Loading…

Perceived Benefit and Cost Perception Gaps between Adopters and Non-Adopters of In-Field Conservation Practices of Agricultural Producers

Farmers’ willingness to adopt conservation practices is influenced by their perceptions of the practices. Differences in perceptions point toward potential educational and outreach strategies that may be employed to promote adoption. The purpose of this study was to assess perception gaps between ad...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Sustainability 2022-10, Vol.14 (19), p.11803
Main Authors: McCollum, Calder, Bergtold, Jason S, Williams, Jeffery, Al-Sudani, Amer, Canales, Elizabeth
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c371t-2e2bf9ed7760f3b2bd22d4cfa772d710f7824969044e4bfcb061c0a88bbfbb733
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c371t-2e2bf9ed7760f3b2bd22d4cfa772d710f7824969044e4bfcb061c0a88bbfbb733
container_end_page
container_issue 19
container_start_page 11803
container_title Sustainability
container_volume 14
creator McCollum, Calder
Bergtold, Jason S
Williams, Jeffery
Al-Sudani, Amer
Canales, Elizabeth
description Farmers’ willingness to adopt conservation practices is influenced by their perceptions of the practices. Differences in perceptions point toward potential educational and outreach strategies that may be employed to promote adoption. The purpose of this study was to assess perception gaps between adopters and non-adopters for continuous no-tillage, conservation crop rotations, cover crops, and variable-rate application of inputs. Using primary survey data from Kansas agricultural producers, we evaluated differences in perceptions regarding economic, agronomic, environmental, and management outcomes through descriptive statistic and mean separation tests. Practice adoption ranged from 29% for variable-rate application of inputs to 69% for conservation crop rotations. On average, adopters perceived increases in crop yields and net returns for each practice compared to non-adopters. Perceptions about other factors varied by practice, but perceived benefits tended to be higher for adopters. Similarly, perceived disadvantages from adoption (e.g., higher cost, increased management needs) tended to be lower among adopters. Overall, both adopters and non-adopters perceived environmental benefits from adopting conservation practices. Our findings point toward potential outreach strategies to promote conservation adoption, such as extension and outreach that share more relevant and localized economic information and build upon joint perceptions of environmental benefits of practices.
doi_str_mv 10.3390/su141911803
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2724322448</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A746959913</galeid><sourcerecordid>A746959913</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c371t-2e2bf9ed7760f3b2bd22d4cfa772d710f7824969044e4bfcb061c0a88bbfbb733</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkdtKxDAQhosoKOqVL1DwSqSak017uS6uLoiKh-uSw2SJ1KQmqYdH8K3N7opo5iLDzPf_ITNFcYDRCaUtOo0jZrjFuEF0o9ghiOMKozO0-SffLvZjfEb5UJrReqf4uoOgwL6BLs_BgbGpFE6XUx9TuWoNyXpXXoohlhLSO4ArJ9oPCUJckTfeVb8Fb8q5q2YW-qWFixDexEp_F4RKVsEKmSyCVWOfxiD63PF6VFm8V2wZ0UfY_7l3i6fZxeP0qrq-vZxPJ9eVohynigCRpgXNeY0MlURqQjRTRnBONMfI8Iawtm4RY8CkURLVWCHRNFIaKTmlu8Xh2ncI_nWEmLpnPwaXn-wIJ4wSwliTqZM1tRA9dNYZn_IXcmh4scovJ5XrE87q9qxt8dL26J8gMwk-0kKMMXbzh_v_7PGaVcHHGMB0Q7AvInx2GHXLXXZ_dkm_ASaOkZs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2724322448</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Perceived Benefit and Cost Perception Gaps between Adopters and Non-Adopters of In-Field Conservation Practices of Agricultural Producers</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><creator>McCollum, Calder ; Bergtold, Jason S ; Williams, Jeffery ; Al-Sudani, Amer ; Canales, Elizabeth</creator><creatorcontrib>McCollum, Calder ; Bergtold, Jason S ; Williams, Jeffery ; Al-Sudani, Amer ; Canales, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><description>Farmers’ willingness to adopt conservation practices is influenced by their perceptions of the practices. Differences in perceptions point toward potential educational and outreach strategies that may be employed to promote adoption. The purpose of this study was to assess perception gaps between adopters and non-adopters for continuous no-tillage, conservation crop rotations, cover crops, and variable-rate application of inputs. Using primary survey data from Kansas agricultural producers, we evaluated differences in perceptions regarding economic, agronomic, environmental, and management outcomes through descriptive statistic and mean separation tests. Practice adoption ranged from 29% for variable-rate application of inputs to 69% for conservation crop rotations. On average, adopters perceived increases in crop yields and net returns for each practice compared to non-adopters. Perceptions about other factors varied by practice, but perceived benefits tended to be higher for adopters. Similarly, perceived disadvantages from adoption (e.g., higher cost, increased management needs) tended to be lower among adopters. Overall, both adopters and non-adopters perceived environmental benefits from adopting conservation practices. Our findings point toward potential outreach strategies to promote conservation adoption, such as extension and outreach that share more relevant and localized economic information and build upon joint perceptions of environmental benefits of practices.