IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i4p1631-d492690.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Will Farmers Accept Lower Gross Margins for the Sustainable Cultivation Method of Mixed Cropping? First Insights from Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Vanessa Bonke

    (Centre of Biodiversity and Sustainable Land Use, Georg-August-University, Goettingen, Buesgenweg 1, 37077 Goettingen, Germany
    Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, Georg-August-University Goettingen, Platz der Goettinger Sieben 5, 37073 Goettingen, Germany)

  • Marius Michels

    (Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, Georg-August-University Goettingen, Platz der Goettinger Sieben 5, 37073 Goettingen, Germany)

  • Oliver Musshoff

    (Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, Georg-August-University Goettingen, Platz der Goettinger Sieben 5, 37073 Goettingen, Germany)

Abstract

A decline in the legume cultivation has contributed to the biodiversity loss within the agricultural production across Europe. One possibility to include legumes into the production and promote sustainability is mixed cropping with legumes and non-legumes. However, the adoption of mixed cropping is challenging for farmers and information about the profitability is scarce. If mixed cropping should become a widely established production method, it is essential to gain an understanding of famers’ evaluation of the profitability mixed cropping needs to reach. Therefore, this article provides first empirical insights into farmers stated willingness to accept gross margin changes compared to current production possibilities. Based on a survey with results from 134 German non-adopters conducted in 2018 we can distinguish conventional farmers with a positive, neutral and negative willingness to accept reductions in gross margins as the trade-off for ecological benefits. Using an ordered logistic model we find that risk attitude, risk perception, the number of measures performed for ecological focus areas, the farmer’s age and being located in the south of Germany influence their willingness to accept gross margin changes compared to currently produced cereals.

