IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of awareness on farmers’ compliance with diffuse pollution mitigation measures: A conditional process modelling


  • Okumah, Murat
  • Martin-Ortega, Julia
  • Novo, Paula


Despite several decades of research and financial commitment, diffuse water pollution remains a major problem threatening the health and resilience of social-ecological systems. New approaches to tackle diffuse pollution emphasise awareness raising and provision of advice with the aim of triggering behavioural change. However, empirical evidence on the effectiveness of this approach remains scarce and mixed, with most studies relying on smaller datasets and case studies. Using one of the largest datasets (N = 1,995) with this information, this study seeks to establish quantitatively the relationship between farmers’ stated awareness of diffuse pollution mitigation measures and their compliance with them, through the analysis of Scotland’s pioneer advice-driven approach. Results from a conditional process modelling suggest awareness might not directly determine compliance but influences it indirectly through the mediating effect of other environmental management practices (in this study reflected in participation in agri-environmental schemes). This mediated relationship appears to be contingent on farm type and location. This would indicate that while public efforts in awareness creation is important, awareness alone is not sufficient to improve compliance; farmers may need to consistently engage in environmental management practices to develop a deeper understanding of the problem and action strategies. In this context, agri-environmental schemes appear to provide an opportunity for the creation of tacit knowledge and understanding of diffuse pollution mitigation measures through experiential learning which may also lead to the creation of new values.

Suggested Citation

  • Okumah, Murat & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Novo, Paula, 2018. "Effects of awareness on farmers’ compliance with diffuse pollution mitigation measures: A conditional process modelling," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 36-45.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:76:y:2018:i:c:p:36-45
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.04.051

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Maria Espinosa‐Goded & Jesús Barreiro‐Hurlé & Eric Ruto, 2010. "What Do Farmers Want From Agri‐Environmental Scheme Design? A Choice Experiment Approach," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 259-273, June.
    2. Lobley, Matt & Saratsi, Eirini & Winter, Michael & Bullock, James, 2013. "Training farmers in agri-environmental management: the case of Environmental Stewardship in lowland England," International Journal of Agricultural Management, Institute of Agricultural Management, vol. 3(1), pages 1-9, October.
    3. Edi Defrancesco & Paola Gatto & Ford Runge & Samuele Trestini, 2008. "Factors Affecting Farmers’ Participation in Agri‐environmental Measures: A Northern Italian Perspective," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 114-131, February.
    4. Gerard Wynn & Bob Crabtree & Jacqueline Potts, 2001. "Modelling Farmer Entry into the Environmentally Sensitive Area Schemes in Scotland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 65-82, January.
    5. Jesus Barreiro-Hurle & Maria Espinosa-Goded & Pierre Dupraz, 2010. "Does intensity of change matter? Factors affecting adoption of agri-environmental schemes in Spain," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(7), pages 891-905.
    6. Deasy, Clare & Quinton, John N. & Silgram, Martyn & Bailey, Alison P. & Jackson, Bob & Stevens, Carly J., 2010. "Contributing understanding of mitigation options for phosphorus and sediment to a review of the efficacy of contemporary agricultural stewardship measures," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 105-109, February.
    7. Barnes, A.P. & Willock, J. & Hall, C. & Toma, L., 2009. "Farmer perspectives and practices regarding water pollution control programmes in Scotland," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(12), pages 1715-1722, December.
    8. Judith Tsouvalis & Susanne Seymour & Charles Watkins, 2000. "Exploring Knowledge-Cultures: Precision Farming, Yield Mapping, and the Expert–Farmer Interface," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 32(5), pages 909-924, May.
    9. P. Dupraz & D. Vermersch & B. De Frahan & L. Delvaux, 2003. "The Environmental Supply of Farm Households: A Flexible Willingness to Accept Model," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(2), pages 171-189, June.
    10. Kay, Paul & Edwards, Anthony C. & Foulger, Miles, 2009. "A review of the efficacy of contemporary agricultural stewardship measures for ameliorating water pollution problems of key concern to the UK water industry," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 99(2-3), pages 67-75, February.
    11. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Daxini, Amar & Ryan, Mary & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Barnes, Andrew P., 2019. "Understanding farmers’ intentions to follow a nutrient management plan using the theory of planned behaviour," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 428-437.
    2. Alotaibi, Bader Alhafi & Kassem, Hazem S. & AL-Zaidi, Abdullah & Alyafrsi, Mohamad A., 2020. "Farmers’ awareness of agri-environmental legislation in Saudi Arabia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    3. Okumah, Murat & Yeboah, Ata Senior & Bonyah, Sylvester Kwaku, 2020. "What matters most? Stakeholders’ perceptions of river water quality," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).

