IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v24y2022i5d10.1007_s10668-021-01693-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision spaces in agricultural risk management: a mental model study of Austrian crop farmers

Author

Listed:
  • Susanne Hanger-Kopp

    (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
    ETH Zurich)

  • Marlene Palka

    (University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna)

Abstract

Drought has become a dominant climate risk both around the world and in Europe, adding to the already challenging task of farming and governing the agricultural sector under climate change. Drought risk management is extremely complex. Apart from irrigation, most drought risk management options have more than one goal and may potentially have negative trade-offs with other risk management objectives. Moreover, government regulations and market mechanisms influence farmers’ decision-making. However, previous studies, both in developed and in developing countries, have predominantly focused on attitudinal and structural influencing factors on farmers’ risk management behavior. In this paper, we comprehensively investigate farmers’ decision spaces with respect to drought risk management. We address two applied research questions: (1) What are farmers’ preferred drought risk management measures? (2) From a farmer’s perspective, what are the dominant factors influencing drought risk management decisions? We find that farmers primarily think of production-based rather than financial measures with respect to drought risk management. At the same time, natural and technical constraints and enabling factors dominate their mental decision space, followed by public and private institutional aspects. This research provides a basis for the design of integrated and holistic drought risk management policy and the drought risk governance needed for sustainable use of land and water resources such as needed to address systemic risks and achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Moreover, we introduce a novel approach using mental models extracted from interviews to explore cognitive representations of farmers' decision spaces. This approach has the potential to complement mainstream research using standardized surveys and behavioral models to analyze drivers of risk management.

