Farmer perceptions of regenerative agriculture in the Corn Belt: exploring motivations and barriers to adoption

IF 3.6 2区 社会学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Jaime J. Coon, Mary Jo Easley, Jennifer L. Williams, Gene Hambrick
{"title":"Farmer perceptions of regenerative agriculture in the Corn Belt: exploring motivations and barriers to adoption","authors":"Jaime J. Coon,&nbsp;Mary Jo Easley,&nbsp;Jennifer L. Williams,&nbsp;Gene Hambrick","doi":"10.1007/s10460-025-10735-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Regenerative agriculture has been proposed as a sustainable approach that balances environmental and economic trade-offs in farming. However, regenerative agriculture lacks a consistent definition and implementation, and there is a need for context-specific information on adoption. In our study, we evaluated farmer perceptions in an economically depressed region on the Indiana-Ohio border. Guided by diffusion theory, we explored definitions of regenerative agriculture and motivations and barriers to adoption using an online pre-survey (n = 49) and exploratory, in-depth interviews with <i>early adopters</i> (n = 16) who identified themselves as using regenerative agriculture. Early adopters defined regenerative agriculture as principles and practices that support healthier soils, with an emphasis on livestock and cover cropping. Interviewees noted that environmental and economic priorities were more strongly linked in regenerative agriculture versus conventional agriculture. Motivations were primarily environmental (e.g., soil, water, biodiversity), whereas barriers were primarily economic (e.g., start-up costs, marketing). However, community benefits, such as healthier food and farmer wellbeing, were other motivators. Regenerative practices were perceived as highly observable but lacking in support from the broader community. Further, in economically depressed communities, costs were seen as limiting, especially for livestock integration, which was perceived to have lower trialability versus practices like cover crops. Our analysis reveals that although many farmers would not say they use regenerative agriculture, there is increasing engagement with some associated practices. Financial and marketing support and facilitating information sharing between early adopters and other farmers may increase regenerative practices in economically depressed regions of the Corn Belt.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7683,"journal":{"name":"Agriculture and Human Values","volume":"42 3","pages":"1847 - 1864"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10460-025-10735-y.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agriculture and Human Values","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10460-025-10735-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Regenerative agriculture has been proposed as a sustainable approach that balances environmental and economic trade-offs in farming. However, regenerative agriculture lacks a consistent definition and implementation, and there is a need for context-specific information on adoption. In our study, we evaluated farmer perceptions in an economically depressed region on the Indiana-Ohio border. Guided by diffusion theory, we explored definitions of regenerative agriculture and motivations and barriers to adoption using an online pre-survey (n = 49) and exploratory, in-depth interviews with early adopters (n = 16) who identified themselves as using regenerative agriculture. Early adopters defined regenerative agriculture as principles and practices that support healthier soils, with an emphasis on livestock and cover cropping. Interviewees noted that environmental and economic priorities were more strongly linked in regenerative agriculture versus conventional agriculture. Motivations were primarily environmental (e.g., soil, water, biodiversity), whereas barriers were primarily economic (e.g., start-up costs, marketing). However, community benefits, such as healthier food and farmer wellbeing, were other motivators. Regenerative practices were perceived as highly observable but lacking in support from the broader community. Further, in economically depressed communities, costs were seen as limiting, especially for livestock integration, which was perceived to have lower trialability versus practices like cover crops. Our analysis reveals that although many farmers would not say they use regenerative agriculture, there is increasing engagement with some associated practices. Financial and marketing support and facilitating information sharing between early adopters and other farmers may increase regenerative practices in economically depressed regions of the Corn Belt.

农民对玉米带再生农业的看法:探索采用的动机和障碍
再生农业被认为是一种可持续的方法,可以平衡农业中的环境和经济权衡。然而,再生农业缺乏一致的定义和实施,并且需要根据具体情况提供有关采用的信息。在我们的研究中,我们评估了印第安纳州-俄亥俄州边境经济萧条地区农民的看法。在扩散理论的指导下,我们通过在线预调查(n = 49)和对早期采采者(n = 16)的探索性深度访谈,探讨了再生农业的定义以及采用再生农业的动机和障碍。早期采用者将再生农业定义为支持更健康土壤的原则和做法,重点是家畜和覆盖作物。受访者指出,与传统农业相比,再生农业的环境和经济优先事项联系更为紧密。动机主要是环境方面的(如土壤、水、生物多样性),而障碍主要是经济方面的(如开办费用、营销)。然而,社区利益,如更健康的食物和农民福利,是其他激励因素。再生实践被认为是高度可观察的,但缺乏更广泛的社区支持。此外,在经济不景气的社区,成本被认为是有限的,特别是牲畜整合,与覆盖作物等做法相比,这种做法被认为具有较低的可试验性。我们的分析表明,尽管许多农民不会说他们使用再生农业,但与一些相关实践的接触越来越多。财政和营销支持以及促进早期采用者和其他农民之间的信息共享可能会增加玉米带经济萧条地区的再生实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Agriculture and Human Values
Agriculture and Human Values 农林科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
13.30%
发文量
97
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: Agriculture and Human Values is the journal of the Agriculture, Food, and Human Values Society. The Journal, like the Society, is dedicated to an open and free discussion of the values that shape and the structures that underlie current and alternative visions of food and agricultural systems. To this end the Journal publishes interdisciplinary research that critically examines the values, relationships, conflicts and contradictions within contemporary agricultural and food systems and that addresses the impact of agricultural and food related institutions, policies, and practices on human populations, the environment, democratic governance, and social equity.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信