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2071-1050</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2071-1050</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/su141911803</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Agricultural economics ; Agricultural industry ; Agricultural practices ; Agricultural production ; Agricultural research ; Conservation ; Conservation practices ; Cover crops ; Crop rotation ; Crop yield ; Crop yields ; Cropping systems ; Crops ; Environmental management ; No-till cropping ; No-tillage ; Perception ; Perceptions ; Soil erosion ; Soil fertility ; Surveys ; Sustainability ; Sustainable agriculture ; Sustainable development</subject><ispartof>Sustainability, 2022-10, Vol.14 (19), p.11803</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2022 MDPI AG</rights><rights>2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c371t-2e2bf9ed7760f3b2bd22d4cfa772d710f7824969044e4bfcb061c0a88bbfbb733</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c371t-2e2bf9ed7760f3b2bd22d4cfa772d710f7824969044e4bfcb061c0a88bbfbb733</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2724322448/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2724322448?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,25751,27922,27923,37010,44588,74896</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>McCollum, Calder</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bergtold, Jason S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williams, Jeffery</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al-Sudani, Amer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Canales, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><title>Perceived Benefit and Cost Perception Gaps between Adopters and Non-Adopters of In-Field Conservation Practices of Agricultural Producers</title><title>Sustainability</title><description>Farmers’ willingness to adopt conservation practices is influenced by their perceptions of the practices. Differences in perceptions point toward potential educational and outreach strategies that may be employed to promote adoption. The purpose of this study was to assess perception gaps between adopters and non-adopters for continuous no-tillage, conservation crop rotations, cover crops, and variable-rate application of inputs. Using primary survey data from Kansas agricultural producers, we evaluated differences in perceptions regarding economic, agronomic, environmental, and management outcomes through descriptive statistic and mean separation tests. Practice adoption ranged from 29% for variable-rate application of inputs to 69% for conservation crop rotations. On average, adopters perceived increases in crop yields and net returns for each practice compared to non-adopters. Perceptions about other factors varied by practice, but perceived benefits tended to be higher for adopters. Similarly, perceived disadvantages from adoption (e.g., higher cost, increased management needs) tended to be lower among adopters. Overall, both adopters and non-adopters perceived environmental benefits from adopting conservation practices. Our findings point toward potential outreach strategies to promote conservation adoption, such as extension and outreach that share more relevant and localized economic information and build upon joint perceptions of environmental benefits of practices.</description><subject>Agricultural economics</subject><subject>Agricultural industry</subject><subject>Agricultural practices</subject><subject>Agricultural production</subject><subject>Agricultural research</subject><subject>Conservation</subject><subject>Conservation practices</subject><subject>Cover crops</subject><subject>Crop rotation</subject><subject>Crop yield</subject><subject>Crop yields</subject><subject>Cropping systems</subject><subject>Crops</subject><subject>Environmental management</subject><subject>No-till cropping</subject><subject>No-tillage</subject><subject>Perception</subject><subject>Perceptions</subject><subject>Soil erosion</subject><subject>Soil fertility</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><subject>Sustainability</subject><subject>Sustainable agriculture</subject><subject>Sustainable development</subject><issn>2071-1050</issn><issn>2071-1050</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkdtKxDAQhosoKOqVL1DwSqSak017uS6uLoiKh-uSw2SJ1KQmqYdH8K3N7opo5iLDzPf_ITNFcYDRCaUtOo0jZrjFuEF0o9ghiOMKozO0-SffLvZjfEb5UJrReqf4uoOgwL6BLs_BgbGpFE6XUx9TuWoNyXpXXoohlhLSO4ArJ9oPCUJckTfeVb8Fb8q5q2YW-qWFixDexEp_F4RKVsEKmSyCVWOfxiD63PF6VFm8V2wZ0UfY_7l3i6fZxeP0qrq-vZxPJ9eVohynigCRpgXNeY0MlURqQjRTRnBONMfI8Iawtm4RY8CkURLVWCHRNFIaKTmlu8Xh2ncI_nWEmLpnPwaXn-wIJ4wSwliTqZM1tRA9dNYZn_IXcmh4scovJ5XrE87q9qxt8dL26J8gMwk-0kKMMXbzh_v_7PGaVcHHGMB0Q7AvInx2GHXLXXZ_dkm_ASaOkZs</recordid><startdate>20221001</startdate><enddate>20221001</enddate><creator>McCollum, Calder</creator><creator>Bergtold, Jason S</creator><creator>Williams, Jeffery</creator><creator>Al-Sudani, Amer</creator><creator>Canales, Elizabeth</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20221001</creationdate><title>Perceived Benefit and Cost Perception Gaps between Adopters and Non-Adopters of