skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


  • NSF Public Access
  • Search Results
  • Soil health through farmers’ eyes: Toward a better understanding of how farmers view, value, and manage for healthier soils
Title: Soil health through farmers’ eyes: Toward a better understanding of how farmers view, value, and manage for healthier soils
Abstract: Improved soil health (SH) is critical in achieving agricultural resilience and miti- gating climate risks. Whether SH management practices are widely used depends greatly on US farmers’ voluntary decision-making. Toward understanding this point, much research has addressed factors that contribute to the adoption (or lack thereof) of SH-promoting practices, but less is known in terms of farmers’ perceptions of SH itself and the corresponding man- agement practices they see as related to achieving SH. To offer introductory insight on this knowledge gap and support better buy-in from farmers toward positive SH outcomes, our research draws upon qualitative interviews with 91 farmers across three key agricultural states in the Midwest (Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan). We develop a more detailed understanding of farmers’ views on SH, and why and how they manage for it. Nearly all interviewed farmers were familiar with the concept of SH and most viewed it favorably. A minority of farmers lacked familiarity with the term “SH” yet still managed for it. Skeptics of SH largely cited uncertainties related to over-zealous messaging by proponents of SH or lack of evidence for the return on investment of SH practices. Overall, farmers’ perceptions of SH largely aligned with the scientific community’s understanding of soils being a dynamic system, though farmers most dominantly defined SH by its biological component. Farmers perceived a host of benefits of SH, most often noting benefits to production, followed by improvements in physical aspects of the soil such as erosion control and increased organic matter. Notably, pro- duction and sustainability benefits were often cited together, suggesting that SH management is increasingly seen as a “win-win” by farmers. Additionally, we found that many farmers view themselves as active participants in SH outcomes and believe their management choices are indicators of positive SH outcomes, regardless of the practices they employ, including some strategies (such as tillage or tile drainage) that do not align with scientifically documented approaches to improving SH. Our findings show that farmers report engaging in an array of SH management practices that target both biotic and abiotic components of soils, and often use multiple practices in tandem to promote SH on their farms. Achieving better SH in agricultural production in the future will require engaging farmers in SH management by tailoring outreach and communication strategies to align with the perspectives and language farmers themselves use to conceptualize SH.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2009125 1832042 2224712
PAR ID:
10484228
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Publisher / Repository:
Soil and Water Conservation Society
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation
Volume:
78
Issue:
1
ISSN:
0022-4561
Page Range / eLocation ID:
82 to 92
Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
conservation agriculture farmer attitudes farmer beliefs natural resource conservation soil health management stakeholder engagement
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; (, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation)
    The potential for healthy soils to address goals of productivity and sustainability has motivated a global soil health movement. Though this movement involves many groups, farmers’ perceptions are particularly important because they influence whether and how soil health concepts are practiced on farms. We used surveys of Michigan row crop farmers, followed by cognitive mapping exercises and interviews with a smaller subset of farmers, to describe how farmers understand, manage, and evaluate soil health. We report three key findings. First, we found that Michigan farmers believe in the benefits of soil health, but they are less certain of how to manage soil health on-farm. In particular, farmers found it challenging to evaluate how practices alter soil properties they know are important for soil health, including organic matter, compaction, and soil biology. Second, we found that most Michigan farmers are taking steps to improve the health of soils they farm, which was reflected in their current practices. Use of no-till and cover crops was especially prominent, and decisions to utilize them were motivated by yield benefits and water management. Third, we show that farmers primarily assess soil health with traditional agronomic soil tests and qualitative indicators (e.g., yield, crop coloration, and soil texture), which have strong ties to soil type. Overall, our findings emphasize that while Michigan farmers agree on the key properties and outcomes of healthy soils, they are less certain of how their management translates into improved soil health on-farm. Developing faster-responding, outcome-focused indicators as well as local benchmarks guided by soil type may motivate future adoption and retention of soil health practices. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; (, Advances in Meteorology)
    The study aims to analyze climate variability and farmers’ perception in Southern Ethiopia. Gridded annual temperature and precipitation data were obtained from the National Meteorological Agency (NMA) of Ethiopia for the period between 1983 and 2014. Using a multistage sampling technique, 403 farm households were surveyed to substantiate farmers’ perceptions about climate variability and change. The study applied a nonparametric Sen’s slope estimator and Mann–Kendall’s trend tests to detect the magnitude and statistical significance of climate variability and binary logit regression model to find factors influencing farm households’ perceptions about climate variability over three agroecological zones (AEZs). The trend analysis reveals that positive trends were observed in the annual maximum temperature, 0.02°C/year ( p < 0.01 ) in the lowland and 0.04°C/year ( p < 0.01 ) in the highland AEZs. The positive trend in annual minimum temperature was consistent in all AEZs and significant ( p < 0.01 ). An upward trend in the annual total rainfall (10 mm/year) ( p < 0.05 ) was recorded in the midland AEZ. Over 60% of farmers have perceived increasing temperature and decreasing rainfall in all AEZs. However, farmers’ perception about rainfall in the midland AEZ contradicts with meteorological analysis. Results from the binary logit model inform that farmers’ climate change perceptions are significantly influenced by their access to climate and market information, agroecology, education, agricultural input, and village market distance. Based on these results, it is recommended to enhance farm households’ capacity by providing timely weather and climate information along with institutional actions such as agricultural extension services. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; ; (, Climate Risk Management)
