The role of farmers’ objectives in current farm practices and adaptation preferences: a case study in Flevoland,the Netherlands

The diversity in farmers’ objectives and responses to external drivers is usually not considered in integrated assessment studies that investigate impacts and adaptation to climate and socio-economic change. Here, we present an approach to assess how farmers’ stated objectives relate to their currently implemented practices and to preferred adaptation options, and we discuss what this implies for assessments of future changes. We based our approach on a combination of multi-criteria decision-making methods. We consistently assessed the importance of farmers’ objectives and adaptation preferences from what farmers say (based on interviews), from what farmers actually do (by analysing current farm performance) and from what farmers want (through a selected alternative farm plan). Our study was performed for six arable farms in Flevoland, a province in the Netherlands. Based on interviews with farmers, we reduced the long list of possible objectives to the most important ones. The objectives we assessed included maximization of economic result and soil organic matter, and minimization of gross margin variance, working hours and nitrogen balance. In our sample, farmers’ stated preferences in objectives were often not fully reflected in realized farming practices. Adaptation preferences of farmers largely resembled their current performance, but generally involved a trend towards stated preferences. Our results suggest that in Flevoland, although farmers do have more objectives, in practical decision-making they focus on economic result maximization, while for strategic decision-making they account for objectives influencing long-term performance and indicators associated with sustainability, in this case soil organic matter.     

Vulnerability and adaptation of European farmers: a multi-level analysis of yield and income responses to climate variability

Climate change will affect crop yields and consequently farmers’ income. The underlying relationships are not well understood, particularly the importance of crop management and related factors at the farm and regional level. We analyze the impacts of trends and variability in climatic conditions from 1990 to 2003 on trends and variability in yields of five crops and farmers’ income at farm type and regional level in Europe considering farm characteristics and other factors. While Mediterranean regions are often characterized as most vulnerable to climate change, our data suggest effective adaptation to variable and changing conditions in these regions largely attributable to the characteristic farm types in these regions. We conclude that for projections of climate change impacts on agriculture, farm characteristics influencing management and adaptation should be considered, as they largely influence the potential impacts.     

Economic impacts of climatic variability and subsidies on European agriculture and observed adaptation strategies

In order to assess agricultural adaptation to climate impacts, new methodologies are needed. The translog distance function allows assessing interactions between different factors, and hence the influence of management on climate impacts. The Farm Accountancy Data Network provides extensive data on farm characteristics of farms throughout the EU15 (i.e. the 15 member states of the European Union before the extension in 2004). These data on farm inputs and outputs from 1990−2003 are coupled with climate data. As climate change is not the only change affecting European agriculture, we also include effects of subsidies and other changes on inputs and outputs of farms throughout Europe. We distinguish several regions and empirically assess (1) climate impacts on farm inputs and outputs in different regions and (2) interactions between inputs and other factors that contribute to the adaptation to these impacts. Changes in production can partly be related to climatic variability and change, but also subsidies and other developments (e.g. technology, markets) are important. Results show that impacts differ per region, and that ‘actual impacts’ cannot be explicitly separated into ‘potential impacts’ and ‘adaptive capacity’ as often proposed for vulnerability assessment. Farmers adapt their practices to prevailing conditions and continuously adapt to changing conditions. Therefore, ‘potential impacts’ will not be observed in practice, leaving it as a mainly theoretical concept. Factors that contribute to the adaptation also differ per region. In some regions more fertilizers or more irrigation can mitigate impacts, while in other regions this amplifies impacts. To project impacts of future climate change on agriculture, current farm management strategies and their influence on current production should be considered. This clearly asks for improved integration of biophysical and economic models.