Jaime J. Coon, Mary Jo Easley, Jennifer L. Williams, Gene Hambrick
{"title":"农民对玉米带再生农业的看法:探索采用的动机和障碍","authors":"Jaime J. Coon, Mary Jo Easley, Jennifer L. Williams, 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":"{\"title\":\"Farmer perceptions of regenerative agriculture in the Corn Belt: exploring motivations and barriers to adoption\",\"authors\":\"Jaime J. Coon, Mary Jo Easley, Jennifer L. Williams, 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}","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}
Farmer perceptions of regenerative agriculture in the Corn Belt: exploring motivations and barriers to adoption
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.
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.