IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v179y2020ics0308521x19302884.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Examining the policy-practice gap: The divergence between regulation and reality in organic fertiliser allocation in pasture based systems

Author

Listed:
  • Micha, Evgenia
  • Roberts, William
  • O’ Sullivan, Lilian
  • O’ Connell, Kay
  • Daly, Karen

Abstract

Slurry and animal manure generated from livestock production systems are typically recycled back to land to replace nutrients removed in products leaving the farm such as milk, meat and grass. Avoiding environmental losses of nutrients due to slurry spreading requires careful management, contingent on farmers following agronomic advice and policy regulation, yet, nutrient losses to water from agriculture continues to put a significant pressure on water quality. The objective of this study was to examine whether a policy-practice gap in slurry management exists on farms by identifying the factors that influence the decision to spread slurry, across the farm. To achieve this, a Heckman selection model was used to identify the drivers of slurry management using farm and field management records and soil information from commercial livestock farms combined with spatial datasets on landscape position. The main drivers influencing the decision to spread slurry were practical considerations relating to the structure and spatial arrangement of fields on the farm, such as proximity to farm yard, as well as landscape position. Field and landscape variables were also related such as slope, elevation, drainage capacity, soil type, presence of open ditches, and soil phosphorus (P) level. Fields with excessive soil P content had a high probability of receiving slurry in greater amounts, thus challenging the assumption that farmers use soil testing to guide slurry management, and identifying the main agri-environmental policy-practice gap and a need for better knowledge exchange in this area. Despite current policy, practical considerations override soil testing and these results showed that slurry management and allocation is rooted in the spatial arrangement of fields on the farm. The results indicated that farmer decisions are driven by factors that relate to the time, cost and labour involved in spreading slurry, indicating the need for water quality measures and policy to consider the practical constraints and considerations from the viewpoint of the farm.

