nitrous oxide (non-CO2 emissions). Furthermore, the study explores whether farmers’ awareness and behaviour has been influenced by a communication campaign carried out by the government of the Netherlands between 2012 and 2015. Four major conclusions emerge. Firstly, the analyses demonstrate that accounting for the cost-effectiveness and technology readiness level (TRL) of different types of climate change mitigation measures provides for a better understanding of the factors that motivate farmers to adopt these measures. Secondly, neither the willingness to take GHG reduction measures nor knowledge on GHG emissions are consistent motivating factors for energy-related measures. Thirdly, it seems that external factors, such as economic hardship, dominate the overall environmental awareness of farmers. Fourthly, the farmer’s propensity to innovate proved to be the strongest and most consistent predictor of both the willingness and the actual adoption of climate change mitigation technologies. Therefore, focusing on making farmers more open to change and general innovation in campaigns in the agricultural sector might be more effective than campaigns focusing specifically on climate change mitigation.

Suggested Citation

  • Albert Moerkerken & Julia Blasch & Pieter Beukering & Erik Well, 2020. "A new approach to explain farmers’ adoption of climate change mitigation measures," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 141-161, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:159:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s10584-019-02595-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-019-02595-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-019-02595-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-019-02595-3?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. Meredith 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.
    2. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    3. J. Arbuckle & Lois Morton & Jon Hobbs, 2013. "Farmer beliefs and concerns about climate change and attitudes toward adaptation and mitigation: Evidence from Iowa," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 118(3), pages 551-563, June.
    4. Matthew J. Hornsey & Emily A. Harris & Paul G. Bain & Kelly S. Fielding, 2016. "Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(6), pages 622-626, June.
    5. 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.
    6. J. Carlton & Amber Mase & Cody Knutson & Maria Lemos & Tonya Haigh & Dennis Todey & Linda Prokopy, 2016. "The effects of extreme drought on climate change beliefs, risk perceptions, and adaptation attitudes," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 211-226, March.
    7. J. Stuart Carlton & Amber S. Mase & Cody L. Knutson & Maria Carmen Lemos & Tonya Haigh & Dennis P. Todey & Linda S. Prokopy, 2016. "The effects of extreme drought on climate change beliefs, risk perceptions, and adaptation attitudes," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 211-226, March.
    8. Sisse Liv Jørgensen & Mette Termansen, 2016. "Linking climate change perceptions to adaptation and mitigation action," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 138(1), pages 283-296, September.
    9. Andrew Barnes & Luiza Toma, 2012. "A typology of dairy farmer perceptions towards climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 112(2), pages 507-522, May.
    10. Paul Diederen & Hans Van Meijl & Arjan Wolters & Katarzyna Bijak, 2003. "Innovation adoption in agriculture : innovators, early adopters and laggards," Cahiers d'Economie et Sociologie Rurales, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 67, pages 29-50.
    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. J Blasch & B van der Kroon & P van Beukering & R Munster & S Fabiani & P Nino & S Vanino, 2022. "Farmer preferences for adopting precision farming technologies: a case study from Italy," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(1), pages 33-81.
    2. Junqiao Ma & Wenfeng Zhou & Shili Guo & Xin Deng & Jiahao Song & Dingde Xu, 2022. "The influence of peer effects on farmers’ response to climate change: evidence from Sichuan Province, China," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 1-23, November.
    3. Behrendt, Karl & Paparas, Dimitrios, 2021. "Proceedings of the 4th Symposium on Agri-Tech Economics for Sustainable Futures, 20th – 21st September 2021, Harper Adams University, Newport, United Kingdom," Agri-Tech Economics Proceedings 316594, Harper Adams University, Land, Farm & Agribusiness Management Department.
    4. Theodoros Skevas & Ray Massey & Jasper Grashuis, 2022. "Farmer adoption and intensity of use of extreme weather adaptation and mitigation strategies: evidence from a sample of Missouri farmers," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 174(1), pages 1-23, September.
    5. Behrendt, Karl & Paparas, Dimitrios, 2021. "Proceedings of the 4th Symposium on Agri-Tech Economics for Sustainable Futures, 20th – 21st September 2021, Harper Adams University, Newport, United Kingdom," Land, Farm & Agribusiness Management Department 316594, Harper Adams University, Land, Farm & Agribusiness Management Department.

    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. Kreft, Cordelia & Huber, Robert & Wuepper, David & Finger, Robert, 2021. "The role of non-cognitive skills in farmers' adoption of climate change mitigation measures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    2. Theodoros Skevas & Ray Massey & Jasper Grashuis, 2022. "Farmer adoption and intensity of use of extreme weather adaptation and mitigation strategies: evidence from a sample of Missouri farmers," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 174(1), pages 1-23, September.
    3. Behrendt, Karl & Paparas, Dimitrios, 2021. "Proceedings of the 4th Symposium on Agri-Tech Economics for Sustainable Futures, 20th – 21st September 2021, Harper Adams University, Newport, United Kingdom," Agri-Tech Economics Proceedings 316594, Harper Adams University, Land, Farm & Agribusiness Management Department.
    4. Castillo, Gracia Maria Lanza & Engler, Alejandra & Wollni, Meike, 2021. "Planned behavior and social capital: Understanding farmers’ behavior toward pressurized irrigation technologies," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    5. Abebe, Fentahun & Zuo, Alec & Wheeler, Sarah Ann & Bjornlund, Henning & Chilundo, Mario & Kissoly, Luitfred & Dube, Thabani, 2022. "The influences on farmers' planned and actual farm adaptation decisions: Evidence from small-scale irrigation schemes in South-Eastern Africa," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    6. Sandra Ricart & Jorge Olcina & Antonio M. Rico, 2018. "Evaluating Public Attitudes and Farmers’ Beliefs towards Climate Change Adaptation: Awareness, Perception, and Populism at European Level," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, December.
    7. Jaana Sorvali & Janne Kaseva & Pirjo Peltonen-Sainio, 2021. "Farmer views on climate change—a longitudinal study of threats, opportunities and action," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 1-19, February.
    8. Behrendt, Karl & Paparas, Dimitrios, 2021. "Proceedings of the 4th Symposium on Agri-Tech Economics for Sustainable Futures, 20th – 21st September 2021, Harper Adams University, Newport, United Kingdom," Land, Farm & Agribusiness Management Department 316594, Harper Adams University, Land, Farm & Agribusiness Management Department.
    9. 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.
    10. Zhihua Xu & Jingmei Li & Jingzhu Shan & Wensi Zhang, 2021. "Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior to understand residents’ coping behaviors for reducing the health risks posed by haze pollution," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 2122-2142, February.
    11. Meredith 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.
    12. Sarah P. Church & Michael Dunn & Nicholas Babin & Amber Saylor Mase & Tonya Haigh & Linda S. Prokopy, 2018. "Do advisors perceive climate change as an agricultural risk? An in-depth examination of Midwestern U.S. Ag advisors’ views on drought, climate change, and risk management," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(2), pages 349-365, June.
    13. Booth, Pamela & Walsh, Patrick J. & Stahlmann-Brown, Pike, 2020. "Drought Intensity, Future Expectations, and the Resilience of Climate Beliefs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    14. Tiberio Daddi & Niccolò Maria Todaro & Maria Rosa De Giacomo & Marco Frey, 2018. "A Systematic Review of the Use of Organization and Management Theories in Climate Change Studies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 456-474, May.
    15. Llewelyn Hughes & David M. Konisky & Sandra Potter, 2020. "Extreme weather and climate opinion: evidence from Australia," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(2), pages 723-743, November.
    16. Guglielmo Zappalà, 2022. "Drought exposure and accuracy: Motivated reasoning in climate change beliefs," Working Papers 2022.02, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    17. Sedighe Pakmehr & Masoud Yazdanpanah & Masoud Baradaran, 2021. "Explaining farmers’ response to climate change-induced water stress through cognitive theory of stress: an Iranian perspective," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 5776-5793, April.
    18. Gökçe Koç & Ayşe Uzmay, 2022. "Determinants of dairy farmers’ likelihood of climate change adaptation in the Thrace Region of Turkey," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(8), pages 9907-9928, August.
    19. David Lane & Evan Murdock & Ken Genskow & Carolyn Rumery Betz & Allison Chatrchyan, 2019. "Climate Change and Dairy in New York and Wisconsin: Risk Perceptions, Vulnerability, and Adaptation among Farmers and Advisors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-24, June.
    20. Nugun Patrick Jellason & Richard N. Baines & John S. Conway & Chukwuma C. Ogbaga, 2019. "Climate Change Perceptions and Attitudes to Smallholder Adaptation in Northwestern Nigerian Drylands," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-20, January.

    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:spr:climat:v:159:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s10584-019-02595-3. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.