IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v148y2018i4d10.1007_s10584-018-2217-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Six languages for a risky climate: how farmers react to weather and climate change

Author

Listed:
  • Kieran M. Findlater

    (University of British Columbia
    University of Cape Town)

  • Terre Satterfield

    (University of British Columbia)

  • Milind Kandlikar

    (University of British Columbia)

  • Simon D. Donner

    (University of British Columbia)

Abstract

How climate-sensitive actors—like commercial farmers—perceive, understand, and react to weather and climate stimuli will ultimately determine the success or failure of climate change adaptation policies. Many studies have characterized farmers’ climate risk perceptions or farming practices, but few have evaluated the in situ decision-making processes that link (or fail to link) risk perceptions to adaptive behaviors. Here, we use a novel methodology to reveal patterns in climate-sensitive decision-making by commercial grain farmers in South Africa. We structure, linguistically code, and statistically analyze causal relationships described in 30 mental models interviews. We show that farmers’ framing of weather and climate risks strongly predicts their adoption of conservation agriculture (CA)—climate-resilient best practices that reduce shorter-term financial and weather risks and longer-term agronomic risks. These farmers describe weather and climate risks using six exhaustive and mutually exclusive languages: agricultural, cognitive, economic, emotional, political, and survival. The prevalence of agricultural and economic language only weakly predicts CA practice, whereas emotional and farm survival language strongly limits CA adoption. The framing of weather risks in terms of farm survival impedes adaptations that are likely to improve such survival in the longer term. But this survival framing is not necessarily indicative of farmers’ current economic circumstances. It represents a consequential mindset rather than a financial state and it may go undetected in more conventional studies relying on direct survey or interview questions.

Suggested Citation

  • Kieran M. Findlater & Terre Satterfield & Milind Kandlikar & Simon D. Donner, 2018. "Six languages for a risky climate: how farmers react to weather and climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 148(4), pages 451-465, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:148:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s10584-018-2217-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-018-2217-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-018-2217-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-018-2217-z?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. Debra Davidson, 2016. "Gaps in agricultural climate adaptation research," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(5), pages 433-435, May.
    2. Moschini, Giancarlo & Hennessy, David A., 2001. "Uncertainty, risk aversion, and risk management for agricultural producers," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 2, pages 88-153, Elsevier.
    3. Levine, Jordan & Chan, Kai M.A. & Satterfield, Terre, 2015. "From rational actor to efficient complexity manager: Exorcising the ghost of Homo economicus with a unified synthesis of cognition research," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 22-32.
    4. Knowler, Duncan & Bradshaw, Ben, 2007. "Farmers' adoption of conservation agriculture: A review and synthesis of recent research," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 25-48, February.
    5. Howard Kunreuther & Geoffrey Heal & Myles Allen & Ottmar Edenhofer & Christopher B. Field & Gary Yohe, 2013. "Risk management and climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 3(5), pages 447-450, May.
    6. Susan Clayton & Patrick Devine-Wright & Paul C. Stern & Lorraine Whitmarsh & Amanda Carrico & Linda Steg & Janet Swim & Mirilia Bonnes, 2015. "Psychological research and global climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(7), pages 640-646, July.
    7. Richard H. Thaler, 2000. "From Homo Economicus to Homo Sapiens," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 133-141, Winter.
    8. James Risbey & Milind Kandlikar & Hadi Dowlatabadi & Dean Graetz, 1999. "Scale, context, and decision making in agricultural adaptation to climate variability and change," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 137-165, June.
    9. Cameron M. Pittelkow & Xinqiang Liang & Bruce A. Linquist & Kees Jan van Groenigen & Juhwan Lee & Mark E. Lundy & Natasja van Gestel & Johan Six & Rodney T. Venterea & Chris van Kessel, 2015. "Productivity limits and potentials of the principles of conservation agriculture," Nature, Nature, vol. 517(7534), pages 365-368, January.
    10. Jesús Antón & Shingo Kimura & Jussi Lankoski & Andrea Cattaneo, 2012. "A Comparative Study of Risk Management in Agriculture under Climate Change," OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers 58, OECD Publishing.
    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. Kieran M. Findlater & Terre Satterfield & Milind Kandlikar, 2019. "Farmers’ Risk‐Based Decision Making Under Pervasive Uncertainty: Cognitive Thresholds and Hazy Hedging," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(8), pages 1755-1770, August.
    2. Margiana Petersen-Rockney, 2022. "Farmers adapt to climate change irrespective of stated belief in climate change: a California case study," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 173(3), pages 1-23, August.
    3. Tina-Simone Neset & Therese Asplund & Janina Käyhkö & Sirkku Juhola, 2019. "Making sense of maladaptation: Nordic agriculture stakeholders’ perspectives," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 107-121, March.
    4. Sandra Ricart & Jorge Olcina & Antonio M. Rico, 2018. "Evaluating Public Attitudes and Farmers’ Beliefs towards Climate Change Adaptation: Awareness, Perception, and Populism at European Level," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, December.
    5. Susanne Hanger-Kopp & Marlene Palka, 2022. "Decision spaces in agricultural risk management: a mental model study of Austrian crop farmers," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(5), pages 6072-6098, May.
    6. José L. Martínez González, 2019. "High Wages or Wages For Energy? An Alternative View of The British Case (1645-1700)," Working Papers 0158, European Historical Economics Society (EHES).

