IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v94y2020ics0264837719311640.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The role of systems thinking in cover crop adoption: Implications for conservation communication

Author

Listed:
  • Church, Sarah P.
  • Lu, Junyu
  • Ranjan, Pranay
  • Reimer, Adam P.
  • Prokopy, Linda S.

Abstract

To address critical water quality problems, significant public and private sector resources in the U.S. have been directed to promoting and supporting the adoption of conservation practices. Cover crops, in particular, have been a focus of outreach and policy efforts due to their multiple benefits for crop production, carbon sequestration, soil health, and water quality. We hypothesize that Indiana’s state and local agencies have emphasized a systems approach to conservation planning and farm management, which has been successful in reaching a subset of farmers and has established Indiana as a national leader in cover crop adoption. We contend that the systems approach to conservation adoption is not a salient message to farmers who have yet to implement conservation, thus adoption (particularly cover crops) may be stagnant. Early work on systems thinking (ST) in conservation is dominated by qualitative research. Here, we make a first attempt to quantify the relationship between ST and cover crop adoption through producer surveys administered in three Indiana watersheds – St Marys, Big Pine, and Upper White. We found that farmers who adopted cover crops were more likely to be systems thinkers than farmers who had not adopted cover crops. These results have significant implications for conservation planners and educators across the U.S. and internationally who are working to implement additional conservation acreage – a whole farm systems approach to conservation messaging may not be an effective method for farmers who have yet to implement conservation.

Suggested Citation

  • Church, Sarah P. & Lu, Junyu & Ranjan, Pranay & Reimer, Adam P. & Prokopy, Linda S., 2020. "The role of systems thinking in cover crop adoption: Implications for conservation communication," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:94:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719311640
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104508
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837719311640
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104508?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. Anne V Bossange & Kandace M Knudson & Anil Shrestha & Ronald Harben & Jeffrey P Mitchell, 2016. "The Potential for Conservation Tillage Adoption in the San Joaquin Valley, California: A Qualitative Study of Farmer Perspectives and Opportunities for Extension," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(12), pages 1-21, December.
    2. Michael A. Levy & Mark N. Lubell & Neil McRoberts, 2018. "The structure of mental models of sustainable agriculture," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 1(8), pages 413-420, August.
    3. Jason M. Randle & Mirella L. Stroink, 2018. "The Development and Initial Validation of the Paradigm of Systems Thinking," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(6), pages 645-657, November.
    4. Kennedy, Stephanie M. & Burbach, Mark E. & Sliwinski, Maggi S., 2016. "Sustainable Grassland Management: An Exploratory Study of Progressive Ranchers in Nebraska," Sustainable Agriculture Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 5(2).
    5. Adam C. Davis & Mirella L. Stroink, 2016. "The Relationship between Systems Thinking and the New Ecological Paradigm," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(4), pages 575-586, July.
    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. Thompson, Nathanael M. & Reeling, Carson J. & Fleckenstein, Michelle R. & Prokopy, Linda S. & Armstrong, Shalamar D., 2021. "Examining intensity of conservation practice adoption: Evidence from cover crop use on U.S. Midwest farms," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    2. Moojen, Fernanda Gomes & Ryschawy, Julie & dos Santos, Davi Teixeira & Barth Neto, Armindo & Vieira, Paulo Cardozo & Portella, Elisa & de Faccio Carvalho, Paulo César, 2022. "The farm coaching experience to support the transition to integrated crop–livestock systems: From gaming to action," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    3. Jessica Rudnick & Mark Lubell & Sat Darshan S. Khalsa & Stephanie Tatge & Liza Wood & Molly Sears & Patrick H. Brown, 2021. "A farm systems approach to the adoption of sustainable nitrogen management practices in California," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(3), pages 783-801, September.
    4. R. S. Clements & S. K. Birthisel & A. Daigneault & E. Gallandt & D. Johnson & T. Wentworth & M. T. Niles, 2021. "Climate change in the context of whole-farming systems: opportunities for improved outreach," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 1-20, June.
    5. Wang, Ge & Li, Xiaoqiu & Gao, Yingjie & Zeng, Chen & Wang, Bingkun & Li, Xiangyu & Li, Xintong, 2023. "How does land consolidation drive rural industrial development? Qualitative and quantitative analysis of 32 land consolidation cases in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    6. Calder McCollum & Jason S. Bergtold & Jeffery Williams & Amer Al-Sudani & Elizabeth Canales, 2022. "Perceived Benefit and Cost Perception Gaps between Adopters and Non-Adopters of In-Field Conservation Practices of Agricultural Producers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-19, September.
    7. David Weisberger & Melissa Ann Ray & Nicholas T. Basinger & Jennifer Jo Thompson, 2024. "Chemical, ecological, other? Identifying weed management typologies within industrialized cropping systems in Georgia (U.S.)," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 41(3), pages 935-953, September.

