IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/gewi21/317069.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Die Bedürfnisse landwirtschaftlicher Akteure in der Grünlandbewirtschaftung in Deutschland: Ergebnisse einer qualitativen Befragung

Author

Listed:
  • Möck, Malte
  • Becker, Talea
  • Feindt, Peter H.

Abstract

Dieser Beitrag stellt die Frage nach den Bedürfnissen von Landwirtinnen und Landwirten, die in Deutschland Grünland bewirtschaften. Diese Bedürfnisse werden als ein zentrales Element der Weltsicht derjenigen Akteure interpretiert, die eine Entscheidung über Aufgabe oder Fortführung sowie über die Art und Weise der Grünlandbewirtschaftung treffen. Obwohl sie das Handeln nicht erklären, verleihen sie diesem doch Sinn. So können Perspektiven auf die Gegenwart der Tätigkeiten im Grünland genauso eröffnet werden wie Einschätzungen zu ihrer innovativen Ausgestaltung in möglichen Zukunftsszenarien. Die Untersuchung stützt sich auf Experteninterviews und Gruppendiskussionen mit Praxisakteuren, die in der Weidehaltung von Rindern tätig sind. Die Ergebnisse der Befragung zeigen, dass sich die Bedürfnisse zur innerbetrieblichen Bewirtschaftung von solchen unterscheiden, die sich aus der Umwelt des Produktionssystems ergeben, darunter vor allem bürokratische Anforderungen. Hinsichtlich möglicher Innovationen für das Grünland können vor dem Hintergrund einer großen Offenheit für Wandel – auch technologischer Art – eine Perspektive der Kosten-Nutzen-Abwägung und eine Dominanz der Sorge um die Hütesicherheit aufgezeigt werden. Die Berücksichtigung dieser Bedürfnisse ist dabei nicht nur unverzichtbar für ein Verstehen der gegenwärtigen Entscheidungen über die Bewirtschaftung des Grünlandes, sondern zugleich ein essenzieller erster Baustein in einer gemeinsamen Ausgestaltung von Innovationen, die Grünlandwirtschaft in Zukunft erleichtern können.

Suggested Citation

  • Möck, Malte & Becker, Talea & Feindt, Peter H., 2021. "Die Bedürfnisse landwirtschaftlicher Akteure in der Grünlandbewirtschaftung in Deutschland: Ergebnisse einer qualitativen Befragung," 61st Annual Conference, Berlin, Germany, September 22-24, 2021 317069, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:gewi21:317069
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.317069
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/317069/files/156-M%C3%B6ck_b.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.317069?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McGinlay, J. & Gowing, D.J.G & Budds, J., 2017. "The threat of abandonment in socio-ecological landscapes: Farmers’ motivations and perspectives on high nature value grassland conservation," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 39-49.
    2. Ghahramani, Afshin & Kingwell, Ross S. & Maraseni, Tek Narayan, 2020. "Land use change in Australian mixed crop-livestock systems as a transformative climate change adaptation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    3. Deirdre Hennessy & Luc Delaby & Agnes van den Pol-van Dasselaar & Laurence Shalloo, 2020. "Increasing Grazing in Dairy Cow Milk Production Systems in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-15, March.
    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. Ross Kingwell, 2021. "Making Agriculture Carbon Neutral Amid a Changing Climate: The Case of South-Western Australia," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.
    2. Xuan Wei & Lihua Zhou & Guojing Yang & Ya Wang & Yong Chen, 2020. "Assessing the Effects of Desertification Control Projects from the Farmers’ Perspective: A Case Study of Yanchi County, Northern China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-15, February.
    3. Vogel, Everton & Beber, Caetano Luiz, 2021. "Sustainable Intensification Strategies for GHG Mitigation Among Heterogeneous Dairy Farms in Paraná, Brazil," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315219, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Minglu Wang & Bruce A. McCarl, 2021. "Impacts of Climate Change on Livestock Location in the US: A Statistical Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.
    5. Holden, Petra B. & Ziervogel, Gina & Hoffman, M. Timm & New, Mark G., 2021. "Transition from subsistence grazing to nature-based recreation: A nuanced view of land abandonment in a mountain social-ecological system, southwestern Cape, South Africa," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    6. Muñoz-Ulecia, E. & Bernués, A. & Casasús, I. & Olaizola, A.M. & Lobón, S. & Martín-Collado, D., 2021. "Drivers of change in mountain agriculture: A thirty-year analysis of trajectories of evolution of cattle farming systems in the Spanish Pyrenees," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    7. Šumrada, Tanja & Vreš, Branko & Čelik, Tatjana & Šilc, Urban & Rac, Ilona & Udovč, Andrej & Erjavec, Emil, 2021. "Are result-based schemes a superior approach to the conservation of High Nature Value grasslands? Evidence from Slovenia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    8. Neal Hughes & Michael Lu & Wei Ying Soh & Kenton Lawson, 2022. "Modelling the effects of climate change on the profitability of Australian farms," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 172(1), pages 1-22, May.
    9. Hang Zhang & Hai Chen & Tianwei Geng & Di Liu & Qinqin Shi, 2020. "Evolutionary Characteristics and Trade-Offs’ Development of Social–Ecological Production Landscapes in the Loess Plateau Region from a Resilience Point of View: A Case Study in Mizhi County, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-17, February.
    10. Maria Busse & Nico Heitepriem & Rosemarie Siebert, 2019. "The Acceptability of Land Pools for the Sustainable Revalorisation of Wetland Meadows in the Spreewald Region, Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-18, July.
    11. Barbara Wróbel & Waldemar Zielewicz & Mariola Staniak, 2023. "Challenges of Pasture Feeding Systems—Opportunities and Constraints," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-31, April.
    12. Monjardino, Marta & Loi, Angelo & Thomas, Dean T. & Revell, Clinton K. & Flohr, Bonnie M. & Llewellyn, Rick S. & Norman, Hayley C., 2022. "Improved legume pastures increase economic value, resilience and sustainability of crop-livestock systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    13. Meyer, Markus A. & Früh-Müller, Andrea, 2020. "Patterns and drivers of recent agricultural land-use change in Southern Germany," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    14. Shihao Zhang & Junhe Tan & Junhang Liu & Jiaqi Wang & Ata Tara, 2022. "Suitability Prediction and Enhancement of Future Water Supply Systems in Barwon Region in Victoria, Australia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-20, April.
    15. Darren J. Murphy & Michael D. Murphy & Bernadette O’Brien & Michael O’Donovan, 2021. "A Review of Precision Technologies for Optimising Pasture Measurement on Irish Grassland," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-36, June.
    16. Cipriano Díaz-Gaona & Manuel Sánchez-Rodríguez & Thais Rucabado-Palomar & Vicente Rodríguez-Estévez, 2019. "A Typological Characterization of Organic Livestock Farms in the Natural Park Sierra de Grazalema Based on Technical and Economic Variables," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-18, October.
    17. Radisav Dubljević & Božidarka Marković & Dušica Radonjić & Danijela Stešević & Milan Marković, 2020. "Influence of Changes in Botanical Diversity and Quality of Wet Grasslands through Phenological Phases on Cow Milk Fatty Acid Composition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-13, August.
    18. Xabier Díaz de Otálora & Agustín del Prado & Federico Dragoni & Fernando Estellés & Barbara Amon, 2021. "Evaluating Three-Pillar Sustainability Modelling Approaches for Dairy Cattle Production Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-14, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural and Food Policy; Research and Development / Technical Change / Emerging Technologies;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ags:gewi21:317069. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gewisea.html .

    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.