Suggested Citation

  • Susanne Hanger-Kopp & Marlene Palka, 2022. "Decision spaces in agricultural risk management: a mental model study of Austrian crop farmers," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(5), pages 6072-6098, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:24:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s10668-021-01693-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-021-01693-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-021-01693-6
    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/s10668-021-01693-6?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. Kieran M. Findlater & Terre Satterfield & Milind Kandlikar & Simon D. Donner, 2018. "Six languages for a risky climate: how farmers react to weather and climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 148(4), pages 451-465, June.
    2. Wim Kellens & Teun Terpstra & Philippe De Maeyer, 2013. "Perception and Communication of Flood Risks: A Systematic Review of Empirical Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(1), pages 24-49, January.
    3. Feola, Giuseppe & Binder, Claudia R., 2010. "Towards an improved understanding of farmers' behaviour: The integrative agent-centred (IAC) framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2323-2333, October.
    4. Donald Wilhite & Mark Svoboda & Michael Hayes, 2007. "Understanding the complex impacts of drought: A key to enhancing drought mitigation and preparedness," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 21(5), pages 763-774, May.
    5. Barry K. Goodwin & Vincent H. Smith, 2013. "What Harm Is Done By Subsidizing Crop Insurance?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 95(2), pages 489-497.
    6. Bossert, Thomas, 1998. "Analyzing the decentralization of health systems in developing countries: decision space, innovation and performance," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 47(10), pages 1513-1527, November.
    7. Rianne van Duinen & Tatiana Filatova & Peter Geurts & Anne van der Veen, 2015. "Empirical Analysis of Farmers' Drought Risk Perception: Objective Factors, Personal Circumstances, and Social Influence," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(4), pages 741-755, April.
    8. Joyce Willock & Ian J. Deary & Gareth Edwards‐Jones & Gavin J. Gibson & Murray J. McGregor & Alistair Sutherland & J. Barry Dent & Oliver Morgan & Robert Grieve, 1999. "The Role of Attitudes and Objectives in Farmer Decision Making: Business and Environmentally‐Oriented Behaviour in Scotland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 286-303, May.
    9. Anton Eitzinger & Claudia R. Binder & Markus A. Meyer, 2018. "Risk perception and decision-making: do farmers consider risks from climate change?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 507-524, December.
    10. Luisa Menapace & Gregory Colson & Roberta Raffaelli, 2013. "Risk Aversion, Subjective Beliefs, and Farmer Risk Management Strategies," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 95(2), pages 384-389.
    11. Bergevoet, R. H. M. & Ondersteijn, C. J. M. & Saatkamp, H. W. & van Woerkum, C. M. J. & Huirne, R. B. M., 2004. "Entrepreneurial behaviour of dutch dairy farmers under a milk quota system: goals, objectives and attitudes," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 1-21, April.
    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. Pham, Huong Dien & Waibel, Hermann, 2018. "Risk attitudes, knowledge, skills and agricultural productivity," TVSEP Working Papers wp-007, Leibniz Universitaet Hannover, Institute of Development and Agricultural Economics, Project TVSEP.
    2. Francisco J. André & Laura Riesgo, 2006. "A Duality Procedure to Elicit Nonlinear Multiattribute Utility Functions," Working Papers 06.02, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
    3. Gómez-Limón, José A. & Gutiérrez-Martín, Carlos & Riesgo, Laura, 2016. "Modeling at farm level: Positive Multi-Attribute Utility Programming," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 17-27.
    4. Riesgo, Laura & Gómez-Limón, José A., 2005. "Multi-Criteria Policy Scenarios Analysis for Public Management of Irrigated Agriculture," 89th Seminar, February 2-5, 2005, Parma, Italy 239276, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Ondersteijn, C.J.M. & Giesen, G.W.J. & Huirne, R.B.M., 2006. "Perceived environmental uncertainty in Dutch dairy farming: The effect of external farm context on strategic choice," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 88(2-3), pages 205-226, June.
    6. Jeffrey Gillespie & Ashok Mishra, 2011. "Off‐farm employment and reasons for entering farming as determinants of production enterprise selection in US agriculture," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 55(3), pages 411-428, July.
    7. Marianne Lefebvre & Estelle Midler & Philippe Bontems, 2020. "Adoption of Environment-Friendly Agricultural Practices with Background Risk: Experimental Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(2), pages 405-428, July.
    8. Wilson, Paul & Harper, Nicholas & Darling, Richard, 2011. "Explaining Variation in Farm and Farm Business Performance in Respect to Farmer Segmentation Analysis," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108783, Agricultural Economics Society.
    9. Varela, Elsa & Olaizola, Ana M. & Blasco, Isabel & Capdevila, Carmen & Lecegui, Antonio & Casasús, Isabel & Bernués, Alberto & Martín-Collado, Daniel, 2022. "Unravelling opportunities, synergies, and barriers for enhancing silvopastoralism in the Mediterranean," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    10. Botero, Hernan & Barnes, Andrew P. & Perez, Lisset & Rios, David & Ramirez-Villegas, Julian, 2021. "The determinants of common bean variety selection and diversification in Colombia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    11. Ezatollah Karami & Afsaneh Mansoorabadi, 2008. "Sustainable agricultural attitudes and behaviors: a gender analysis of Iranian farmers," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 10(6), pages 883-898, December.
    12. Gomez-Limon, Jose Antonio & Berbel, Julio & Arriaza Balmón, Manuel, 2005. "MCDM Farm System Analysis for Public Management of Irrigated Agriculture," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24676, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Matthew Gorton & Elodie Douarin & Sophia Davidova & Laure Latruffe, 2006. "Attitudes to farming and agricultural policy in the context of 2003 CAP reform: A comparison of farmers in selected established and new Member States," Post-Print hal-02283469, HAL.
    14. Jeffrey Gillespie & Narayan Nyaupane & Brittany Dunn & Kenneth McMillin, 2016. "Why do farmers decide to produce meat goats? Evidence from the United States," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 33(4), pages 911-927, December.
    15. Castillo-Valero, Juan S. & Sanchez-Garcia, Mercedes & Garcia-Cortijo, Mari Carmen, 2016. "Predicting grower choices in a regulated environment," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 20(1), November.
    16. Ruggiero Rippo & Simone Cerroni, 2023. "Farmers' participation in the Income Stabilisation Tool: Evidence from the apple sector in Italy," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(1), pages 273-294, February.
    17. Andre, Francisco J. & Riesgo, Laura, 2007. "A non-interactive elicitation method for non-linear multiattribute utility functions: Theory and application to agricultural economics," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(2), pages 793-807, September.
    18. Riesgo, Laura & Gomez-Limon, Jose A., 2006. "Multi-criteria policy scenario analysis for public regulation of irrigated agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 91(1-2), pages 1-28, November.
    19. Abinash Bhattachan & Matthew D. Jurjonas & Priscilla R. Morris & Paul J. Taillie & Lindsey S. Smart & Ryan E. Emanuel & Erin L. Seekamp, 2019. "Linking residential saltwater intrusion risk perceptions to physical exposure of climate change impacts in rural coastal communities of North Carolina," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 97(3), pages 1277-1295, July.
    20. Jale Amanuel Dufera & Tewodros Addisu Yate & Tadesse Tujuba Kenea, 2023. "Spatiotemporal analysis of drought in Oromia regional state of Ethiopia over the period 1989 to 2019," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 117(2), pages 1569-1609, 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:spr:endesu:v:24:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s10668-021-01693-6. 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.