A new approach to explain farmers’ adoption of climate change mitigation measures
Albert Moerkerken (),
Pieter Beukering and
Additional contact information
Albert Moerkerken: Netherlands Enterprise Agency RVO
Julia Blasch: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Pieter Beukering: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Erik Well: CLM Research and Advisory
Climatic Change, 2020, vol. 159, issue 1, No 10, 161 pages
Abstract The determinants of farmers’ decisions to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are currently not well understood. This study takes several new angles in investigating farmers’ climate change mitigation behaviour. Based on two identical surveys among representative samples of Dutch farmers, this study examines the underlying determinants and motivating factors for three different types of climate change mitigation measures on farms: energy saving, the production of renewable energy and reduction of emissions of methane and nitrous oxide (non-CO2 emissions). Furthermore, the study explores whether farmers’ awareness and behaviour has been influenced by a communication campaign carried out by the government of the Netherlands between 2012 and 2015. Four major conclusions emerge. Firstly, the analyses demonstrate that accounting for the cost-effectiveness and technology readiness level (TRL) of different types of climate change mitigation measures provides for a better understanding of the factors that motivate farmers to adopt these measures. Secondly, neither the willingness to take GHG reduction measures nor knowledge on GHG emissions are consistent motivating factors for energy-related measures. Thirdly, it seems that external factors, such as economic hardship, dominate the overall environmental awareness of farmers. Fourthly, the farmer’s propensity to innovate proved to be the strongest and most consistent predictor of both the willingness and the actual adoption of climate change mitigation technologies. Therefore, focusing on making farmers more open to change and general innovation in campaigns in the agricultural sector might be more effective than campaigns focusing specifically on climate change mitigation.
Keywords: Climate change mitigation; Agriculture; Communication campaign; Energy use; Farmer behaviour (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-019-02595-3 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:climat:v:159:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s10584-019-02595-3
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
Access Statistics for this article
Climatic Change is currently edited by M. Oppenheimer and G. Yohe
More articles in Climatic Change from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla ().