Refining perception-based farmer typologies with the analysis of past census data
Highlights
► Four farmer types were generated based on attitudes towards birds and farming objectives. ► Time-series census showing past behaviour does not correspond with attitudes and objectives. ► Market prices and subsidies have stronger influence on farm strategy. ► Financial reward for agri-environmental management should be increased.
Introduction
Changes in farm strategies are expected after 2013 with the “greening” of agricultural policies and the increasing social and market pressures (Fairweather et al., 2009). Farm strategies (i.e. land use plan, management style, participation into agri-environmental schemes (AES)) are diverse, even at small geographical scale, which highlights the importance of internal factors, such as attitudes and objectives, in decision making. A number of studies have focused on these factors and how they relate to behavioural intentions (e.g. Garforth et al., 2006; Herzon and Mikk, 2007; Gorton et al., 2008; Jongeneel et al., 2008; Barnes et al., 2009; Sutherland et al., 2011). Taking account of the heterogeneity in farmer decisions has improved the relevance of policy formulation and has been the motivation behind the rising development of farmer typologies (Schmitzberger et al., 2005; Emtage et al., 2006, 2007; DEFRA, 2008). These typologies have addressed CAP reform (Gorton et al., 2008), conservation behaviour (Schmitzberger et al., 2005; Davies and Hodge, 2006; Siebert et al., 2006) and wider land use issues (Barnes et al., 2011; Sutherland et al., 2011). Each of these studies has brought important information for enhancing the effectiveness of policies through the investigation of groups of farmers with similar reactions to exogenous factors and tendencies towards future planning (i.e. Emtage et al., 2007).
To a certain degree, the use of typologies is limited by a lack of robust validation. Vanclay et al. (2006) expressed concerns about the validity of perception-based farmer typologies in policy formulation. They claimed that farmers do not specifically identify themselves within pre-defined groups (also see Fairweather and Klonsky, 2009) and that they can distort their answers in the interest of “social desirability” (Maguire, 2009). Moreover most typologies are generated at one point in time when the future dynamics of strategies could be better anticipated if we distinguish the evolution of trajectories in farm strategies (Landais, 1998; Davies and Hodge, 2007; Iraizoz et al., 2007). Commonly, qualitative analysis is associated with a positivist approach in the sense that it permits a better understanding of the variations that exist within different types; in other words this implies a validity assessment (see Ritchie and Lewis, 2003, p. 40–44). However, this is impractical from a policy-formulation viewpoint, as qualitative assessment does not allow robust application of information and policy at a national level. Another way of validating and refining a typology, and probably the most relevant, is the evaluation of consistency with other studies in conjunction with the appraisal of actual behaviour.
Actual behaviour has not been included into research with attitudinal typologies, despite an apparent need for a more robust understanding of farmer decision making. Data on self-reported past farming strategies across time (e.g. census data, farm account survey, Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS)) are appropriate for the appraisal of actual behaviours. Firstly, this type of data is readily available, and we can assume that the information contained within it is, at least, partly explained by the current typology of attitudes and objectives. In addition, it is possible to quantify information at farm or parcel level, e.g. area under a certain land use, amount of payment from subsidies, and therefore allows us to observe behaviour that is not obvious from the social survey results. In this sense, the analysis of past data is not simply a tool for validation, but represents a means of improving the different profiles of a typology by revealing possible gaps and misinterpretation from social surveys alone. Therefore, the combination of two quantitative methodologies, one to generate a typology from attitudinal statements and one for the appraisal of past farm strategies across time, would contribute at maximising the potential utility of this methodology and making its application broad-ranging. The bulk of typologies have usually concentrated on behavioural intentions and perceptions (e.g. Beedell and Rehman, 1999; Rehman et al., 2007; Anhstrom et al., 2009) although some studies have focused exclusively on farm strategies (Primdahl, 1999; Bohnet et al., 2003; Dannenberg and Kuemmerle, 2010). No studies have tried to bring these two approaches together.
