The Carbon Coalition contends that the most efficient means of gaining maximum uptake of mitigation measures on-farm is one that recognizes and responds to the unique personality-type that typifies the Australian farmer and grazier.
As woolgrowers who live and work on a 1780 acre property on the Cudgegon River near Gulgong NSW, the nature of those who choose farming as a profession and vocation is well-known to us.
From our observation they share the following universal values and norms:
• Fierce independence – this is typical of small business proprietors. But they have to rely on their own ingenuity and each other for personal safety and business continuity as they work in a dangerous industry, subject to fire, disease, drought, flood, and commodity market prices. Distance from emergency and health services places family at risk.
• Self-sufficiency – this was seen in the numbers of farmers who refused to apply for income support or other government assistance in the current drought. Farmers detest the begging bowl mentality.
• Pride in produce – they are growers because they like growing primary produce. Few growers are not self-proclaimed experts in their field or commodity. They choose to endure the rigors of life mentioned above because of this pride and the environment and space the country affords them.
• Driven by dollars – they follow markets and change enterprises within parameters of capacities as the money dictates. They move from wool to fat lambs to cattle to crops with alacrity.
• Don’t trust governments – There is a high level of cynicism about politicians at party level (as opposed to their attitude towards the individual country MP who is usually a ‘good bloke’) that saw a 15% swing against the sitting member in the Parkes Electorate in the recent Federal Election.
These observations are augmented by the following findings:
Trevor Webb, of the Bureau of Rural Sciences, identified the top seven factors that determine outcomes in programs that encourage shifting towards sustainable farming practices.(43) They all involve perceived risk.
• Financial viability: “Poor financial viability is a major constraint on the adoption of more sustainable farming practices that have limited productive advantage (Cary et al. 2002). ... Studies have generally linked higher levels of farm income with higher levels of practice adoption (Camboni and Napier 1993; Curtis and DeLacy 1998; Curtis and Van Nouhuys 1999; Saltiel et al. 1994; Witter et al. 1996).” This applies particularly where those practices do not deliver any efficiency or productive gains.
• Financial advantage: “The perceived financial advantages of more sustainable agricultural practices have been shown to be one of the best indicators of their adoption.” Barr and Cary (1992) conclude that environmental innovations that were believed to be profitable were usually readily adopted, while those with a net financial cost were rarely adopted. …
• Risk: Many Australian farmers are often motivated by a balance between the need for profit and a satisfaction with a comfortable living which minimizes risk and some will trade off profit maximisation for risk reduction (Howden et al. 1997; Marks and O’Keefe 1996; Reeve and Black 1993; Rendell et al. 1996).
• Complexity: “More complex practices are less likely to be adopted.”
(Vanclay and Lawrence 1995).
• Compatibility: “ If a practice is not readily incorporated into a farming system then its adoption may be attenuated. Similarly if the ideas encompassing the new practice do not fit with local norms that will also work against adoption.”
• Trialability: Practices which can be trialed on a small scale prior to full implementation are more likely to be adopted. Trialing reduces risk.
• Observability: More sustainable NRM practices whose advantages are observable are more likely to be adopted…
Dr Webb concluded: “No single practice is likely to be widely applicable with high relative advantage to the landholder, low complexity, high compatibility, trialability and observability, and low risk.”
His findings were supported by the conclusions of the National Land and Water Resources Audit in 2002 (44) : “Sustainable practices that provide economic and other advantages have lower risk, they are simpler tomanage and will generally be adopted more rapidly. Few natural resource management practices have all these characteristics...”
“Low farm incomes and high debt are likely to discourage adoption of sustainable practices. Confidence in the stability of future farm incomes is likely to be associated with a greater capacity and willingness to invest in natural resource management.”
“Recent research in Queensland suggests farmers are more likely to have a personality style adapted to perseverance, autonomy, solitude and a capacity to cope with adversity (Shrapnel &Davie 2000). Of 14 general personality styles expected in the wider community, farmers were found to generally fall into a limited suite of five styles. These five styles have a common tendency to experience discomfort in group situations. … Landcare is not necessarily the most effective means to inform or influence land managers or why group extension is, at best, one tool for delivering training on new farming techniques.”
Conclusion: Farmers would respond best to the opportunity to earn an additional revenue stream, selling what they grow for a good price without depending on Government goodwill for ‘stewardship’ payments and that did not appear to be a big risk.
The Carbon Coalition contends that Carbon Farming is the easiest way for a landholder to shift from emitting to sequestering, from degradation to restoration.
FOOTNOTES:
43. Dr Trevor Webb, “Understanding behaviour: Social and economic influences on land practice change, Bureau of Rural Sciences. Land management practices information priorities, classification and mapping – towards an agreed national approach. Kamberra Winery, Canberra 11-12 May 2004
44. Australian farmers: Relating to natural resource management
National Land and Water Resources Audit, Commonwealth of Australia
March 2002 http://www.anra.gov.au/topics/economics/pubs/national/anrm-report/farmers.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment