An official website of the United States government
Abstract Agricultural technologies are vital for farmers adapting to climate change. However, while efforts have focused on improving access and initial adoption, little attention has been given to social disparities in rates of adoption and the benefits derived from these technologies. Our study investigates the adoption of groundwater irrigation technology in India, a transformative innovation that has historically enhanced productivity and food security, and helped agricultural households adapt to a changing climate. We use a nationwide household survey sample that spans nearly a decade, capturing a key period of groundwater expansion in India. Our analysis reveals that members of highly marginalized social groups are less likely to adopt groundwater irrigation technologies, and less likely to sustain their use of the technologies for long periods of time. Furthermore, the household-level benefits of the technologies–operationalized through the relationship between technology adoption and income–appear lower for households belonging to historically marginalized groups compared to the historically advantaged. Our study underscores the importance of addressing social inequalities in both adoption as well as the sustained utilization of agricultural technologies and other climate adaptation tools. Disparities in the utilization of these technologies can hinder farmers’ ability to access new innovations and adapt to increasing threats from climate change. Targeted policies and interventions are essential to not only provide historically marginalized groups access to technological innovations, but also facilitate their effective utilization.
more »
« less
Innovation as a policy strategy for natural resource protection
Abstract Growing global food demands place major strains on water resources, including quality impairments and increased water scarcity. Drawing on the largely separate bodies of literature on externalities and technological innovation, this article develops a dynamic framework to explore the long‐term impacts of alternative policy approaches to the agricultural impacts on water resources. Environmental policies, which focus on correcting environmental externalities, lead to an overall gain because costs to farmers are more than offset by reduced environmental damages. Technology policies, which direct public investments into agricultural eco‐innovations, lead to benefits for farmers as well as the environment. Joint implementation of both types of policies leads to the largest overall gain. In principle, a technology policy alone could have greater environmental benefits than an environmental policy alone. This outcome is most likely in cases where the productivity effect of new technology is large and the cost of research is low. Recommendations for research managersAs an alternative to traditional environmental policy, investments in research can provide win–win solutions that benefit the environment and agricultural producers.Conceivably, eco‐innovations could lead to environmental conditions that are better than those achieved by environmental policy alone.Adding research investments to existing environmental policy would lead to further improvements in environmental quality while also benefitting farmers.Unlike environmental policies that are perceived to impose costs on agriculture, technology policies impart benefits to farmers and are less likely to face political opposition from industry.Technology policies are likely to be the most effective when eco‐innovation leads to technologies that meaningfully reduce environmental impacts and also raise farm productivity.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1739191
- PAR ID:
- 10197758
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley-Blackwell
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Natural Resource Modeling
- Volume:
- 32
- Issue:
- 3
- ISSN:
- 0890-8575
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Agricultural simplification continues to expand at the expense of more diverse forms of agriculture. This simplification, for example, in the form of intensively managed monocultures, poses a risk to keeping the world within safe and just Earth system boundaries. Here, we estimated how agricultural diversification simultaneously affects social and environmental outcomes. Drawing from 24 studies in 11 countries across 2655 farms, we show how five diversification strategies focusing on livestock, crops, soils, noncrop plantings, and water conservation benefit social (e.g., human well-being, yields, and food security) and environmental (e.g., biodiversity, ecosystem services, and reduced environmental externalities) outcomes. We found that applying multiple diversification strategies creates more positive outcomes than individual management strategies alone. To realize these benefits, well-designed policies are needed to incentivize the adoption of multiple diversification strategies in unison.more » « less
-
Abstract Smallholder farmers are some of the poorest and most food insecure people on Earth. Their high nutritional and economic reliance on home‐grown produce makes them particularly vulnerable to environmental stressors such as pollinator loss or climate change which threaten agricultural productivity. Improving smallholder agriculture in a way that is environmentally sustainable and resilient to climate change is a key challenge of the 21st century.Ecological intensification, whereby ecosystem services are managed to increase agricultural productivity, is a promising solution for smallholders. However, smallholder farms are complex socio‐ecological systems with a range of social, ecological and environmental factors interacting to influence ecosystem service provisioning. To truly understand the functioning of a smallholder farm and identify the most effective management options to support household food and nutrition security, a holistic, systems‐based understanding is required.In this paper, we propose a network approach to understand, visualise and model the complex interactions occurring among wild species, crops and people on smallholder farms. Specifically, we demonstrate how networks may be used to (a) identify wild species with a key role in supporting, delivering or increasing the resilience of an ecosystem service; (b) quantify the value of an ecosystem service in a way that is relevant to the food and nutrition security of smallholders; and (c) understand the social interactions that influence the management of shared ecosystem services.Using a case study based on data from rural Nepal, we demonstrate how this framework can be used to connect wild plants, pollinators and crops to key nutrients consumed by humans. This allows us to quantify the nutritional value of an ecosystem service and identify the wild plants and pollinators involved in its provision, as well as providing a framework to predict the effects of environmental change on human nutrition.Our framework identifies mechanistic links between ecosystem services and the nutrients consumed by smallholder farmers and highlights social factors that may influence the management of these services. Applying this framework to smallholder farms in a range of socio‐ecological contexts may provide new, sustainable and equitable solutions to smallholder food and nutrition security. A freePlain Language Summarycan be found within the Supporting Information of this article.more » « less
-
Abstract Innovations in precision agriculture now enable the identification of crop field patches whose retirement offers high environmental benefits and the low opportunity cost of crop yield loss. Precision conservation can lower costs to farmers and payment costs for government agencies. Precision conservation incentive policy should unite elements of land retirement (set-aside) and working lands policies that pay for environmental services. Key decisions surround how to bundle land fragments in a contract, keep contract design simple, evaluate environmental benefits, monitor compliance, and measure the additionality of those benefits.more » « less
-
Abstract The exploitation of ecosystem services, through processes like agricultural production, is associated with myriad negative environmental impacts, which are felt by stakeholders on local, regional, and global scales. The varying type and scale of impacts leads naturally to fragmented and siloed approaches to mitigating externalities by diverse governmental and non-governmental institutions. However, policies designed to address a single impact may worsen other negative impacts. As a result, even when groups have the expertise to design policy solutions in one dimension, policies addressing single issues may conflict and result in less than ideal outcomes in combination. In this paper, we present a conceptual framework and examples of this kind of ‘policy collision,’ where policies produce mutual negative interference so that policies designed independently may fail to achieve their goals. We argue that an integrated systems perspective is needed to overcome this problem and present several positive examples where this has been put into practice. Policy collision provides a useful framework for determining how each colliding policy should be modified in improve outcomes.more » « less