    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. Kieran M. Findlater & Terre Satterfield & Milind Kandlikar, 2019. "Farmers’ Risk‐Based Decision Making Under Pervasive Uncertainty: Cognitive Thresholds and Hazy Hedging," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(8), pages 1755-1770, August.
    2. Wondimagegn Tesfaye & Garrick Blalock & Nyasha Tirivayi, 2021. "Climate‐Smart Innovations and Rural Poverty in Ethiopia: Exploring Impacts and Pathways," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(3), pages 878-899, May.
    3. 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).
    4. Adam M. Komarek, 2018. "Conservation agriculture in western China increases productivity and profits without decreasing resilience," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 10(5), pages 1251-1262, October.
    5. Ward, Patrick S. & Mapemba, Lawrence & Bell, Andrew R., 2021. "Smart subsidies for sustainable soils: Evidence from a randomized controlled trial in southern Malawi," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    6. Heleene Tambet & Yaniv Stopnitzky, 2021. "Climate Adaptation and Conservation Agriculture among Peruvian Farmers," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(3), pages 900-922, May.
    7. Kirui, Oliver & Tambo, Justice, 2021. "Yield Effects of Conservation Agriculture Under Fall Armyworm Stress: The Case of Zambia," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315882, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Marc Baudry & Edouard Civel & Camille Tévenart, 2023. "Land allocation and the adoption of innovative practices in agriculture: a real option modelling of the underlying hidden costs," Working Papers hal-04159839, HAL.
    9. Gao, Li & Zhang, Wendong & Mei, Yingdan & Sam, Abdoul G. & Song, Yu & Jin, Shuqin, 2018. "Do farmers adopt fewer conservation practices on rented land? Evidence from straw retention in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 609-621.
    10. Andreas Scheba, 2017. "Conservation agriculture and sustainable development in Africa: insights from Tanzania," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 41(4), pages 209-219, November.
    11. Subhradip Bhattacharjee & Amitava Panja & Moumita Panda & Subham Dutta & Susanta Dutta & Rakesh Kumar & Dinesh Kumar & Malu Ram Yadav & Tatiana Minkina & Valery P. Kalinitchenko & Rupesh Kumar Singh &, 2023. "How Did Research on Conservation Agriculture Evolve over the Years? A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-20, January.
    12. Bhim Bahadur Ghaley & Teodor Rusu & Taru Sandén & Heide Spiegel & Cristina Menta & Giovanna Visioli & Lilian O’Sullivan & Isabelle Trinsoutrot Gattin & Antonio Delgado & Mark A. Liebig & Dirk Vrebos &, 2018. "Assessment of Benefits of Conservation Agriculture on Soil Functions in Arable Production Systems in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-17, March.
    13. Tambo, J. & Mockshell, J., 2018. "Differential impacts of conservation agriculture technology options on household welfare in sub-Saharan Africa," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277035, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Dazhuan Ge & Hualou Long & Li Ma & Yingnan Zhang & Shuangshuang Tu, 2017. "Analysis Framework of China’s Grain Production System: A Spatial Resilience Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-21, December.
    15. Francesco Calzarano & Fabio Stagnari & Sara D’Egidio & Giancarlo Pagnani & Angelica Galieni & Stefano Di Marco & Elisa Giorgia Metruccio & Michele Pisante, 2018. "Durum Wheat Quality, Yield and Sanitary Status under Conservation Agriculture," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-13, September.
    16. Tambo, Justice A. & Mockshell, Jonathan, 2018. "Differential Impacts of Conservation Agriculture Technology Options on Household Income in Sub-Saharan Africa," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 95-105.
    17. Jara-Rojas, Roberto & Bravo-Ureta, Boris E. & Díaz, José, 2012. "Adoption of water conservation practices: A socioeconomic analysis of small-scale farmers in Central Chile," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 54-62.
    18. Carlotta Penone & Elisa Giampietri & Samuele Trestini, 2021. "Hedging Effectiveness of Commodity Futures Contracts to Minimize Price Risk: Empirical Evidence from the Italian Field Crop Sector," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-14, December.
    19. De los Santos-Montero, Luis A. & Bravo-Ureta, Boris E. & von Cramon-Taubadel, Stephan & Hasiner, Eva, 2020. "The performance of natural resource management interventions in agriculture: Evidence from alternative meta-regression analyses," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    20. Perego, A. & Rocca, A. & Cattivelli, V. & Tabaglio, V. & Fiorini, A. & Barbieri, S. & Schillaci, C. & Chiodini, M.E. & Brenna, S. & Acutis, M., 2019. "Agro-environmental aspects of conservation agriculture compared to conventional systems: A 3-year experience on 20 farms in the Po valley (Northern Italy)," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 73-87.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:spr:climat:v:148:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s10584-018-2217-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.