    Extreme weather events have cost lives and financial losses across the United States. Moreover, they are expected to increase in frequency, and this will exacerbate their impact on vulnerable sectors such as agriculture. But how farmers could adapt to extreme weather events by adopting different conservation practices has received slight attention in the literature. This study examines how farmers' perceptions of drought and flooding influence their decisions to implement conservation practices in their conventional crop fields. Out of the 350 farmer responses we received, fewer than half indicated a likelihood to adopt no-tillage/reduced tillage (43%), cover crops (40%), crop diversification (37%), and integrated crop-livestock grazing (29%). Using this data and a multivariate probit modeling framework, we show that farmers’ decisions can be partly explained by their perception of drought but not by their perception of flooding. Specifically, the perceived number of drought years significantly increases the likelihood of adopting no-tillage/reduced tillage and diversified cropping in the future. However, the number of drought years is not significantly associated with the use of cover crops and integrated crop-livestock grazing. These results suggest that the effects of extreme weather events on adoption of conservation practices as adaptive measures vary across different practices. Therefore, adaptation policies that make use of conservation practices must be tailored to farmers’ needs and priorities to be effective. 
    more » « less
  4. (, Journal of social ontology)
    What is philosophically interesting about how soil is managed and categorized? This paper begins by investigating how different soil ontologies develop and change as they are used within different social communities. Analyzing empirical evidence from soil science, ethnopedology, sociology, and agricultural extension reveals that efforts to categorize soil are not limited to current scientific soil classifications but also include those based in social ontologies of soil. I examine three of these soil social ontologies: (1) local and Indigenous classifications farmers and farming communities use to conceptualize their relationships with soil in their fields; (2) categorizations ascribed to farmers in virtue of their agricultural goals and economic priorities relied upon in sociological research; and (3) federal agency classifications of land capability employed by agricultural scientists. Studying the interplay of these social ontologies shows how assessing soil properties and capabilities are the result of previous agricultural strategies informed by culture, agroecological history, weather, soil biodiversity, crop rotation, and the goals held by decision-makers. The paper then identifies the soil relationships and interactions that constitute ontology-making activities. Building on recent work, I outline a novel interactive account of perspectival realism grounded in agricultural extension research and ethnopedological data that captures the haptic nature of farmers’ soil strategies. This interactive account explains how ontologies are chosen, why they are chosen, and how they interact and inform soil management decision-making. The paper concludes by examining the values laden in these ontologies and those which are causally implicated in the choice of soil management strategies. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; et al (, Field crops research)
    Smallholder agriculture is critical for current and future food security, yet quantifying the sources of smallholder yield variance remains a major challenge. Attributing yield variance to farmer management, as opposed to soil and weather constraints, is an important step to understanding the impact of farmer decision-making, in a context where smallholder farmers use a wide range of management practices and may have limited access to fertilizer. This study used a process-based crop model to simulate smallholder maize (Zea mays) yield at the district-level in Zambia and quantify the percent of yield variance (effect size) attributed to soil, weather, and three management inputs (cultivar, fertilizer, planting date). Effect sizes were calculated via an ANOVA variance decomposition. Further, to better understand the treatment effects of management practices, effect sizes were calculated both for all years combined and for individual years. We found that farmer management decisions explained 27–82 % of total yield variance for different agro-ecological regions in Zambia, primarily due to fertilizer impact. Fertilizer explained 45 % of yield variance for the average district, although its effect was much larger in northern districts of Zambia that typically have higher precipitation, where it explained 72 % of yield variance on average. When fixing a specific fertilizer amount, the “low-cost” management options of varying planting dates and cultivars explained 20–28 % of yield variance, with some regional variation. To better understand why management practices impact yield more in particular years, we performed a correlation analysis comparing yearly management effect sizes with four meteorologically based variables: total growing season precipitation, rainy season onset, extreme heat degree days, and longest dry spell. Results showed that fertilizer’s impact generally increased under favorable weather conditions, and planting date’s impact increased under adverse weather conditions. This study demonstrates how a national yield variance decomposition can be used to understand where specific management interventions would have a greater impact and can provide policymakers with quantification of soil, weather, and management effects. In addition, the variance composition can easily be adapted to a different range of management inputs, such as other cultivars or fertilizer quantities, and can also be used to assess the effect size of management adaptations under climate change. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email