Suggested Citation

  • Vanessa Bonke & Marius Michels & Oliver Musshoff, 2021. "Will Farmers Accept Lower Gross Margins for the Sustainable Cultivation Method of Mixed Cropping? First Insights from Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-13, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:4:p:1631-:d:492690
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/4/1631/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/4/1631/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde & Jürgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, 2011. "Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants, And Behavioral Consequences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 522-550, June.
    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. Dominic Lemken & Mandy Knigge & Stephan Meyerding & Achim Spiller, 2017. "The Value of Environmental and Health Claims on New Legume Products: A Non-Hypothetical Online Auction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-18, July.
    4. Seroa da Motta, Ronaldo & Ortiz, Ramon Arigoni, 2018. "Costs and Perceptions Conditioning Willingness to Accept Payments for Ecosystem Services in a Brazilian Case," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 333-342.
    5. Teresa Serra & David Zilberman & José M. Gil, 2008. "Differential uncertainties and risk attitudes between conventional and organic producers: the case of Spanish arable crop farmers," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 39(2), pages 219-229, September.
    6. Dale Whittington & Wiktor Adamowicz & Patrick Lloyd-Smith, 2017. "Asking Willingness-to-Accept Questions in Stated Preference Surveys: A Review and Research Agenda," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 9(1), pages 317-336, October.
    7. 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.
    8. Lemken, Dominic & Spiller, Achim & von Meyer-Höfer, Marie, 2017. "The Case of Legume-Cereal Crop Mixtures in Modern Agriculture and the Transtheoretical Model of Gradual Adoption," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 20-28.
    9. Greiner, Romy & Patterson, Louisa & Miller, Owen, 2009. "Motivations, risk perceptions and adoption of conservation practices by farmers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 99(2-3), pages 86-104, February.
    10. Dale Whittington & Wiktor Adamowicz & Patrick Lloyd-Smith, 2017. "Asking Willingness-to-Accept Questions in Stated Preference Surveys: A Review and Research Agenda," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 9(1), pages 317-336, October.
    11. Inga C. Melchior & Jens Newig, 2021. "Governing Transitions towards Sustainable Agriculture—Taking Stock of an Emerging Field of Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, January.
    12. Bartosz Bartkowski & Stephan Bartke, 2018. "Leverage Points for Governing Agricultural Soils: A Review of Empirical Studies of European Farmers’ Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-27, September.
    13. Brown, Calum & Kovács, Eszter & Herzon, Irina & Villamayor-Tomas, Sergio & Albizua, Amaia & Galanaki, Antonia & Grammatikopoulou, Ioanna & McCracken, Davy & Olsson, Johanna Alkan & Zinngrebe, Yves, 2021. "Simplistic understandings of farmer motivations could undermine the environmental potential of the common agricultural policy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    14. Jianhua Wang & Chenchen Yang & Wanglin Ma & Jianjun Tang, 2020. "Risk preference, trust, and willingness-to-accept subsidies for pro-environmental production: an investigation of hog farmers in China," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 22(3), pages 405-431, July.
    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. 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.
    2. 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).
    3. Céline Nauges & Dale Whittington, 2019. "Social Norms Information Treatments in the Municipal Water Supply Sector: Some New Insights on Benefits and Costs," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(03), pages 1-40, July.
    4. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    5. Li, Fuduo & Zhang, Kangjie & Ren, Jing & Yin, Changbin & Zhang, Yang & Nie, Jun, 2021. "Driving mechanism for farmers to adopt improved agricultural systems in China: The case of rice-green manure crops rotation system," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    6. Chèze, Benoît & David, Maia & Martinet, Vincent, 2020. "Understanding farmers' reluctance to reduce pesticide use: A choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    7. Laure Latruffe & Céline Nauges, 2014. "Technical efficiency and conversion to organic farming: the case of France," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 41(2), pages 227-253.
    8. Dörschner, T. & Mußhoff, O., 2014. "Does the Risk Attitude Influence and Farmers’ Willingness to Participate in Agri-Environmental Measures? – A Normative Approach to Evaluate Ecosystem Services," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 49, March.
    9. Lloyd-Smith, Patrick & Adamowicz, Wiktor, 2018. "Can stated measures of willingness-to-accept be valid? Evidence from laboratory experiments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 133-149.
    10. Garini, C.S. & Vanwindekens, F. & Scholberg, J.M.S. & Wezel, A. & Groot, J.C.J., 2017. "Drivers of adoption of agroecological practices for winegrowers and influence from policies in the province of Trento, Italy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 200-211.
    11. Tingting Liu & Randall J. F. Bruins & Matthew T. Heberling, 2018. "Factors Influencing Farmers’ Adoption of Best Management Practices: A Review and Synthesis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-26, February.
    12. Canales Medina, Elizabeth & Bergtold, Jason S. & Williams, Jeffery R., 2017. "Modeling the factors affecting farmers’ timing of adoption of in-field conservation cropping practices," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258558, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    13. Han, Guang & Arbuckle, J. Gordon & Grudens-Schuck, Nancy, 2021. "Motivations, goals, and benefits associated with organic grain farming by producers in Iowa, U.S," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    14. Latruffe, Laure & Nauges, Celine, 2010. "Converting to organic farming in France: Is there a selection problem?," 120th Seminar, September 2-4, 2010, Chania, Crete 109386, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Maldonado, Jorge H. & Moreno-Sánchez, Rocío del Pilar & Espinoza, Sophía & Bruner, Aaron & Garzón, Natalia & Myers, John, 2018. "Peace is much more than doves: The economic benefits of bird-based tourism as a result of the peace treaty in Colombia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 78-86.
    16. Villegas, Laura, 2017. "Shady Business: Why do Puerto Rican Coffee Farmers Adopt Conservation Agriculture Practices?," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 259136, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    17. Ioanna Grammatikopoulou & Eija Pouta & Sami Myyrä, 2016. "Exploring the determinants for adopting water conservation measures. What is the tendency of landowners when the resource is already at risk?," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(6), pages 993-1014, June.
    18. Robert Finger & Lucca Zachmann & Chloe McCallum, 2023. "Short supply chains and the adoption of fungus‐resistant grapevine varieties," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(3), pages 1753-1775, September.
    19. Canales, Elizabeth & Bergtold, Jason S. & Williams, Jeffery & Peterson, Jeffrey, 2015. "Estimating farmers’ risk attitudes and risk premiums for the adoption of conservation practices under different contractual arrangements: A stated choice experiment," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205640, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Benitez-Altuna, Francisco & Trienekens, Jacques & Materia, Valentina C. & Bijman, Jos, 2021. "Factors affecting the adoption of ecological intensification practices: A case study in vegetable production in Chile," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).

    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:13:y:2021:i:4:p:1631-:d:492690. 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.