Agricultural landowners' willingness to participate in a filter strip program for watershed protection

Land Use Policy

Volumn 49, Issue , 2015, Pages 75-85

  Yeboah, Felix Kwame ^a   Lupi, Frank ^a   Kaplowitz, Michael D ^a  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Conservation program; Filter strips; Landowner behavior; Watershed management

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURAL LAND; AGRICULTURAL RUNOFF; BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE; LANDOWNER; NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION; POLLUTION CONTROL; WATERSHED;

MICHIGAN; SAGINAW BAY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84938382943     PISSN: 02648377     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.07.016     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Abu-Zreig M., Rudra R.P., Lalonde M.N., Whiteley H.R., Kaushik N.K. Experimental investigation of runoff reduction and sediment removal by vegetated filter strips. Hydrol. Process. 2004, 18(11):2029-2037. 10.1002/hyp.1400.
2. Agrawal G.D. Diffuse agricultural water pollution in India. Water Sci. Technol. 1999, 39(3):33-47. 10.1016/S0273-1223(99)00030-X.
3. Asquith N.M., Vargas M.T., Wunder S. Selling two environmental services: in-kind payments for bird habitat and watershed protection in Los Negros, Bolivia. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 65(4):675-684. 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.12.014.
4. Baumgart-Getz A., Prokopy L.S., Floress K. Why farmers adopt best management practice in the United States: a meta-analysis of the adoption literature. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 96(1):17-25. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.10.006.
5. Baylis K., Peplow S., Rausser G., Simon L. Agri-environmental policies in the EU and United States: a comparison. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 65(4):753-764. 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.07.034.
6. Beedell J.D.C., Rehman T. Explaining farmers' conservation behaviour: why do farmers behave the way they do?. J. Environ. Manag. 1999, 57(3):165-176. 10.1006/jema.1999.0296.
7. Bratt A. Farmers' choices: management practices to reduce nutrient leakage within a Swedish catchment. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2002, 45(5):673-689. 10.1080/0964056022000013066.
8. Bremer L.L., Farley K.A., Lopez-Carr D. What factors influence participation in payment for ecosystem services programs? An evaluation of Ecuador's SocioPáramo program. Land Use Policy 2014, 36:122-133. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.08.002.
9. Brown T.A. Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research 2012, Guilford Press.
10. Buckley C., Hynes S., Mechan S. Supply of an ecosystem service-farmers' willingness to adopt riparian buffer zones in agricultural catchments. Environ. Sci. Policy 2012, 24:101-109. 10.1016/j.envsci.2012.07.022.
11. Burton R.J.F. The influence of farmer demographic characteristics on environmental behaviour: a review. J. Environ. Manag. 2014, 135:19-26. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.12.005.
12. Burton R.J.F., Schwarz G. Result-oriented agri-environmental schemes in Europe and their potential for promoting behavioural change. Land Use Policy 2013, 30(1):628-641. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.05.002.
13. Cameron A.C., Miller D.L. Robust inference with clustered data. Handbook of Empirical Economics and Finance 2011, 1-28. Taylor and Francis Group, LLC, Boca Raton, FL.
14. Celio E., Flint C.G., Schoch P., Grêt-Regamey A. Farmers' perception of their decision-making in relation to policy schemes: a comparison of case studies from Switzerland and the United States. Land Use Policy 2014, 41:163-171. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.04.005.
15. Chen X., Lupi F., He G., Liu J. Linking social norms to efficient conservation investment in payments for ecosystem services. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2009, 106(28):11812-11817. 10.1073/pnas.0809980106.
16. Chen X., Lupi F., He G., Ouyang Z., Liu J. Factors affecting land reconversion plans following a payment for ecosystem service program. Biol. Conserv. 2009, 142(8):1740-1747. 10.1016/j.biocon.2009.03.012.
17. Choice Metrics Ngene 1.1 User Manual and Reference Guide 2011, 72. Choice Metrics Pty Ltd, Retrieved from http://www.choice-metrics.com/download.html.
