A meta-analysis of agricultural conservation intentions, behaviors, and practices: Insights from 35 years of quantitative literature in the United States.

Conservation practices (CPs) are integral to maintaining the long-term viability of agro-ecological systems. Because farming systems and farmers' values and attitudes are heterogeneous, factors that consistently predict conservation behaviors remain elusive. Moreover, heterogeneity is present among studies regarding the type of CPs examined, and whether behavioral intentions or actual behaviors were measured. This study considers the characteristics of each CP, and whether a given study measured behavioral intention or actual behavior, to better understand farmers' adoption of CPs. We reviewed and analyzed 35 years (1982-2017) of quantitative conservation adoption literature in the United States. We categorized CPs based on their primary purpose, the type of benefit they provide, and whether they are operational or structural. We also examined the following five CPs: conservation tillage, buffers or borders, soil testing, grassed waterways, and cover crops. In our behavioral intention and actual behavior analysis, we found that attitudinal factors predicted both conservation intention and action (actual behavior), whereas current or previous use of practices only influenced actions, not stated conservation intentions. In our analysis focusing on CP characteristics, we found that having specific knowledge about and positive attitudes toward the CP, adoption of other CPs, seeking and using information, larger farm size, and vulnerable land predicted actual adoption across nearly all CP categorizations. Nuances emerge when comparing predictors of CPs that share a particular characteristic. For example, we found farm characteristics to be comparatively more important in predicting adoption of soil management CPs than nutrient and livestock management CPs, and farmers' stewardship identity to be more important for permanent practices than operational practices.

Explaining the use of online agricultural decision support tools with weather or climate information in the Midwestern United States.

Agricultural decision support tools (DSTs) with weather or climate information can provide useful information to help stakeholders make operational farming decisions and adapt to increasingly variable weather or climate in the context of climate change. However, many of these DSTs are still not fully utilized. Understanding the use of DSTs can help identify strategies to promote their usage to more end-users. This study surveyed farmers (n = 2,633) and advisors (n = 2,719) across 12 states in the Midwest to draw comparisons on their usage of DSTs and factors influencing the usage. The advisors are more likely to take advantage of free and publicly available sources than farmers. Advisors are also more likely to agree on the usefulness of DSTs, feel social pressure to use DSTs, be concerned and perceive risks from variable weather, believe in climate change, and show positive attitudes towards climate change adaptation than farmers. Concerns about weather or climate, descriptive social norms, greater farm size, and general propensity to adopt a new technology are positively associated with higher adoption rate of DSTs for both farmers and advisors. Higher level of perceived behavioral control to deal with weather-related risks, injunctive social norms, gender (male), and age are positively associated with higher adoption rate of DSTs for only advisors. Positive adaptation attitude towards climate change and higher education level are positively associated with higher adoption rate of DSTs for only farmers. Unlike advisors, age is negatively associated with higher adoption rate of DSTs for farmers. Implications of our findings include DST educators leveraging social networks and reinforcing social norms to promote usage among current non-users, building up both farmers' and advisors' confidence and knowledge in using DSTs, understanding the role of advisors as "change agents" to promote DST usage among farmers, and connecting networks of "innovators" and "early adopters." With more and more DSTs developed, future scholarship can draw upon our findings to understand how to encourage DSTs adoption among current non-users and extend to other regions.

Lessons learned from using a decision-support tool for precision placement of conservation practices in six agricultural watersheds in the US midwest.

While conservation of natural resources on agricultural landscapes has been a priority for public agencies for more than 80 years, the ability of conservation planners to place conservation practices for enhanced environmental benefits remains elusive. To increase both adoption of conservation practices and efficient use of conservation funding, conservation planners are turning to decision support tools (DSTs), such as the Agricultural Conservation Planning Framework (ACPF). However, less is known about how DSTs facilitate a whole-landscape approach to conservation planning, and the strategies that are employed by conservation planners to engage with producers using new GIS-enabled planning technologies. With the goal of contributing to both the policy and practice of precision conservation, we present findings from semi-structured in-depth interviews conducted with 21 conservation professionals in six watersheds in the US Midwest. Results suggest that the ACPF encourages conservation professionals to think at a watershed scale, supports their approach to conservation planning, and helps them in watershed planning and stakeholder engagement. Results also highlight the importance of conservation professionals employing a suite of strategies, such as being mindful of the scale of producer engagement (i.e., single farm vs community based) and accounting for producers' personalities, to create 'enabling conditions' for producer engagement when adopting a precision approach to conservation. Policy recommendations for precision conservation technologies include the need to streamline and expedite the process of conservation delivery, and that DSTs are a means to an end, but not a universal remedy, because conservation planning is most effective when localized interactions of rural landscapes and social dynamics are considered in an adaptive approach.

Midwestern US Farmers Perceive Crop Advisers as Conduits of Information on Agricultural Conservation Practices.

Nonpoint source pollution from agricultural land uses continues to pose one of the most significant threats to water quality in the US, with measurable impacts across local, regional, and national scales. The impact and the influence of targeted conservation efforts are directly related to the degree to which farmers are familiar with and trust the entities providing the information and/or outreach. Recent research suggests that farmers consistently rank independent and retail-affiliated crop advisers as among the most trusted and influential sources for agronomic information, but little is understood about whether farmers are willing to receive advice from crop advisers on the use of practices that conserve soil and water, and, if so, whether crop advisers will be perceived as influential. We present survey data from farmers (n = 1461) in Michigan's Saginaw Bay (Lake Huron) watershed to explore these questions. Results suggest that farmers view crop advisers as trustworthy sources of information about conservation, and influential on management practices that have large conservation implications. We discuss these results, along with perceived barriers and opportunities to crop advisers partnering with traditional conservation agencies to enhance the impact of voluntary conservation programs.