In-Field Conservation Practices of Agricultural Producers</title><author>McCollum, Calder ; Bergtold, Jason S ; Williams, Jeffery ; Al-Sudani, Amer ; Canales, Elizabeth</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c371t-2e2bf9ed7760f3b2bd22d4cfa772d710f7824969044e4bfcb061c0a88bbfbb733</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Agricultural economics</topic><topic>Agricultural industry</topic><topic>Agricultural practices</topic><topic>Agricultural production</topic><topic>Agricultural research</topic><topic>Conservation</topic><topic>Conservation practices</topic><topic>Cover crops</topic><topic>Crop rotation</topic><topic>Crop yield</topic><topic>Crop yields</topic><topic>Cropping systems</topic><topic>Crops</topic><topic>Environmental management</topic><topic>No-till cropping</topic><topic>No-tillage</topic><topic>Perception</topic><topic>Perceptions</topic><topic>Soil erosion</topic><topic>Soil fertility</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><topic>Sustainability</topic><topic>Sustainable agriculture</topic><topic>Sustainable development</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>McCollum, Calder</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bergtold, Jason S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williams, Jeffery</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al-Sudani, Amer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Canales, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><jtitle>Sustainability</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>McCollum, Calder</au><au>Bergtold, Jason S</au><au>Williams, Jeffery</au><au>Al-Sudani, Amer</au><au>Canales, Elizabeth</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Perceived Benefit and Cost Perception Gaps between Adopters and Non-Adopters of In-Field Conservation Practices of Agricultural Producers</atitle><jtitle>Sustainability</jtitle><date>2022-10-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>19</issue><spage>11803</spage><pages>11803-</pages><issn>2071-1050</issn><eissn>2071-1050</eissn><abstract>Farmers’ willingness to adopt conservation practices is influenced by their perceptions of the practices. Differences in perceptions point toward potential educational and outreach strategies that may be employed to promote adoption. The purpose of this study was to assess perception gaps between adopters and non-adopters for continuous no-tillage, conservation crop rotations, cover crops, and variable-rate application of inputs. Using primary survey data from Kansas agricultural producers, we evaluated differences in perceptions regarding economic, agronomic, environmental, and management outcomes through descriptive statistic and mean separation tests. Practice adoption ranged from 29% for variable-rate application of inputs to 69% for conservation crop rotations. On average, adopters perceived increases in crop yields and net returns for each practice compared to non-adopters. Perceptions about other factors varied by practice, but perceived benefits tended to be higher for adopters. Similarly, perceived disadvantages from adoption (e.g., higher cost, increased management needs) tended to be lower among adopters. Overall, both adopters and non-adopters perceived environmental benefits from adopting conservation practices. Our findings point toward potential outreach strategies to promote conservation adoption, such as extension and outreach that share more relevant and localized economic information and build upon joint perceptions of environmental benefits of practices.</abstract><cop>Basel</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><doi>10.3390/su141911803</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2071-1050
ispartof Sustainability, 2022-10, Vol.14 (19), p.11803
issn 2071-1050
2071-1050
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2724322448
source Publicly Available Content Database
subjects Agricultural economics
Agricultural industry
Agricultural practices
Agricultural production
Agricultural research
Conservation
Conservation practices
Cover crops
Crop rotation
Crop yield
Crop yields
Cropping systems
Crops
Environmental management
No-till cropping
No-tillage
Perception
Perceptions
Soil erosion
Soil fertility
Surveys
Sustainability
Sustainable agriculture
Sustainable development
title Perceived Benefit and Cost Perception Gaps between Adopters and Non-Adopters of In-Field Conservation Practices of Agricultural Producers
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T14%3A33%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Perceived%20Benefit%20and%20Cost%20Perception%20Gaps%20between%20Adopters%20and%20Non-Adopters%20of%20In-Field%20Conservation%20Practices%20of%20Agricultural%20Producers&rft.jtitle=Sustainability&rft.au=McCollum,%20Calder&rft.date=2022-10-01&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=19&rft.spage=11803&rft.pages=11803-&rft.issn=2071-1050&rft.eissn=2071-1050&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/su141911803&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA746959913%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c371t-2e2bf9ed7760f3b2bd22d4cfa772d710f7824969044e4bfcb061c0a88bbfbb733%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2724322448&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A746959913&rfr_iscdi=true