Suggested Citation

  • Micha, Evgenia & Roberts, William & O’ Sullivan, Lilian & O’ Connell, Kay & Daly, Karen, 2020. "Examining the policy-practice gap: The divergence between regulation and reality in organic fertiliser allocation in pasture based systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:179:y:2020:i:c:s0308521x19302884
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2019.102708
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X19302884
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2019.102708?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dawson, C.J. & Hilton, J., 2011. "Fertiliser availability in a resource-limited world: Production and recycling of nitrogen and phosphorus," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(Supplemen), pages 14-22, January.
    2. Greene,William H. & Hensher,David A., 2010. "Modeling Ordered Choices," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521194204, January.
    3. Kerebel, A. & Cassidy, R. & Jordan, P. & Holden, N.M., 2013. "Farmer perception of suitable conditions for slurry application compared with decision support system recommendations," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 49-60.
    4. Micha, E. & Tsakiridis, A. & Ragkos, A., 2018. "Assessing the importance of soil testing in fertilizer use intensity: an econometric analysis of phosphorus fertilizer allocation in dairy farm systems," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277103, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Maarten L. Buis, 2011. "Stata tip 97: Getting at ρ’s and σ’s," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 11(2), pages 315-317, June.
    6. Daxini, Amar & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary & Barnes, Andrew & Buckley, Cathal & Daly, Karen, 2018. "Which factors influence farmers’ intentions to adopt nutrient management planning?," 92nd Annual Conference, April 16-18, 2018, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 273494, Agricultural Economics Society.
    7. Daxini, Amar & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary & Barnes, Andrew & Buckley, Cathal & Daly, Karen, 2018. "Which factors influence farmers’ intentions to adopt nutrient management planning?," 92nd Annual Conference, April 16-18, 2018, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 273498, Agricultural Economics Society.
    8. Dawson, C.J. & Hilton, J., 2011. "Fertiliser availability in a resource-limited world: Production and recycling of nitrogen and phosphorus," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(S1), pages 14-22.
    9. Nicholas J. Cox, 2008. "Stata tip 59: Plotting on any transformed scale," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 8(1), pages 142-145, February.
    10. Groot, Jeroen C.J. & Oomen, Gerard J.M. & Rossing, Walter A.H., 2012. "Multi-objective optimization and design of farming systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 63-77.
    11. Daly, K. & Tuohy, P. & Peyton, D. & Wall, D.P. & Fenton, O., 2017. "Field soil and ditch sediment phosphorus dynamics from two artificially drained fields on poorly drained soils," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 115-125.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dolinska, Aleksandra & Hassenforder, Emeline & Loboguerrero, Ana Maria & Sultan, Benjamin & Bossuet, Jérôme & Cottenceau, Jeanne & Bonatti, Michelle & Hellin, Jon & Mekki, Insaf & Drogoul, Alexis & Va, 2023. "Co-production opportunities seized and missed in decision-support frameworks for climate-change adaptation in agriculture – How do we practice the “best practice”?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dániel Fróna & János Szenderák & Mónika Harangi-Rákos, 2019. "The Challenge of Feeding the World," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-18, October.
    2. Li, Fuduo & Zhang, Kangjie & Ren, Jing & Yin, Changbin & Zhang, Yang & Nie, Jun, 2021. "Driving mechanism for farmers to adopt improved agricultural systems in China: The case of rice-green manure crops rotation system," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    3. Meyer-Aurich, Andreas & Karatay, Yusuf Nadi, 2019. "Effects of uncertainty and farmers' risk aversion on optimal N fertilizer supply in wheat production in Germany," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 130-139.
    4. Michael Barrowclough & L. Geyer, 2015. "Biofuel Policies: The Underground Limitation on Biofuels," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 21(1), pages 55-65, March.
    5. Okumah, Murat & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Chapman, Pippa J. & Novo, Paula & Cassidy, Rachel & Lyon, Christopher & Higgins, Alex & Doody, Donnacha, 2021. "The role of experiential learning in the adoption of best land management practices," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    6. Dmitrieva, D. & Ilinova, A. & Kraslawski, A., 2017. "Strategic management of the potash industry in Russia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 81-89.
    7. Daniel K. Maduku & Steven Mbeya, 2024. "Understanding family takaful purchase behaviour: the roles of religious obligation and gender," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 29(2), pages 440-458, June.
    8. Shebanina, Olena & Burkovska, Anna & Petrenko, Vadym & Burkovska, Alla, 2023. "Economic planning at agricultural enterprises: Ukrainian experience of increasing the availability of data in the context of food security," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 9(4), December.
    9. Jane Musole Kwenye & Xiaoting Hou Jones & Alan Renwick, 2023. "Understanding Land-Use Trade-off Decision Making Using the Analytical Hierarchy Process: Insights from Agricultural Land Managers in Zambia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, February.
    10. Marie Asma Ben-Othmen & Mariia Ostapchuk, 2023. "How diverse are farmers’ preferences for large-scale grassland ecological restoration? Evidence from a discrete choice experiment," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 104(3), pages 341-375, December.
    11. Pathak, Santosh & Wang, Hua & Adusumilli, Naveen C., 2021. "Quantifying the dynamics of agricultural conservation practices in the Delta region," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313916, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Peter Horton & Steve A. Banwart & Dan Brockington & Garrett W. Brown & Richard Bruce & Duncan Cameron & Michelle Holdsworth & S. C. Lenny Koh & Jurriaan Ton & Peter Jackson, 2017. "An agenda for integrated system-wide interdisciplinary agri-food research," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(2), pages 195-210, April.
    13. Daxini, Amar & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary & Buckley, Cathal & Barnes, Andrew P., 2018. "Factors influencing farmers' intentions to adopt nutrient management planning: accounting for heterogeneity," 166th Seminar, August 30-31, 2018, Galway, West of Ireland 276183, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Hans-Peter Weikard, 2016. "Phosphorus recycling and food security in the long run: a conceptual modelling approach," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 8(2), pages 405-414, April.
    15. Yang, Xin & Zhou, Xiaohe & Deng, Xiangzheng, 2022. "Modeling farmers’ adoption of low-carbon agricultural technology in Jianghan Plain, China: An examination of the theory of planned behavior," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    16. Reijnders, L., 2014. "Phosphorus resources, their depletion and conservation, a review," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 32-49.
    17. Tsakiridis, Andreas & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary & Cullen, Paula & ÓhUallacháin, Daire & Sheridan, Helen & Stout, Jane, 2021. "Examining the relationship between farmer participation in an agri-environment scheme and the quantity and quality of semi-natural habitats on farms - An Irish case study," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315280, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Paul J. A. Withers & Colin Neal & Helen P. Jarvie & Donnacha G. Doody, 2014. "Agriculture and Eutrophication: Where Do We Go from Here?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(9), pages 1-23, September.
    19. Daxini, Amar & Ryan, Mary & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Barnes, Andrew P., 2019. "Understanding farmers’ intentions to follow a nutrient management plan using the theory of planned behaviour," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 428-437.
    20. Mariusz Z. Gusiatin & Dorota Kulikowska & Katarzyna Bernat, 2024. "Municipal Sewage Sludge as a Resource in the Circular Economy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-25, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:179:y:2020:i:c:s0308521x19302884. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.