The document discusses the factors influencing practice change among rural landholders, emphasizing the importance of both human dimensions and technologies in the adoption process. Key aspects include individual learning processes, social factors, and the unique adoption stories of various practices, which are influenced by relative advantage and trialability. It underscores the necessity for anticipating adoptability in research, policy, and extension efforts to enhance successful practice change.

1. Understanding Practice Change by Rural Landholders David Pannell ARC Federation Fellow School of Agricultural and Resource Economics University of Western Australia

3. Key points Practice change depends on: The human dimension (learning, social processes, goals, perceptions, …) The technologies (relative advantage, trialability) Each practice has its own unique adoption story For policy, extension and research, it pays to anticipate adoptability

4. The human dimension The innovative practice 

5. At the individual level It’s a learning process Initially uncertainty is high e.g. about a new pasture plant’s response to climate, soils, pests, weeds, inputs, grazing, etc. Over time, learning  uncertainty falls Subjective perceptions – it’s personal

6. Learning process - stages Awareness of problem or opportunity Non-trial evaluation Trial evaluation Adoption (or not) Review and modification Disadoption Continuum Process is never complete

7. Social factors influence adoption Related to communication, trust, credibility Social networks Physical proximity Extension Ethnic/cultural divisions Related to benefits from adopting the practice Off-farm income Property size Age/education Reason for holding land Goals

8. A variety of goals (i) material wealth & financial security (ii) environmental protection and enhancement (iii) social approval and acceptance (iv) personal integrity, ethics (v) balance of work and lifestyle

9. Categories of adopters Kernal of truth But given too much emphasis Don’t forget the practices An individual could be Early adopter for a new crop variety Laggard for a new pasture species

10. The human dimension The innovative practice 

11.  Characteristics of practices Relative advantage Trialability

12. Relative advantage Economic benefits Profitability of practice Farming systems effects Adjustment cost Riskiness Compatibility Complexity Opportunity cost Compatibility with Beliefs/values Family goals Self image Brand preference Environmental Values of landholder Threats Benefits of practice

13. Relative advantage driving peak adoption

14. ‘ Convenience agriculture’ More management demands Less time available The challenge for ‘inconvenient’ agricultural practices e.g. Intensive livestock systems?

15.  Characteristics of practices Relative advantage Trialability

16. Trialability How easy is it to get over the learning hump?

17. Factors reduce value of trialling Observability low or costly Highly novel new practice Previous experience not transferable Long time scales Survey of farmers in Upper Kent, 1997 Of the farmers who invested in Landcare (e.g. drainage, trees, lucerne) less than half had observed any benefit

18. Each practice has its own adoption story Influential factors Time frame Groups of adopters and non-adopters

19. Factors influencing no-till adoption Higher education Participation in extension activities Use of paid consultant Years since first awareness of nearby no-till adopter Occurrence of a very dry year Fall in price of glyphosate Location (region/state) & average rainfall Effectiveness of pre-emergent herbicide (trifluralin) Soil-moisture-conservation & seeding timeliness NOT SIGNIFICANT: Erosion risk; soil conservation benefits; Landcare 82% of decisions correctly predicted Source: D’ Emden et al. 2006

20. Factors influencing IWM adoption Higher use of extension Higher education Lower discount rate for future returns Perception of higher ryegrass control (efficacy) Perception of higher economic value of practices Perception of longer time until new herbicide Uncertainty of when new herbicide will be available Higher proportion of the farm cropped The resistance status of the farm 86% of decisions correctly predicted Source: Llewellyn et al. 2006

21. It pays to anticipate adoptability Researchers Target research effort to practices and technologies with better prospects

22. It pays to anticipate adoptability Extension Sustained adoption requires relative advantage Ignoring that threatens credibility

23. It pays to anticipate adoptability Policy Anticipate adoptability when considering policy responses (what mechanism, if any) Non-adoption is generally for good reasons, especially if it persists

24. Key points Practice change depends on: The human dimension (learning, social processes, goals, perceptions, …) The technologies (relative advantage, trialability) Each practice has its own unique adoption story For policy, extension and research, it pays to anticipate adoptability