IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04626643.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Combining digital technologies and incentives for water conservation: A Q-method study to understand preferences of French irrigators

Author

Listed:
  • Pauline Pedehour

    (GRANEM - Groupe de Recherche Angevin en Economie et Management - UA - Université d'Angers - Institut Agro Rennes Angers - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement, CONFLUENCES - SFR UA 4201 Confluences - UA - Université d'Angers)

  • Marianne Lefebvre

    (GRANEM - Groupe de Recherche Angevin en Economie et Management - UA - Université d'Angers - Institut Agro Rennes Angers - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement, CONFLUENCES - SFR UA 4201 Confluences - UA - Université d'Angers)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the preferences for a water conservation scheme that has not yet been implemented by combining digital tools with pilot irrigation and incentives for farmers to adopt deficit irrigation. We conducted a Q-study with 25 farmers and irrigation advisors in two French watersheds highly dependent on irrigation. We found that the material implementation of the scheme (sensors, smartphone app...) is largely accepted. However, the incentive design is less consensual, i.e., how irrigation performance is defined and what is at stake for those performing better in deficit irrigation. A wider survey with 202 farmers allows to assess how the four profiles highlighted with the Q-study distribute in the farming population of the two watersheds. This study contributes to understanding how farmers perceive a combination of technological levers and incentives to foster water conservation.

