The influence of the seasons: how the agricultural calendar impacts farmer perceptions of cover crops

Author(s):  
Margaret Beetstra ◽  
Robyn Wilson ◽  
Eric Toman

Abstract Across the Midwest, substantial funding and personnel time have been allocated to encourage farmers to adopt a wide range of conservation practices but adoption rates for many of these practices remain low. Prior research focuses largely on the influence of individual-level factors (e.g., beliefs, attitudes) on conservation practice adoption rather than on contextual factors (e.g., seasons) that might also play a role. In the present study, we considered seasonal variation and its potential influence on farmer cover crop decision-making. We first established how farmer temporal and financial resources fluctuate across the year and then compared the annual agricultural decision and cover crop decision calendars. We also considered farmer cover crop perceptions and likely behaviors. To study this, we surveyed the same Midwestern farmers in the spring, summer and winter within a 12-month period. Results indicated that farmers were generally the least busy and the most financially comfortable in the winter months. Moreover, farmers perceived the benefits of cover crops differently throughout the year. These results indicate that seasonality can be a confounding factor which should be considered when designing and conducting research and farmer engagement. As researchers, it is our responsibility to understand the specific calendar experienced by our sample and how that may influence responses so we can examine theory-supported factors of interest rather than seasonality as a driver of farmer responses. As practitioners, it is important to use research findings to engage with farmers about conservation in a way that prioritizes communicating about the most salient aspects of the practice at the time of year when farmers will be most receptive.

Food Policy ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 102054
Author(s):  
Nathanael M. Thompson ◽  
Carson J. Reeling ◽  
Michelle R. Fleckenstein ◽  
Linda S. Prokopy ◽  
Shalamar D. Armstrong

Author(s):  
Deepthi Kolady ◽  
Weiwei Zhang ◽  
Tong Wang ◽  
Jessica Ulrich-Schad

Abstract This study uses location-specific data to investigate the role of spatially mediated peer effects in farmers’ adoption of conservation agriculture practices. The literature has shown that farmers trust other farmers and one way to increase conservation practice adoption is through identifying feasible conservation practices in neighboring fields. Estimating this effect can help improve our understanding of what influences the adoption and could play a role in improving federal and local conservation program design. The study finds that although spatial peer effects are important in the adoption of conservation tillage and diverse crop rotation, the scale of peer effects are not substantial.


2017 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason S. Bergtold ◽  
Steven Ramsey ◽  
Lucas Maddy ◽  
Jeffery R. Williams

AbstractOver the past few decades, farmers have increasingly integrated cover crops into their cropping systems. Cover-crop benefits can help a farmer to achieve sustainability or reduce negative environmental externalities, such as soil erosion or chemical runoff. However, the impact on farm economics will likely be the strongest incentive to adopt cover crops. These impacts can include farm profits, cash crop yields or both. This paper provides a review of cover-crop adoption, production, risk and policy considerations from an economic perspective. These dimensions are examined through a review of cover-crop literature. This review was written to provide an overview of cover crops and their impacts on the farm business and the environment, especially with regard to economic considerations. Through increasing knowledge about cover crops, the intent here is to inform producers contemplating adoption and policy makers seeking to encourage adoption.


HortScience ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 42 (7) ◽  
pp. 1568-1574 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Ryan Harrelson ◽  
Greg D. Hoyt ◽  
John L. Havlin ◽  
David W. Monks

Throughout the southeastern United States, vegetable growers have successfully cultivated pumpkins (Cucurbita pepo) using conventional tillage. No-till pumpkin production has not been pursued by many growers as a result of the lack of herbicides, no-till planting equipment, and knowledge in conservation tillage methods. All of these conservation production aids are now present for successful no-till vegetable production. The primary reasons to use no-till technologies for pumpkins include reduced erosion, improved soil moisture conservation, long-term improvement in soil chemical and microbial properties, and better fruit appearance while maintaining similar yields compared with conventionally produced pumpkins. Cover crop utilization varies in no-till production, whereas residue from different cover crops can affect yields. The objective of these experiments was to evaluate the influence of surface residue type on no-till pumpkin yield and fruit quality. Results from these experiments showed all cover crop residues produced acceptable no-till pumpkin yields and fruit size. Field location, weather conditions, soil type, and other factors probably affected pumpkin yields more than surface residue. Vegetable growers should expect to successfully grow no-till pumpkins using any of the winter cover crop residues tested over a wide range in residue biomass rates.


EDIS ◽  
1969 ◽  
Vol 2003 (16) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jim Rich ◽  
David Wright ◽  
Jim Marois ◽  
Dick Sprenkel

Cover crops are generally planted after a primary (cash) crop for one or more of the following reasons: erosion control, organic matter accumulation, improved soil tilth, pest suppression (weed, disease, nematode, and insect), and nitrogen production. Optimally, a cover crop will provide a wide range of most or all of the previously mentioned benefits, even if the main reason for planting it was more specific. The eight cover/green manure crops described herein have been shown to provide several benefits to a succeeding crop. This document is ENY-688 (IN483), one of a series of the Department of Entomology and Nematology, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Publication Date: August 2003.


2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejandro Plastina ◽  
Fangge Liu ◽  
Fernando Miguez ◽  
Sarah Carlson

AbstractDespite being generally accepted as a promising conservation practice to reduce nitrate pollution and promote soil sustainability, cover crop adoption in Midwestern US agriculture is low. Based on focus groups, surveys and partial budgets, we calculated the annual net returns to cover crop use for farmers in Illinois, Iowa and Minnesota; and elicited farmers’ perceptions about the pros and cons of incorporating cover crops to their row cropping systems. The novelty of our methodology resides in comparing each farmer's practices in the portion of their cropping system with cover crops (typically small), against their practices in the other portion of their cropping system without cover crops. The resulting comparisons, accounting for farmer heterogeneity, are more robust than the typical effects calculated by comparing indicators across cover crop users and unrelated non-adopters. Our results highlight the complicated nature of integrating cover crops into the crop production system and show that cover crops affect whole farm profitability through several channels besides establishment and termination costs. Despite farmers’ positive perceptions about cover crops and the availability of cost-share programs, calculated annual net returns to cover crops use were negative for most participants.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document