    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. Unay-Gailhard, İlkay & Bojnec, Štefan, 2015. "Farm size and participation in agri-environmental measures: Farm-level evidence from Slovenia," EconStor Open Access Articles, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 273-282.
    2. Aslam, Uzma & Termansen, Mette & Fleskens, Luuk, 2017. "Investigating farmers’ preferences for alternative PES schemes for carbon sequestration in UK agroecosystems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 27(PA), pages 103-112.
    3. Whitten, Stuart M. & Reeson, Andrew & Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John, 2013. "Designing conservation tenders to support landholder participation: A framework and case study assessment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 82-92.
    4. Cullen, Paula & Bougard, Maxime & Heery, Declan & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary, 2017. "Farmers with Attitudes (to the Environment and Agri-environment Schemes)," 91st Annual Conference, April 24-26, 2017, Royal Dublin Society, Dublin, Ireland 258648, Agricultural Economics Society.
    5. Alló, Maria & Igleasias, Eva & Loureiro, Maria L., 2013. "Farmers’ preferences and social capital towards agri-environmental schemes for protecting birds," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150620, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Christensen, Tove & Pedersen, Anders Branth & Nielsen, Helle Oersted & Mørkbak, Morten Raun & Hasler, Berit & Denver, Sigrid, 2011. "Determinants of farmers' willingness to participate in subsidy schemes for pesticide-free buffer zones--A choice experiment study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1558-1564, June.
    7. Calvet, Coralie & Le Coent, Philippe & Napoleone, Claude & Quétier, Fabien, 2019. "Challenges of achieving biodiversity offset outcomes through agri-environmental schemes: Evidence from an empirical study in Southern France," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 113-125.
    8. Stephen Hynes & Eoghan Garvey, 2009. "Modelling Farmers’ Participation in an Agri‐environmental Scheme using Panel Data: An Application to the Rural Environment Protection Scheme in Ireland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 546-562, September.
    9. Campus, Daniela, 2014. "Evaluating agri-environmental schemes. The case of Tuscany," 2014 Third Congress, June 25-27, 2014, Alghero, Italy 172969, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    10. Unay-Gailhard, İlkay & Bojnec, Štefan, 2016. "Sustainable participation behaviour in agri-environmental measures," EconStor Open Access Articles, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 47-58.
    11. Christensen, Tove & Pedersen, Anders Branth & Nielsen, Helle Orstead & Morkbak, Morten Raun & Hasler, Berit & Denver, Sigrid, 2010. "How to increase the effectiveness of agri-environmental subsidy schemes through knowledge of farmer perceptions-a choice experiment on pesticide free buffer zones," 120th Seminar, September 2-4, 2010, Chania, Crete 109316, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Stephen Hynes & Eoghan Garvey, 2008. "Modelling Structural State Dependency in Agri-Environmental Schemes," Working Papers 0827, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    13. Daniele Mozzato & Paola Gatto & Edi Defrancesco & Lucia Bortolini & Francesco Pirotti & Elena Pisani & Luigi Sartori, 2018. "The Role of Factors Affecting the Adoption of Environmentally Friendly Farming Practices: Can Geographical Context and Time Explain the Differences Emerging from Literature?," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 10(9), pages 1-23, August.
    14. Murphy, Geraldine & Hynes, Stephen & Murphy, Eithne & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Green, Stuart, 2011. "Assessing the compatibility of farmland biodiversity and habitats to the specifications of agri-environmental schemes using a multinomial logit approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 111-121.
    15. Melindi-Ghidi, Paolo & Dedeurwaerdere, Tom & Fabbri, Giorgio, 2020. "Using environmental knowledge brokers to promote deep green agri-environment measures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    16. Kanchanaroek, Yingluck & Aslam, Uzma, 2017. "Assessing Farmers’ Preferences To Participate In Agri-environment Policies In Thailand," 2017 International Congress, August 28-September 1, 2017, Parma, Italy 260888, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Zandersen, Marianne & Oddershede, Jakob Stoktoft & Pedersen, Anders Branth & Nielsen, Helle Ørsted & Termansen, Mette, 2021. "Nature Based Solutions for Climate Adaptation - Paying Farmers for Flood Control," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    18. Doris Läpple, 2010. "Adoption and Abandonment of Organic Farming: An Empirical Investigation of the Irish Drystock Sector," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 697-714, September.
    19. Mack, Gabriele & Ritzel, Christian & Jan, Pierrick, 2020. "Determinants for the Implementation of Action-, Result- and Multi-Actor-Oriented Agri-Environment Schemes in Switzerland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    20. Adinolfi, Felice & Capitanio, Fabian & Pascucci, Stefano & de Magistris, Tiziana, 2011. "Factors Affecting Participation of Italian Farmers in Rural Development Policy," 122nd Seminar, February 17-18, 2011, Ancona, Italy 99418, European Association of Agricultural Economists.


    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:76:y:2018:i:c:p:36-45. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Joice Jiang). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.