18. Christensen T., Pedersen A.B., Nielsen H.O., Mørkbak M.R., Hasler B., Denver S. Determinants of farmers' willingness to participate in subsidy schemes for pesticide-free buffer zones-a choice experiment study. Ecol. Econ. 2011, 70(8):1558-1564. 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.03.021.
19. Cooper J.C., Osborn C.T. The effect of rental rates on the extension of conservation reserve program contracts. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 1998, 80(1):184-194. 10.2307/3180280.
20. Dillman D.A., Smyth J.D., Christian L.M. Internet, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method 2008, John Wiley & Sons.
21. Druschke C.G., Secchi S. The impact of gender on agricultural conservation knowledge and attitudes in an Iowa watershed. J. Soil Water Conserv. 2014, 69(2):95-106. 10.2489/jswc.69.2.95.
22. Duncan R. Regulating agricultural land use to manage water quality: the challenges for science and policy in enforcing limits on non-point source pollution in New Zealand. Land Use Policy 2014, 41:378-387. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.06.003.
23. Dupraz P., Vermersch D., Frahan B.H.D., Delvaux L. The environmental supply of farm households: a flexible willingness to accept model. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2003, 25(2):171-189. 10.1023/A:1023910720219.
24. Espinosa-Goded M., Barreiro-Hurlé J., Ruto E. What do farmers want from agri-environmental scheme design? A choice experiment approach. J. Agric. Econ. 2010, 61(2):259-273. 10.1111/j.1477-9552.2010.00244.x.
25. Fielding K.S., Terry D.J., Masser B.M., Bordia P., Hogg M.A. Explaining landholders' decisions about riparian zone management: the role of behavioural, normative, and control beliefs. J. Environ. Manag. 2005, 77(1):12-21. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.03.002.
26. Giri S., Nejadhashemi A.P., Woznicki S.A. Evaluation of targeting methods for implementation of best management practices in the Saginaw River Watershed. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 103:24-40. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.02.033.
27. Greiner R., Gregg D. Farmers' intrinsic motivations, barriers to the adoption of conservation practices and effectiveness of policy instruments: empirical evidence from northern Australia. Land Use Policy 2011, 28(1):257-265. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2010.06.006.
28. Haab T.C., McConnell K.E. Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources: The Econometrics of Non-Market Valuation 2002, Edward Elgar Publishing.
29. Holt D., Smith T.M.F. Post stratification. J. R. Stat. Soc.: Ser. A 1979, 142(1):33. (General). 10.2307/2344652.
30. Howard G., Roe B.E. Stripping because you want to versus stripping because the money is good: a latent class analysis of farmer preferences regarding filter strip programs. Presented at the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association's 2013 AAEA & CAES Joint Annual Meeting 2013, 32. Retrieved from http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/149821/2/AAEA_HowardandRoe_ALatentClassAnalysisofFarmerPreferencesregardingBestManagementPractices.pdf
31. Hynes S., Garvey E. Modelling farmers' participation in an agri-environmental scheme using panel data: an application to the rural environmental protection scheme in Ireland. J. Agric. Econ. 2009, 60(3):546-562.
32. Januchowski-Hartley S.R., Moon K., Stoeckl N., Gray S. Social factors and private benefits influence landholders' riverine restoration priorities in tropical Australia. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 110:20-26. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.05.011.
33. Jeppesen E., Kronvang B., Meerhoff M., Søndergaard M., Hansen K.M., Andersen H.E., et al. Climate change effects on runoff, catchment phosphorus loading and lake ecological state, and potential adaptations. J. Environ. Qual. 2009, 38(5):1930-1941. 10.2134/jeq2008.0113.
34. Johnson F.R., Kanninen B., Bingham M., Özdemir S. Experimental design for stated-choice studies. Valuing Environmental Amenities Using Stated Choice Studies 2007, 159-202. Springer, Netherlands, Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/1-4020-5313-4_7. B.J. Kanninen (Ed.).B.J. Kanninen (Ed.).
35. Kaplowitz M.D., Lupi F., Arreola O. Local markets for payments for environmental services: can small rural communities self-dinance watershed protection?. Water Resour. Manag. 2012, 26(13):3689-3704. 10.1007/s11269-012-0097-y.