Suggested Citation

  • Pauline Pedehour & Marianne Lefebvre, 2023. "Combining digital technologies and incentives for water conservation: A Q-method study to understand preferences of French irrigators," Post-Print hal-04626643, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04626643
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-04626643v2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-04626643v2/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Nudging farmers to enrol land into agri-environmental schemes: the role of a collective bonus," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 43(4), pages 609-636.
    2. Sylvain Chabé-Ferret & Philippe Le Coent & Arnaud Reynaud & Julie Subervie & Daniel Lepercq, 2019. "Can we nudge farmers into saving water? Evidence from a randomised experiment," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 393-416.
    3. Chamaret, Cécile & Steyer, Véronique & Mayer, Julie C., 2020. "“Hands off my meter!” when municipalities resist smart meters: Linking arguments and degrees of resistance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    4. Louisa Prause & Sarah Hackfort & Margit Lindgren, 2021. "Digitalization and the third food regime," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(3), pages 641-655, September.
    5. Grimsrud, Kristine & Graesse, Maximo & Lindhjem, Henrik, 2020. "Using the generalised Q method in ecological economics: A better way to capture representative values and perspectives in ecosystem service management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    6. Ching Leong & Raul Lejano, 2016. "Thick narratives and the persistence of institutions: using the Q methodology to analyse IWRM reforms around the Yellow River," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(4), pages 445-465, December.
    7. Gans, Will & Alberini, Anna & Longo, Alberto, 2013. "Smart meter devices and the effect of feedback on residential electricity consumption: Evidence from a natural experiment in Northern Ireland," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 729-743.
    8. Benjamin Ouvrard & Raphaële Préget & Arnaud Reynaud & Laetitia Tuffery, 2023. "Nudging and subsidising farmers to foster smart water meter adoption," Post-Print hal-04043374, HAL.
    9. Davies, B.B. & Hodge, I.D., 2007. "Exploring environmental perspectives in lowland agriculture: A Q methodology study in East Anglia, UK," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 323-333, March.
    10. Ujjayant Chakravorty & Manzoor H. Dar & Kyle Emerick, 2023. "Inefficient Water Pricing and Incentives for Conservation," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 319-350, January.
    11. Carroll, James & Lyons, Seán & Denny, Eleanor, 2014. "Reducing household electricity demand through smart metering: The role of improved information about energy saving," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 234-243.
    12. Benjamin Ouvrard & R Préget & A Reynaud & L Tuffery, 2023. "Nudging and subsidising farmers to foster smart water meter adoption," Post-Print hal-04102529, HAL.
    13. B Ouvrard & R Préget & A Reynaud & L Tuffery, 2023. "Nudging and subsidising farmers to foster smart water meter adoption," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 50(3), pages 1178-1226.
    14. Barry, John & Proops, John, 1999. "Seeking sustainability discourses with Q methodology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 337-345, March.
    15. Beal, C.D. & Flynn, J., 2015. "Toward the digital water age: Survey and case studies of Australian water utility smart-metering programs," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 29-37.
    16. Sneegas, Gretchen & Beckner, Sydney & Brannstrom, Christian & Jepson, Wendy & Lee, Kyungsun & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2021. "Using Q-methodology in environmental sustainability research: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    17. Zekri, Slim & Madani, Kaveh & Bazargan-Lari, Mohammad Reza & Kotagama, Hemesiri & Kalbus, Edda, 2017. "Feasibility of adopting smart water meters in aquifer management: An integrated hydro-economic analysis," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 85-93.
    18. Aditya Dinesh Gupta & Prerna Pandey & Andrés Feijóo & Zaher Mundher Yaseen & Neeraj Dhanraj Bokde, 2020. "Smart Water Technology for Efficient Water Resource Management: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-23, November.
    19. Giannoccaro, Giacomo & Roselli, Luigi & Sardaro, Ruggiero & de Gennaro, Bernardo C., 2022. "Design of an incentive-based tool for effective water saving policy in agriculture," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Benjamin Ouvrard & Raphaële Préget & Arnaud Reynaud & Laetitia Tuffery, 2020. "Nudging and Subsidizing Farmers to Foster Smart Water Meter Adoption," Working Papers hal-02958784, HAL.
    2. Davies, Ben B. & Hodge, Ian D., 2012. "Shifting environmental perspectives in agriculture: Repeated Q analysis and the stability of preference structures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 51-57.
    3. Singhal, Puja, 2024. "Inform me when it matters: Cost salience, energy consumption, and efficiency investments," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    4. Allison Lassiter & Nicole Leonard, 2022. "A systematic review of municipal smart water for climate adaptation and mitigation," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 49(5), pages 1406-1430, June.
    5. S. S. Ganji & A. N. Ahangar & Samaneh Jamshidi Bandari, 2022. "Evaluation of vehicular emissions reduction strategies using a novel hybrid method integrating BWM, Q methodology and ER approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(10), pages 11576-11614, October.
    6. Philippe Coent, 2023. "Payment for environmental services related to aquifers: a review of specific issues and existing programmes," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 104(3), pages 273-310, December.
    7. Clare Hall & Anita Wreford, 2012. "Adaptation to climate change: the attitudes of stakeholders in the livestock industry," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 207-222, February.
    8. Guo, Bowei & Weeks, Melvyn, 2022. "Dynamic tariffs, demand response, and regulation in retail electricity markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    9. Schaal, Tamara & Jacobs, Annie & Leventon, Julia & Scheele, Ben C. & Lindenmayer, David & Hanspach, Jan, 2022. "‘You can’t be green if you’re in the red’: Local discourses on the production-biodiversity intersection in a mixed farming area in south-eastern Australia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    10. Daniele Curzi & Sylvain Chabé‐Ferret & Salvatore Di Falco & Laure Kuhfuss & Marianne Lefebvre & Alan Matthews, 2022. "Using Experiments to Design and Evaluate the CAP: Insights from an Expert Panel," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 21(2), pages 28-34, August.
    11. Turhan, Ethemcan, 2016. "Value-based adaptation to climate change and divergent developmentalisms in Turkish agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 140-148.
    12. Eefje Cuppen, 2012. "Diversity and constructive conflict in stakeholder dialogue: considerations for design and methods," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 45(1), pages 23-46, March.
    13. Vecchio, Yari & Di Pasquale, Jorgelina & Del Giudice, Teresa & Pauselli, Gregorio & Masi, Margherita & Adinolfi, Felice, 2022. "Precision farming: what do Italian farmers really think? An application of the Q methodology," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    14. von Zahn, Moritz & Bauer, Kevin & Mihale-Wilson, Cristina & Jagow, Johanna & Speicher, Max & Hinz, Oliver, 2022. "The smart green nudge: Reducing product returns through enriched digital footprints & causal machine learning," SAFE Working Paper Series 363, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2022.
    15. Sneegas, Gretchen & Beckner, Sydney & Brannstrom, Christian & Jepson, Wendy & Lee, Kyungsun & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2021. "Using Q-methodology in environmental sustainability research: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    16. Leonhardt, Heidi & Braito, Michael & Uehleke, Reinhard, 2021. "Who participates in agri-environmental schemes? A mixed-methods approach to investigate the role of farmer archetypes in scheme uptake and participation level," FORLand Working Papers 27 (2021), Humboldt University Berlin, DFG Research Unit 2569 FORLand "Agricultural Land Markets – Efficiency and Regulation".
    17. Ahir, Rajesh K. & Chakraborty, Basab, 2021. "A meta-analytic approach for determining the success factors for energy conservation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    18. Christine Corlet Walker & Angela Druckman & Claudio Cattaneo, 2020. "Understanding the (non-)Use of Societal Wellbeing Indicators in National Policy Development: What Can We Learn from Civil Servants? A UK Case Study," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 150(3), pages 911-953, August.
    19. Tahereh Zobeidi & Masoud Yazdanpanah & Masoumeh Forouzani & Bahman Khosravipour, 2016. "Climate change discourse among Iranian farmers," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 521-535, October.
    20. Urquhart, Julie & Courtney, Paul, 2011. "Seeing the owner behind the trees: A typology of small-scale private woodland owners in England," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(7), pages 535-544, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Deficit Irrigation; Water; Agriculture; Q method; Technology acceptance; Water allocation scheme;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hal:journl:hal-04626643. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.