Because of the restructuring of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in 2013 and the transfer of funding from direct payment (Pillar I) to Rural Development Programme (RDP, Pillar II), it is important to understand farmer attitudes towards ecological issues, along with their business objectives and behavioural intentions, which can often be conflicting (Willock et al., 1999; Wallace and Moss, 2002). To assess these conflicts, that are not always apparent from the analysis of social surveys, the use of past data on farm strategies should allow the evaluation of the strength that internal and external factors have on actual decisions.
Consequently, the aim of this research is twofold: i) to develop and describe a conventional catchment level farmer typology based on the perceptions they hold towards ecological conservation, in particular birds, and their farming goals and, ii) to refine these types through the analysis of respondents' past farming strategies obtained from census and IACS data. Identifying farmer beliefs and refining these types for more accurate measurement will serve as a basis for the improvement of future policy, in particular in the transfer of information and its effective targeting for the uptake of voluntary environmental schemes.
Section snippets
Study area
Scottish agricultural landscapes are largely composed of hills, upland and unimproved grasslands that are difficult to manage (MLURI, 2008). However intensive arable farming is possible, mainly on the East coast of Scotland, due to a better climate, and a relatively flat landscape and fertile soil. Therefore in these areas, agricultural subsidies are at the highest levels, and farmers can adapt more easily to market signals (Wilson, 2011; McCraken and Midgley, 2011), which in turn can influence
Attitudes towards farming and farmland birds
The PCA identified 18 items that were associated with attitudes towards the ecological aspects of farming in the questionnaire. A stepwise variable selection was carried out in order to increase the goodness-of-fit of the model. The procedure led to the loss of 7 items leaving a total of 11 variables under the PCA. The remaining model had a goodness-of-fit index, which represents the overall degree of fit, that is, the squared residuals from prediction compared with the actual data, of 0.965
Discussion
The perception-based typology established from this study shows that farmers in the Lunan catchment have a combination of objectives and values that translate into different strategies. Although all respondents held relatively strong concerns about ecological and landscape issues, a spectrum of varied commitments was evident from the study of past farming strategies. The level of importance of different farming objectives and the actual land use allocation are important farmer type-specific
Conclusion
The purpose of this paper was to present a typology based on a single period survey of ecological attitudes and farming goals, and then refine this further with respect to time-series data on past farming strategies. This obviates the need for costly resurveying of participants or the development of methods to elicit truthful responses to farming behaviours. The types revealed in the study, at least partially, agree with those of previous work (e.g. Shucksmith, 1993; Fairweather and Keating,
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by the Rural and Environment Research and Analysis Directorate (RERAD) of the Scottish Government. We would also like to thank the farmers for their participation in the study and Feedback Marketing Limited through which interviews were made fast and effective. The authors are also very thankful to three anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments.
References (82)
- et al.
Farmer perspectives and practices regarding water pollution control programmes in Scotland
Agricultural Water Management
(2009) - et al.
Explaining farmers' conservation behaviour: why do farmers behave the way they do?
Journal of Environmental Management
(1999) - et al.
Farmer goals and management styles: implications for advancing biologically based agriculture
Agricultural Systems
(2006) - et al.
Exploring environmental perspectives in lowland agriculture: a Q methodology study in East Anglia, UK
Ecological Economics
(2007) - et al.
Goals and management styles of New-Zealand farmers
Agricultural Systems
(1994) Farm-level constraints on agri-environmental scheme participation: a transactional perspective
Journal of Rural Studies
(2000)- et al.
Attitudes to agricultural policy and farming futures in the context of the 2003 CAP reform: a comparison of farmers in selected established and new Member States
Journal of Rural Studies
(2008) - et al.
Motivations, risk perceptions and adoption of conservation practices by farmers
Agricultural Systems
(2009) Identifying farmer attitudes towards genetically modified (GM) crops in Scotland: are they pro- or anti-GM?
Geoforum
(2008)- et al.
Farmers' perceptions of biodiversity and their willingness to enhance it through agri-environment schemes: a comparative study from Estonia and Finland
Journal for Nature Conservation
(2007)