IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04626643.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Combining digital technologies and incentives for water conservation: A Q-method study to understand preferences of French irrigators

Author

Listed:
  • Pauline Pedehour

    (GRANEM - Groupe de Recherche Angevin en Economie et Management - UA - Université d'Angers - Institut Agro Rennes Angers - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement, CONFLUENCES - SFR UA 4201 Confluences - UA - Université d'Angers)

  • Marianne Lefebvre

    (GRANEM - Groupe de Recherche Angevin en Economie et Management - UA - Université d'Angers - Institut Agro Rennes Angers - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement, CONFLUENCES - SFR UA 4201 Confluences - UA - Université d'Angers)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the preferences for a water conservation scheme that has not yet been implemented by combining digital tools with pilot irrigation and incentives for farmers to adopt deficit irrigation. We conducted a Q-study with 25 farmers and irrigation advisors in two French watersheds highly dependent on irrigation. We found that the material implementation of the scheme (sensors, smartphone app...) is largely accepted. However, the incentive design is less consensual, i.e., how irrigation performance is defined and what is at stake for those performing better in deficit irrigation. A wider survey with 202 farmers allows to assess how the four profiles highlighted with the Q-study distribute in the farming population of the two watersheds. This study contributes to understanding how farmers perceive a combination of technological levers and incentives to foster water conservation.

Suggested Citation

  • Pauline Pedehour & Marianne Lefebvre, 2023. "Combining digital technologies and incentives for water conservation: A Q-method study to understand preferences of French irrigators," Post-Print hal-04626643, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04626643
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-04626643v2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-04626643v2/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chamaret, Cécile & Steyer, Véronique & Mayer, Julie C., 2020. "“Hands off my meter!” when municipalities resist smart meters: Linking arguments and degrees of resistance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    2. Louisa Prause & Sarah Hackfort & Margit Lindgren, 2021. "Digitalization and the third food regime," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(3), pages 641-655, September.
    3. Grimsrud, Kristine & Graesse, Maximo & Lindhjem, Henrik, 2020. "Using the generalised Q method in ecological economics: A better way to capture representative values and perspectives in ecosystem service management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    4. Gans, Will & Alberini, Anna & Longo, Alberto, 2013. "Smart meter devices and the effect of feedback on residential electricity consumption: Evidence from a natural experiment in Northern Ireland," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 729-743.
    5. Davies, B.B. & Hodge, I.D., 2007. "Exploring environmental perspectives in lowland agriculture: A Q methodology study in East Anglia, UK," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 323-333, March.
    6. Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Nudging farmers to enrol land into agri-environmental schemes: the role of a collective bonus," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 43(4), pages 609-636.
    7. Benjamin Ouvrard & R Préget & A Reynaud & L Tuffery, 2023. "Nudging and subsidising farmers to foster smart water meter adoption," Post-Print hal-04102529, HAL.
    8. Beal, C.D. & Flynn, J., 2015. "Toward the digital water age: Survey and case studies of Australian water utility smart-metering programs," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 29-37.
    9. Aditya Dinesh Gupta & Prerna Pandey & Andrés Feijóo & Zaher Mundher Yaseen & Neeraj Dhanraj Bokde, 2020. "Smart Water Technology for Efficient Water Resource Management: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-23, November.
    10. Sylvain Chabé-Ferret & Philippe Le Coent & Arnaud Reynaud & Julie Subervie & Daniel Lepercq, 2019. "Can we nudge farmers into saving water? Evidence from a randomised experiment," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 393-416.
    11. Ching Leong & Raul Lejano, 2016. "Thick narratives and the persistence of institutions: using the Q methodology to analyse IWRM reforms around the Yellow River," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(4), pages 445-465, December.
    12. Benjamin Ouvrard & Raphaële Préget & Arnaud Reynaud & Laetitia Tuffery, 2023. "Nudging and subsidising farmers to foster smart water meter adoption," Post-Print hal-04043374, HAL.
    13. Ujjayant Chakravorty & Manzoor H. Dar & Kyle Emerick, 2023. "Inefficient Water Pricing and Incentives for Conservation," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 319-350, January.
    14. Carroll, James & Lyons, Seán & Denny, Eleanor, 2014. "Reducing household electricity demand through smart metering: The role of improved information about energy saving," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 234-243.
    15. B Ouvrard & R Préget & A Reynaud & L Tuffery, 2023. "Nudging and subsidising farmers to foster smart water meter adoption," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 50(3), pages 1178-1226.
    16. Barry, John & Proops, John, 1999. "Seeking sustainability discourses with Q methodology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 337-345, March.
    17. Sneegas, Gretchen & Beckner, Sydney & Brannstrom, Christian & Jepson, Wendy & Lee, Kyungsun & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2021. "Using Q-methodology in environmental sustainability research: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    18. Zekri, Slim & Madani, Kaveh & Bazargan-Lari, Mohammad Reza & Kotagama, Hemesiri & Kalbus, Edda, 2017. "Feasibility of adopting smart water meters in aquifer management: An integrated hydro-economic analysis," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 85-93.
    19. Giannoccaro, Giacomo & Roselli, Luigi & Sardaro, Ruggiero & de Gennaro, Bernardo C., 2022. "Design of an incentive-based tool for effective water saving policy in agriculture," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    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. SASAKI, Hiroki & HORIE, Shinya & HORIE, Tetsuya & TANAKA, Katsuya, 2024. "Assessing the Effects of Nudge and Boost for Methane Emission Reduction from Paddy Field- Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial in Japan," IAAE 2024 Conference, August 2-7, 2024, New Delhi, India 344318, International Association of Agricultural Economists (IAAE).
    2. Raineau, Yann & Giraud-Héraud, Éric & Lecocq, Sébastien, 2025. "Social comparison nudges: What actually happens when we are told what others do?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    3. Benjamin Ouvrard & Raphaële Préget & Arnaud Reynaud & Laetitia Tuffery, 2020. "Nudging and Subsidizing Farmers to Foster Smart Water Meter Adoption," Working Papers hal-02958784, HAL.
    4. Singhal, Puja, 2024. "Inform me when it matters: Cost salience, energy consumption, and efficiency investments," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    5. Allison Lassiter & Nicole Leonard, 2022. "A systematic review of municipal smart water for climate adaptation and mitigation," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 49(5), pages 1406-1430, June.
    6. Clare Hall & Anita Wreford, 2012. "Adaptation to climate change: the attitudes of stakeholders in the livestock industry," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 207-222, February.
    7. Guo, Bowei & Weeks, Melvyn, 2022. "Dynamic tariffs, demand response, and regulation in retail electricity markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    8. Schaal, Tamara & Jacobs, Annie & Leventon, Julia & Scheele, Ben C. & Lindenmayer, David & Hanspach, Jan, 2022. "‘You can’t be green if you’re in the red’: Local discourses on the production-biodiversity intersection in a mixed farming area in south-eastern Australia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    9. Daniele Curzi & Sylvain Chabé‐Ferret & Salvatore Di Falco & Laure Kuhfuss & Marianne Lefebvre & Alan Matthews, 2022. "Using Experiments to Design and Evaluate the CAP: Insights from an Expert Panel," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 21(2), pages 28-34, August.
    10. von Zahn, Moritz & Bauer, Kevin & Mihale-Wilson, Cristina & Jagow, Johanna & Speicher, Max & Hinz, Oliver, 2022. "The smart green nudge: Reducing product returns through enriched digital footprints & causal machine learning," SAFE Working Paper Series 363, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2022.
    11. Lin, Hongyang & Jia, Huanyu & Ye, Yingjin & Shen, Yu & Lin, Boqiang, 2024. "Is cognition of residential tiered pricing policy effective in reducing electricity consumption in China?," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    12. Leonhardt, Heidi & Braito, Michael & Uehleke, Reinhard, 2021. "Who participates in agri-environmental schemes? A mixed-methods approach to investigate the role of farmer archetypes in scheme uptake and participation level," FORLand Working Papers 27 (2021), Humboldt University Berlin, DFG Research Unit 2569 FORLand "Agricultural Land Markets – Efficiency and Regulation".
    13. Urquhart, Julie & Courtney, Paul, 2011. "Seeing the owner behind the trees: A typology of small-scale private woodland owners in England," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(7), pages 535-544, September.
    14. Winkler, Klara J. & Nicholas, Kimberly A., 2016. "More than wine: Cultural ecosystem services in vineyard landscapes in England and California," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 86-98.
    15. Mandolesi, Serena & Nicholas, Philippa & Naspetti, Simona & Zanoli, Raffaele, 2015. "Identifying viewpoints on innovation in low-input and organic dairy supply chains: A Q-methodological study," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 25-34.
    16. Matthias Buchholz & Oliver Musshoff, 2021. "Tax or green nudge? An experimental analysis of pesticide policies in Germany [A psychological study of the inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefit]," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 48(4), pages 940-982.
    17. Huaranca, Laura Liliana & Iribarnegaray, Martín Alejandro & Albesa, Federico & Volante, José Norberto & Brannstrom, Christian & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2019. "Social Perspectives on Deforestation, Land Use Change, and Economic Development in an Expanding Agricultural Frontier in Northern Argentina," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    18. Cuppen, Eefje & Breukers, Sylvia & Hisschemöller, Matthijs & Bergsma, Emmy, 2010. "Q methodology to select participants for a stakeholder dialogue on energy options from biomass in the Netherlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 579-591, January.
    19. Strong, Derek Ryan, 2017. "The Early Diffusion of Smart Meters in the US Electric Power Industry," Thesis Commons 7zprk, Center for Open Science.
    20. Hermelingmeier, Verena & Nicholas, Kimberly A., 2017. "Identifying Five Different Perspectives on the Ecosystem Services Concept Using Q Methodology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 255-265.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Deficit Irrigation; Water; Agriculture; Q method; Technology acceptance; Water allocation scheme;
    All these keywords.

    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:hal:journl:hal-04626643. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.