36. Kaplowitz M.D., Lupi F., Hoehn J.P. Multiple methods for developing and evaluating a stated-choice questionnaire to value wetlands. Methods for Testing and Evaluating Survey Questionnaires 2004, 503-524. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, Retrieved S. Presser, from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/0471654728.ch24/summary. S. Presser, J.M. Rothgeb, M.P. Couper, J.T. Lessler, J. Elizabethrtin, E. Singer (Eds.).
37. Knowler D., Bradshaw B. Farmers' adoption of conservation agriculture: a review and synthesis of recent research. Food Policy 2007, 32(1):25-48. 10.1016/j.foodpol.2006.01.003.
38. Kvakkestad V., Rørstad P.K., Vatn A. Norwegian farmers' perspectives on agriculture and agricultural payments: between productivism and cultural landscapes. Land Use Policy 2015, 42:83-92. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.07.009.
39. Lambert D.M., Sullivan P., Claassen R., Foreman L. Profiles of US farm households adopting conservation-compatible practices. Land Use Policy 2007, 24(1):72-88. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2005.12.002.
40. Lant C.L., Kraft S.E., Gillman K.R. Enrollment of filter strips and recharge areas in the CRP and USDA easement programs. J. Soil Water Conserv. 1995, 50(2):193-200.
41. Larson K.L., Lach D. Participants and non-participants of place-based groups: an assessment of attitudes and implications for public participation in water resource management. J. Environ. Manag. 2008, 88(4):817-830. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.04.008.
42. Li Y., Zhang J. Agricultural diffuse pollution from fertilisers and pesticides in China. Water Sci. Technol. 1999, 39(3):25-32. 10.1016/S0273-1223(99)00029-3.
43. Loftus T.T., Kraft S.E. Enrolling conservation buffers in the CRP. Land Use Policy 2003, 20(1):73-84. 10.1016/S0264-8377(02)00046-7.
44. Ma L., Feng S., Reidsma P., Qu F., Heerink N. Identifying entry points to improve fertilizer use efficiency in Taihu Basin, China. Land Use Policy 2014, 37:52-59. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.01.008.
45. Ma S., Swinton S.M., Lupi F., Jolejole-Foreman C. Farmers' willingness to participate in payment-for-environmental-services programmes. J. Agric. Econ. 2012, 63(3):604-626. 10.1111/j.1477-9552.2012.00358.x.
46. Mettepenningen E., Vandermeulen V., Delaet K., Van Huylenbroeck G., Wailes E.J. Investigating the influence of the institutional organisation of agri-environmental schemes on scheme adoption. Land Use Policy 2013, 33:20-30. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.12.004.
47. Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program: 2011 Annual Report 2011, 44. Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, Lansing, MI.
48. Milly P.C.D., Dunne K.A., Vecchia A.V. Global pattern of trends in streamflow and water availability in a changing climate. Nature 2005, 438(7066):347-350. 10.1038/nature04312.
49. Mishra A.K., Khanal A.R. Is participation in agri-environmental programs affected by liquidity and solvency?. Land Use Policy 2013, 35:163-170. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.05.015.
50. Murphy G., Hynes S., Murphy E., O'Donoghue C. An investigation into the type of farmer who chose to participate in Rural Environment Protection Scheme (REPS) and the role of institutional change in influencing scheme effectiveness. Land Use Policy 2014, 39:199-210. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.02.015.
51. Myers D. Social Psychology 2012, McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages, New York, NY. 11th ed.
52. Mzoughi N. Farmers adoption of integrated crop protection and organic farming: do moral and social concerns matter?. Ecol. Econ. 2011, 70(8):1536-1545. 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.03.016.
53. Natural Resource Conservation Service 2014 Farm Bills 2014, Retrieved 26.05.14, from http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/programs/farmbill/.
54. Novotny V. Diffuse pollution from agriculture-a worldwide outlook. Water Sci. Technol. 1999, 39(3):1-13. 10.1016/S0273-1223(99)00027-X.
55. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Environmental Indicators for Agriculture: Methods and Results 2001, vol. 3:53. Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France, Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/greengrowth/sustainable-agriculture/1916629.pdf.
56. Prokopy L.S., Floress K., Klotthor-Weinkauf D., Baumgart-Getz A. Determinants of agricultural best management practice adoption: evidence from the literature. J. Soil Water Conserv. 2008, 63(5):300-311. 10.2489/jswc.63.5.300.
57. Purvis A., Hoehn J.P., Sorenson V.L., Pierce F.J. Farmers' response to a filter strip program: results from a contingent valuation survey. J. Soil Water Conserv. 1989, 44(5):501-504.
58. Ruto E., Garrod G. Investigating farmers' preferences for the design of agri-environment schemes: a choice experiment approach. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2009, 52(5):631-647. 10.1080/09640560902958172.
59. Ryan R.L., Erickson D.L., De Young R. Farmers' motivations for adopting conservation practices along Riparian zones in a mid-western agricultural watershed. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2003, 46(1):19-37. 10.1080/713676702.
60. Saginaw Bay Watershed Initiative Network The Saginaw Bay Watershed 2012, Retrieved 26.05.14 from http://www.saginawbaywin.org/info_on_watershed/.
61. Sattler C., Nagel U.J. Factors affecting farmers' acceptance of conservation measures-a case study from north-eastern Germany. Land Use Policy 2010, 27(1):70-77. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.02.002.
62. Schroeder L.A., Isselstein J., Chaplin S., Peel S. Agri-environment schemes: farmers' acceptance and perception of potential "Payment by Results" in grassland-a case study in England. Land Use Policy 2013, 32:134-144. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.10.009.
63. Shan N., Ruan X.-H., Xu J., Pan Z.-R. Estimating the optimal width of buffer strip for nonpoint source pollution control in the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China. Ecol. Model. 2014, 276:51-63. 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2013.12.019.
64. Stuart D., Benveniste E., Harris L.M. Evaluating the use of an environmental assurance program to address pollution from United States cropland. Land Use Policy 2014, 39:34-43. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.03.009.
65. Sudman S., Bradburn N.M., Schwarz N. Thinking About Answers: The Application of Cognitive Processes to Survey Methodology 1996, Jossey-Bass Publishers.
66. Train K. Discount rates in consumers' energy-related decisions". Energy 1985, 10:1243-1253.
67. US EPA Saginaw River and Bay [Overviews & Factsheets] 2012, Retrieved 26.05.14, from http://epa.gov/greatlakes/aoc/saginaw-river/index.html.
68. US EPA O. Managing Nonpoint Source Pollution from Agriculture 2012, Retrieved 19.02.14, from http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/outreach/point6.cfm.
69. Van Herzele A., Gobin A., Van Gossum P., Acosta L., Waas T., Dendoncker N., Henry de Frahan B. Effort for money? Farmers' rationale for participation in agri-environment measures with different implementation complexity. J. Environ. Manag. 2013, 131:110-120. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.09.030.
70. Vanslembrouck I., Van Huylenbroeck G., Verbeke W. Determinants of the willingness of Belgian farmers to participate in agri-environmental measures. J. Agric. Econ. 2002, 53(3):489-511. 10.1111/j.1477-9552.2002.tb00034.x.
71. Watson S.B., Ridal J., Boyer G.L. Taste and odour and cyanobacterial toxins: impairment, prediction, and management in the Great Lakes. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2008, 65(8):1779-1796. 10.1139/F08-084.
72. Wauters E., Bielders C., Poesen J., Govers G., Mathijs E. Adoption of soil conservation practices in Belgium: an examination of the theory of planned behaviour in the agri-environmental domain. Land Use Policy 2010, 27(1):86-94. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.02.009.
73. Willis G.B. Cognitive Interviewing: A Tool for Improving Questionnaire Design 2004, SAGE Publications, Inc, Thousand Oaks, California. 1st ed.
74. Zhang X., Liu X., Zhang M., Dahlgren R.A., Eitzel M. A review of vegetated buffers and a meta-analysis of their mitigation efficacy in reducing nonpoint source pollution. J. Environ. Qual. 2010, 39(1):76. 10.2134/jeq2008.0496.