    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. Roberta De Angelis, 2022. "Circular economy business models as resilient complex adaptive systems," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(5), pages 2245-2255, July.
    2. Crabolu, Gloria & Font, Xavier & Eker, Sibel, 2023. "Evaluating policy complexity with Causal Loop Diagrams," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    3. Kaarina Määttä & Sanna Hyvärinen & Tanja Äärelä & Satu Uusiautti, 2020. "Five Basic Cornerstones of Sustainability Education in the Arctic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-15, February.
    4. Jessica Rudnick & Mark Lubell & Sat Darshan S. Khalsa & Stephanie Tatge & Liza Wood & Molly Sears & Patrick H. Brown, 2021. "A farm systems approach to the adoption of sustainable nitrogen management practices in California," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(3), pages 783-801, September.
    5. Lalani, Baqir & Aminpour, Payam & Gray, Steven & Williams, Meredith & Büchi, Lucie & Haggar, Jeremy & Grabowski, Philip & Dambiro, José, 2021. "Mapping farmer perceptions, Conservation Agriculture practices and on-farm measurements: The role of systems thinking in the process of adoption," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    6. Liu, Ying & Feng, Qisheng & Wang, Chenggang & Tang, Zeng, 2018. "A risk-based model for grassland management using MODIS data: The case of Gannan region, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 461-469.
    7. Willamo, R. & Helenius, L. & Holmström, C. & Haapanen, L. & Sandström, V. & Huotari, E. & Kaarre, K. & Värre, U. & Nuotiomäki, A. & Happonen, J. & Kolehmainen, L., 2018. "Learning how to understand complexity and deal with sustainability challenges – A framework for a comprehensive approach and its application in university education," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 370(C), pages 1-13.
    8. Kirsten Davis & Navid Ghaffarzadegan & Jacob Grohs & Dustin Grote & Niyousha Hosseinichimeh & David Knight & Hesam Mahmoudi & Konstantinos Triantis, 2020. "The Lake Urmia vignette: a tool to assess understanding of complexity in socio‐environmental systems," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 36(2), pages 191-222, April.
    9. Roman Asshoff & Christiane Konnemann & Nadine Tramowsky & Werner Rieß, 2021. "Applying the Global Change App in Different Instruction Settings to Foster Climate Change Knowledge among Student Teachers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-26, August.
    10. Jing Hou & Bo Hou, 2019. "Farmers’ Adoption of Low-Carbon Agriculture in China: An Extended Theory of the Planned Behavior Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-20, March.
    11. Avery Lavoie & Chloe B. Wardropper, 2021. "Engagement with conservation tillage shaped by “good farmer” identity," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(4), pages 975-985, December.
    12. Evgenia Micha & Owen Fenton & Karen Daly & Gabriella Kakonyi & Golnaz Ezzati & Thomas Moloney & Steven Thornton, 2020. "The Complex Pathway towards Farm-Level Sustainable Intensification: An Exploratory Network Analysis of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Perception," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-20, March.
    13. Carla Mingolla & Liselot Hudders & Veroline Cauberghe, 2020. "Framing Descriptive Norms as Self-Benefit Versus Environmental Benefit: Self-Construal’s Moderating Impact in Promoting Smart Energy Devices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-23, January.
    14. Domenico Dentoni & Carlo Cucchi & Marija Roglić & Rob Lubberink & Rahmin Bender & Timothy Manyise, 2023. "Systems Thinking, Mapping and Change in Food and Agriculture," Post-Print hal-04002011, HAL.
    15. Si, Ruishi & Lu, Qian & Aziz, Noshaba, 2021. "Does the stability of farmland rental contract & conservation tillage adoption improve family welfare? Empirical insights from Zhangye, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    16. Jack Jameson & Kevin McDonnell & Vijaya Bhaskar Alwarnaidu Vijayarajan & Patrick D. Forristal, 2024. "Knowledge Exchange and Innovation Adoption Preferences of Arable Growers in Ireland’s Atlantic-Influenced Climate," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-23, February.
    17. Castilla-Rho, Juan & Kenny, Daniel, 2022. "What prevents the adoption of regenerative agriculture and what can we do about it? Lessons from a behaviorally-attuned Participatory Modelling exercise in Australia," OSF Preprints asxr2, Center for Open Science.
    18. Michael Carolan, 2022. "Presences and absences in food systems depictions: a systematic visual content analysis," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 14(5), pages 1347-1358, October.
    19. Chelsie Romulo & Bhawani Venkataraman & Susan Caplow & Shamili Ajgaonkar & Craig R. Allen & Aavudai Anandhi & Steven W. Anderson & Caterina Belle Azzarello & Katja Brundiers & Eunice Blavascunas & Jen, 2024. "Implementing interdisciplinary sustainability education with the food-energy-water (FEW) nexus," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-17, December.
    20. Payam Aminpour & Heike Schwermer & Steven Gray, 2021. "Do social identity and cognitive diversity correlate in environmental stakeholders? A novel approach to measuring cognitive distance within and between groups," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(11), pages 1-18, November.

    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:lauspo:v:94:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719311640. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.