Lu Junyu, Ranjan Pranay, Floress Kristin, Arbuckle J G, Church Sarah P, Eanes Francis R, Gao Yuling, Gramig Benjamin M, Singh Ajay S, Prokopy Linda S
School of Community Resources and Development, Arizona State University, USA.
School of Earth & Sustainability, Northern Arizona University, USA.
J Environ Manage. 2022 Dec 1;323:116240. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116240. Epub 2022 Sep 29.
Conservation practices (CPs) are integral to maintaining the long-term viability of agro-ecological systems. Because farming systems and farmers' values and attitudes are heterogeneous, factors that consistently predict conservation behaviors remain elusive. Moreover, heterogeneity is present among studies regarding the type of CPs examined, and whether behavioral intentions or actual behaviors were measured. This study considers the characteristics of each CP, and whether a given study measured behavioral intention or actual behavior, to better understand farmers' adoption of CPs. We reviewed and analyzed 35 years (1982-2017) of quantitative conservation adoption literature in the United States. We categorized CPs based on their primary purpose, the type of benefit they provide, and whether they are operational or structural. We also examined the following five CPs: conservation tillage, buffers or borders, soil testing, grassed waterways, and cover crops. In our behavioral intention and actual behavior analysis, we found that attitudinal factors predicted both conservation intention and action (actual behavior), whereas current or previous use of practices only influenced actions, not stated conservation intentions. In our analysis focusing on CP characteristics, we found that having specific knowledge about and positive attitudes toward the CP, adoption of other CPs, seeking and using information, larger farm size, and vulnerable land predicted actual adoption across nearly all CP categorizations. Nuances emerge when comparing predictors of CPs that share a particular characteristic. For example, we found farm characteristics to be comparatively more important in predicting adoption of soil management CPs than nutrient and livestock management CPs, and farmers' stewardship identity to be more important for permanent practices than operational practices.
保护措施(CPs)对于维持农业生态系统的长期生存能力至关重要。由于农业系统以及农民的价值观和态度各不相同,能够持续预测保护行为的因素仍然难以捉摸。此外,在所研究的保护措施类型以及测量的是行为意图还是实际行为方面,不同研究之间存在差异。本研究考虑了每种保护措施的特征,以及特定研究测量的是行为意图还是实际行为,以便更好地理解农民对保护措施的采用情况。我们回顾并分析了美国35年(1982 - 2017年)以来关于保护措施采用情况的定量文献。我们根据保护措施的主要目的、提供的益处类型以及它们是操作性的还是结构性的对其进行了分类。我们还研究了以下五种保护措施:保护性耕作、缓冲带或边界、土壤检测、草地水道和覆盖作物。在我们对行为意图和实际行为的分析中,我们发现态度因素既预测了保护意图又预测了行动(实际行为),而当前或以前对措施的使用仅影响行动,而非陈述的保护意图。在我们关注保护措施特征的分析中,我们发现对保护措施有特定的了解并持有积极态度、采用其他保护措施、寻求和使用信息、农场规模较大以及土地易受影响等因素在几乎所有保护措施分类中都预测了实际采用情况。当比较具有特定特征的保护措施的预测因素时会出现细微差别。例如,我们发现农场特征在预测土壤管理保护措施的采用方面比营养和畜牧管理保护措施相对更重要,并且农民的管理身份对于永久性措施比操作性措施更重要。