Register      Login
Animal Production Science Animal Production Science Society
Food, fibre and pharmaceuticals from animals
Shopping Cart: ( empty )
You are here: Home > Journals > AN > EA05037
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Contents Vol 46(11)

Understanding and promoting adoption of conservation practices by rural landholders

D. J. Pannell A F G , G. R. Marshall B , N. Barr C F , A. Curtis D , F. Vanclay E and R. Wilkinson C F
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A School of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia.

B Institute for Rural Futures, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia.

C Department of Primary Industries, Bendigo, Vic. 3554, Australia.

D Faculty of Science and Agriculture, Charles Sturt University, Albury, NSW 2640, Australia.

E Tasmanian Institute of Agricultural Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tas. 7001, Australia.

F Cooperative Research Centre for Plant-Based Management of Dryland Salinity, University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia.

G Corresponding author. Email: david.pannell@uwa.edu.au

Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 46(11) 1407-1424 https://doi.org/10.1071/EA05037
Submitted: 14 February 2005  Accepted: 9 March 2006   Published: 9 October 2006

Abstract

Research on the adoption of rural innovations is reviewed and interpreted through a cross-disciplinary lens to provide practical guidance for research, extension and policy relating to conservation practices. Adoption of innovations by landholders is presented as a dynamic learning process. Adoption depends on a range of personal, social, cultural and economic factors, as well as on characteristics of the innovation itself. Adoption occurs when the landholder perceives that the innovation in question will enhance the achievement of their personal goals. A range of goals is identifiable among landholders, including economic, social and environmental goals. Innovations are more likely to be adopted when they have a high ‘relative advantage’ (perceived superiority to the idea or practice that it supersedes), and when they are readily trialable (easy to test and learn about before adoption). Non-adoption or low adoption of a number of conservation practices is readily explicable in terms of their failure to provide a relative advantage (particularly in economic terms) or a range of difficulties that landholders may have in trialing them.

Additional keywords: agriculture, economics, extension, innovation, learning, natural resource management, personality, policy, psychology, social issues, sociology, trials.


Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful for the reviewer comments received, and to Amabel Fulton and Sally Marsh for their detailed and insightful suggestions. Funders who have contributed directly or indirectly to the preparation of this review include Land and Water Australia, the Australian Research Council, Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, Grains Research and Development Corporation, and the CRC for Plant-Based Management of Dryland Salinity.


References


Abadi Ghadim AK, Pannell DJ (1999) A conceptual framework of adoption of an agricultural innovation. Agricultural Economics 21, 145–154.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | (verified 21 September 2006)

Marsh SP, Pannell DJ (2000) Agricultural extension policy in Australia: the good, the bad and the misguided. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 44, 605–627.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Marsh S, Pannell D, Lindner R (2000) The impact of agricultural extension on adoption and diffusion of lupins as a new crop in Western Australia. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 40, 571–583.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Marsh SP, Burton MP, Pannell DJ (2006) Understanding farmers’ monitoring of water tables for salinity management. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 46, 1113–1122.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Marshall GR (2004a) From words to deeds: enforcing farmers’ conservation cost-sharing commitments. Journal of Rural Studies 20, 157–167.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Marshall GR (2004b) Farmers cooperating in the commons? A study of collective action in salinity management. Ecological Economics 51, 271–286.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Marshall GR (2005) ‘Economics for collaborative environmental management: renegotiating the commons.’ (Earthscan Publications: London)

Mesiti L, Vanclay F (2006) Specifying the farming styles in viticulture. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 46, 585–593.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Miranowski JA, Carlson GA (1993) Agricultural resource economics: an overview. In ‘Agricultural and environmental resource economics’. (Eds GA Carlson, D Zilberman, JA Miranowski) pp. 3–27. (Oxford University Press: New York, NY)

Miranowski JA, Hrubovak J, Sutton J (1991) The effects of commodity programs on resource use. In ‘Commodity and resource policies in agricultural systems’. (Eds N Bockstael, R Just) pp. 275–292. (Springer-Verlag: New York, NY)

Mues C, Chapman L, Van Hilst R (1998) ‘Survey of Landcare and land management practices: 1992–93.’ (Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics: Canberra)

Mullen JD, Vernon D, Fishpool KI (2000) Agricultural extension policy in Australia: public funding and market failure. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 44, 629–645.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Nicoll R (1994) ‘Landholders’ knowledge and perceptions of dryland salinity control options in the Broadford and Kilmore shires.’ (Environmental Management Research Project, Deakin University: Melbourne)

Ohlmer B, Olson K, Brehmer B (1998) Understanding farmers’ decision making processes and improving managerial assistance. Journal of Agricultural Economics 18, 273–290.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Ostrom E (1998) A behavioral approach to the rational choice theory of collective action. American Political Science Review 92, 1–22.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Ostrom E, Gardner R, Walker J (1994) Regularities from the laboratory and possible explanations. In ‘Rules, games, and common-pool resources’, (Eds E Ostrom, R Gardner, J Walker) pp. 195–220. (University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor, MI)

Pannell DJ (1996) Lessons from a decade of whole-farm modelling in Western Australia. Review of Agricultural Economics 18, 373–383.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Pannell DJ (1999) Social and economic challenges in the development of complex farming systems. Agroforestry Systems 45, 395–409.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Pannell DJ (2001a) Dryland salinity: economic, scientific, social and policy dimensions. The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 45, 517–546.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Pannell DJ (2001b) Explaining non-adoption of practices to prevent dryland salinity in Western Australia: implications for policy. In ‘Land degradation’. (Ed. A Conacher) pp. 335–346. (Kluwer: Dordrecht)

Pannell DJ, McFarlane DJ, Ferdowsian R (2001) Rethinking the externality issue for dryland salinity in Western Australia. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 45, 459–475.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Phillips TI (1985) The development of methodologies for the determination and facilitation of learning for dairy farmers. MAgSci thesis. School of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Melbourne, Melbourne.

