减少养分指数:农民采用保护措施的最低限度连续衡量标准

IF 2.2 4区 农林科学 Q2 ECOLOGY
C.D. Shaffer-Morrison, R.S. Wilson
{"title":"减少养分指数:农民采用保护措施的最低限度连续衡量标准","authors":"C.D. Shaffer-Morrison, R.S. Wilson","doi":"10.2489/jswc.2024.00129","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A Nutrient Reduction Index (NRI) was developed to assist investigators who wish to explore the impacts of interventions, individual difference factors, and farm characteristics on nutrient-focused conservation practices. Comparing the effectiveness of different interventions or understanding the effects of different farm and farmer characteristics can be difficult in the absence of a single and standardized measure of conservation practices ([Anderson 2020][1]; [Loken and Gelman 2017][2]; [Lilienfeld and Strother 2020][3]). Across two data sets ( N = 1,452), the continuous NRI was calculated by weighting several in-field practices (tillage, cover crops, and small grains in rotation) by their actual impact on nutrient reduction ([Iowa State University 2019][4]; [Ha et al. 2020][5]). The NRI was shown to have a smoother distribution than individual conservation behaviors, and convergent validity was demonstrated with conservation-related constructs like conservationist identity and use of filtering practices. The NRI also correlated with farm size, greater formal education, and lower farmer age, consistent with previous work regarding general conservation practices. This measure of nutrient reduction practices can help reduce error associated with dichotomization of practice adoption ([MacCallum et al. 2002][6]) and testing multiple measures ([Banerjee et al. 2009][7]; [Anderson 2020][1]), and its weighted nature better reflects the impact of practice adoption on actual nutrient reduction. [1]: #ref-1 [2]: #ref-22 [3]: #ref-20 [4]: #ref-17 [5]: #ref-13 [6]: #ref-26 [7]: #ref-3","PeriodicalId":50049,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Soil and Water Conservation","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Nutrient Reduction Index: A minimalist and continuous measure of conservation practice adoption among farmers\",\"authors\":\"C.D. Shaffer-Morrison, R.S. Wilson\",\"doi\":\"10.2489/jswc.2024.00129\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A Nutrient Reduction Index (NRI) was developed to assist investigators who wish to explore the impacts of interventions, individual difference factors, and farm characteristics on nutrient-focused conservation practices. Comparing the effectiveness of different interventions or understanding the effects of different farm and farmer characteristics can be difficult in the absence of a single and standardized measure of conservation practices ([Anderson 2020][1]; [Loken and Gelman 2017][2]; [Lilienfeld and Strother 2020][3]). Across two data sets ( N = 1,452), the continuous NRI was calculated by weighting several in-field practices (tillage, cover crops, and small grains in rotation) by their actual impact on nutrient reduction ([Iowa State University 2019][4]; [Ha et al. 2020][5]). The NRI was shown to have a smoother distribution than individual conservation behaviors, and convergent validity was demonstrated with conservation-related constructs like conservationist identity and use of filtering practices. The NRI also correlated with farm size, greater formal education, and lower farmer age, consistent with previous work regarding general conservation practices. This measure of nutrient reduction practices can help reduce error associated with dichotomization of practice adoption ([MacCallum et al. 2002][6]) and testing multiple measures ([Banerjee et al. 2009][7]; [Anderson 2020][1]), and its weighted nature better reflects the impact of practice adoption on actual nutrient reduction. [1]: #ref-1 [2]: #ref-22 [3]: #ref-20 [4]: #ref-17 [5]: #ref-13 [6]: #ref-26 [7]: #ref-3\",\"PeriodicalId\":50049,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Soil and Water Conservation\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Soil and Water Conservation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.2024.00129\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Soil and Water Conservation","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.2024.00129","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

制定营养素减少指数(NRI)是为了帮助那些希望探索干预措施、个体差异因素和农场特征对以营养素为重点的保护措施的影响的研究人员。在缺乏单一和标准化的保护措施的情况下,比较不同干预措施的效果或了解不同农场和农民特征的影响可能比较困难([Anderson 2020][1];[Loken and Gelman 2017][2];[Lilienfeld and Strother 2020][3])。在两组数据(N = 1 452)中,通过对几种田间实践(耕作、覆盖作物和小粒轮作)对养分减少的实际影响进行加权,计算出连续的 NRI([爱荷华州立大学 2019][4];[Ha 等人 2020][5])。与单个保护行为相比,NRI 的分布更为平滑,并且与保护主义者身份和过滤实践的使用等与保护相关的建构具有收敛有效性。NRI 还与农场规模、较高的正规教育程度和较低的农民年龄相关,这与之前有关一般保护实践的工作相一致。这种减少养分实践的测量方法有助于减少与实践采用二分法([MacCallum 等人,2002 年][6])和测试多种测量方法([Banerjee 等人,2009 年][7];[Anderson,2020 年][1])相关的误差,其加权性质更好地反映了实践采用对实际养分减少的影响。[1]:#ref-1 [2]:#ref-22 [3]:#ref-20 [4]:#ref-17 [5]:#ref-13 [6]:#ref-26 [7]:#参考文献-3
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Nutrient Reduction Index: A minimalist and continuous measure of conservation practice adoption among farmers
A Nutrient Reduction Index (NRI) was developed to assist investigators who wish to explore the impacts of interventions, individual difference factors, and farm characteristics on nutrient-focused conservation practices. Comparing the effectiveness of different interventions or understanding the effects of different farm and farmer characteristics can be difficult in the absence of a single and standardized measure of conservation practices ([Anderson 2020][1]; [Loken and Gelman 2017][2]; [Lilienfeld and Strother 2020][3]). Across two data sets ( N = 1,452), the continuous NRI was calculated by weighting several in-field practices (tillage, cover crops, and small grains in rotation) by their actual impact on nutrient reduction ([Iowa State University 2019][4]; [Ha et al. 2020][5]). The NRI was shown to have a smoother distribution than individual conservation behaviors, and convergent validity was demonstrated with conservation-related constructs like conservationist identity and use of filtering practices. The NRI also correlated with farm size, greater formal education, and lower farmer age, consistent with previous work regarding general conservation practices. This measure of nutrient reduction practices can help reduce error associated with dichotomization of practice adoption ([MacCallum et al. 2002][6]) and testing multiple measures ([Banerjee et al. 2009][7]; [Anderson 2020][1]), and its weighted nature better reflects the impact of practice adoption on actual nutrient reduction. [1]: #ref-1 [2]: #ref-22 [3]: #ref-20 [4]: #ref-17 [5]: #ref-13 [6]: #ref-26 [7]: #ref-3
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
2.60%
发文量
0
审稿时长
3.3 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Soil and Water Conservation (JSWC) is a multidisciplinary journal of natural resource conservation research, practice, policy, and perspectives. The journal has two sections: the A Section containing various departments and features, and the Research Section containing peer-reviewed research papers.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信