Dear Colleagues,
I'm currently working on a project trying to engage Swiss farmers in handling liquid manure more cautiously.
In a target area with high conservation value approximately 150 farmers cultivate areas close to brooks and streams that harbor threatened fish species. When liquid manure is spilled into these waters there is a very high risk of killing entire populations, cancelling out several year's conservation efforts.
Each year up to about 5 accidents are reported in the target area (in some years there are none). We are faced with a difficult situation:
* the farmer's risks awareness is generally low
* many farmers care little for the environment, certainly not for rare fish species that aren't even edible
* individuals operate by themselves and not collectively (like say, in a factory)
* accidents occur with low incidences but bring about dire consequences
Is anybody aware of similar situations and willing to offer advice or references on how to proceed?
We are considering to head for a strategy that involves (public?) commitments and prompts but feel not quite sure.
Your help is warmly appreciated
Oliver
Oliver Graf
Switzerland
Accidents with low Incidence but Dire Consequences
Sign in or Sign up to comment
Hi Ron:
Can you please provide the full citation for the article? I did a search for the article and was unable to find it. Thanks in advance.
Best, Doug
Doug McKenzie-Mohr
Environmental Psychologist
McKenzie-Mohr & Associates Inc.
Canada
http://www.cbsm.com
Hello Oliver,
The USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service has a buffer initiative that has a lot of technical information that seems to fit your situation. Just enter "buffer" into the search box and you'll get to the info.
However, as I have said many times, "We don't have technical problems, we have adoption problems." I have found an excellent article out of Australia that, to date, has the best discussion of the adoption of innovative (conservation) practices. The paper is by D.J. Pannell et al. and is titled: "Understanding and promoting adoption of conservation practices by rural landholders." The Abstract reads: "Research on the adoption of rural innovations is reviewed and interpreted through a cross-disciplinary lens to provide practical guidance for research, extension and policy relating to conservation practices. Adoption of innovations by landholders is presented as a dynamic learning process. Adoption depends on a range of personal, social, cultural and economic factors, as well as on characteristics of the innovation itself. Adoption occurs when the landholder perceives that the innovation in question will enhance the achievement of their personal goals. A range of goals is identifiable among landholders, including economic, social and environmental goals. Innovations are more likely to be adopted when they have a high relative advantage (perceived superiority to the idea or practice that it supersedes), and when they are readily trialable (easy to test and learn about before adoption). Non-adoption or low adoption of a number of conservation practices is readily explicable in terms of their failure to provide a relative advantage (particularly in economic terms) or a range of difficulties that landholders may have in trialing them."
I'm sure you'll find this paper very useful in understanding the decision making process used by farmers and the information they need to make a "comfortable" decision about an innovative conservation practice. I know I have found it very helpful in my adoption work.
Ron Harben
Air Quality Coordinator
California Association of Resource Conservation Districts
United States
The link below describes a "Trust" which works with local farmers and involves them in wildlife management.
http://www.deltafarmland.ca/
Perhaps some of their program ideas can help you involve the local farmers and bring them a sense of stewardship.
Best of luck!
Dave Smith
Environment Canada
Canada
Adoption of conservation practices by rural landholders
David J. PannellA,F, Graham R. MarshallB, Neil BarrC,F, Allan CurtisD, Frank VanclayE and Roger WilkinsonC,F
ASchool of Agricultural & Resource Economics, University of Western Australia, Crawley, 6009 WA
BInstitute for Rural Futures, University of New England, Armidale, 2351 NSW
CDepartment of Primary Industries, Bendigo, 3554 Victoria
DFaculty of Science and Agriculture, Charles Sturt University, Albury, 2640 NSW
ETasmanian Institute of Agricultural Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, 7001 Tasmania
FCooperative Research Centre for Plant-Based Management of Dryland Salinity, University of Western Australia, Crawley, 6009 WA
Note: This is a summary of: Pannell, D.J., Marshall, G.R., Barr, N., Curtis, A., Vanclay, F. and Wilkinson, R. (2006). Understanding and promoting adoption of conservation practices by rural landholders. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 46(11): 1407-1424. The full paper is available at the journal web site: http://www.publish.csiro.au/nid/72/paper/EA05037.htm
Ron Harben
Air Quality Coordinator
California Association of Resource Conservation Districts
United States