Presser HA, Cornish JB (1968) ‘Channels of information and farmers’ goals in relation to the adoption of recommended practices: a survey in a dried fruit growing district.’ (University of Melbourne, School of Agriculture: Melbourne)

Rahm MR, Huffman WE (1984) The adoption of reduced tillage: the role of human capital and other variables. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66, 405–412.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Ransom K, Barr N (1994) The adoption of dryland lucerne in north-central Victoria. Research Report Series No. 151. Department of Agriculture, Melbourne.

Reeve I (2001) Australian farmers’ attitudes on rural environmental issues: 1991–2000. Report to Land and Water Australia. Institute for Rural Futures, University of New England, Armidale.

Reeve I, Frost L, Musgrave W, Stayner R (2002) Agriculture and natural resource management in the Murray Darling Basin: policy history and analysis. Report to the Murray Darling Basin Commission. Institute for Rural Futures, University of New England, Armidale.

Ridley AM, Pannell DJ (2005) The role of plants and plant-based R&D in managing dryland salinity in Australia. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 45, 1341–1355.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Rogers EM (1962) ‘Diffusion of innovations.’ (Free Press: New York, NY)

Rogers EM (2003) ‘Diffusion of innovations.’ 5th edn. (Free Press: New York, NY)

Röling NG (1988) ‘Extension science, information systems in agricultural development.’ (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge)

Ruttan VW (1996) What happened to technology adoption–diffusion research? Sociologia Ruralis 36, 51–73. open url image1

Shampine A (1998) Compensating for information externalities in technology diffusion models. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 80, 337–346.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Shapiro BI, Brorsen BW, Doster DH (1992) Adoption of double-cropping soyabean and wheat. Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics 24, 33–40. open url image1

Shrapnel M (2002) ‘Bushies and cockies — beyond the myths: the personalities of our outback land managers.’ MSc thesis. University of Queensland, Brisbane.

Shrapnel M, Davie J (2001) The influence of personality in determining farmer responsiveness to risk. Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension 7, 167–178. open url image1

Sinden JA, King DA (1990) Adoption of soil conservation measures in Manilla Shire, New South Wales. Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics 58, 179–192. open url image1

Sobels J, Curtis A, Lockie S (2001) The role of Landcare networks in rural Australia: exploring the contribution of social capital. Journal of Rural Studies 17, 265–276.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Stoyles M (1992) ‘Cultural barriers to extension: results of a survey of the non English speaking background farmers in east Shepparton.’ (Ethnic Communications: Melbourne)

Tonks I (1983) Bayesian learning and the optimal investment decision of the firm. Economic Journal 93, 87–98.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Tsur Y, Sternberg M, Hochman E (1990) Dynamic modelling of innovation process adoption with risk aversion and learning. Oxford Economic Papers 42, 336–355. open url image1

Vanclay F (1986) Socio-economic correlates of adoption of soil conservation technology. Master of Social Science thesis. Department of Anthropology and Sociology, University of Queensland, Brisbane.

Vanclay F (1992) The social context of farmers’ adoption of environmentally sound farming practices. In ‘Agriculture, environment and society: contemporary issues for Australia.’ (Eds G Lawrence, F Vanclay, B Furze) pp. 94–121. (Macmillan: Melbourne)

Vanclay F (1997) The social basis of environmental management. In ‘Critical landcare.’ (Eds S Lockie, F Vanclay) pp. 9–27. (Centre for Rural Social Research, Charles Sturt University: Wagga Wagga)

Vanclay F (2002) Conceptualising social impacts. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 22, 183–211.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Vanclay F (2004) Social principles for agricultural extension to assist in the promotion of natural resource management. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 44, 213–222.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Vanclay F, Lawrence G (1995) ‘The environmental imperative.’ (Central Queensland University Press: Rockhampton)

Vanclay F, Lockie S (1993) ‘Barriers to the adoption of sustainable crop rotations.’ (Centre for Rural Social Research, Charles Sturt University: Wagga Wagga)

Vanclay F, Mesiti L, Howden P (1998) Styles of farming and farming subcultures: Appropriate concepts for Australian rural sociology? Rural Society 8, 85–107. open url image1

Vanclay F, Howden P, Mesiti L, Glyde S (2006) The social and intellectual construction of farming styles. Sociologia Ruralis 46, 61–82..
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Weston RE, Cary JW (1979) ‘A change for the better: stress, attitudes and decision making of dairy farmers 1976 to 1978.’ (School of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Melbourne: Melbourne)

Wiebers UC (1992) Economic and environmental effects of pest management information and pesticides: the case of processing tomatoes in California. PhD thesis. Tecnische Universität Berlin, Fachbereich Internationale Agrarentwicklung, Institue für Agrarbetriebs-Und Standortsokonomie.

Wilkinson RL (1989) ‘Stepwise adoption of a complex agricultural technology.’ MAgrSc thesis. University of Melbourne, Melbourne.

Wilkinson R, Cary J (1992) ‘Monitoring landcare in north central Victoria.’ (School of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Melbourne: Melbourne)

Wilkinson RL, Cary JW (1993) ‘Monitoring soilcare in north east Victoria.’ (School of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Melbourne: Melbourne)