Iowa farmers’ willingness to take action in support of the Iowa Nutrient

Reduction Strategy

J. Gordon Arbuckle Jr.

SWCS Annual ConferenceJuly 27, 2015

Study context:• 1997 Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico

Watershed Nutrient Task Force established– 5 fed agencies, 12 states, tribes in MARB– Goal: Reduce and control Gulf hypoxia

• 2008 Action Plan: Asked states to develop Nutrient Reduction Strategies by 2013

• Undercurrent of regulatory threat

Study context:• Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy released May

2013• Goals: Reduce point/nonpoint source nutrient flow• Goal for agriculture: 41% reduction in N loss & 29%

reduction in P loss• Strategy is voluntary

http://www.nutrientstrategy.iastate.edu/sites/default/files/documents/NRS1-141001.pdf

Science Assessment: What Practices Work

Goals will only be reached if nearly all farmers increase use of diversity of practices: e.g., Cover crops + no-till + MRTN calculator + split application

Research Questions

In the end, success depends on widespread farmer action• Are farmers aware of the Nutrient Reduction Strategy?• Do they support the plan?• Are they willing to take action toward NRS goals?• What are relationships between selected factors and

willingness to take action?– Knowledge of NRS, information sources– Trust in extension, private sector– Environmental awareness and concern– Perceived economic barriers– Farm and farmer characteristics

Data from the 2014 Iowa Farm and Rural Life Poll, an annual survey of Iowa farmers• Focus on issues of importance to agriculture in

the Midwest• Since 1982, longest-running survey of its kind• In cooperation with Iowa Dept. of Ag and Iowa Ag

Stats• Farm Poll 2014 surveyed 1,128/2,218 farmers:

51% response rate• Questions focused on 1) knowledge of NRS, 2)

sources of info on NRS, and 3) attitudes toward NRS and related issues

• OLS regression: Factors associated with expressed support for actions to help meet NRS goals

Methods

Dependent variable: Three-item scale measuring proactive support for the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy (Mean 3.49/5; Alpha .709)

           

 StronglyDisagree Disagree Uncertain Agree

StronglyAgree

 —Percent—

I would like to improve conservation practices on the land I farm to help meet the Nutrient Reduction Strategy’s goals

0.8 3.7 23.6 63.6 8.3

I would be willing to have someone help me to evaluate how my farm operation is doing in terms of keeping nutrients out of waterways

4.5 10.3 38.9 40.5 5.7

Helping to meet the Nutrient Reduction Strategy’s goals is a high priority for me 2.0 11.3 39.0 41.6 6.0

Awareness of the Nutrient Reduction Strategy

Not at all knowledgeable

Slightly knowledgeable

Somewhat knowledgeable Knowledgeable

Very knowledgeable

20% 27% 32% 18% 4%

Gave a description, then asked how knowledgeable they were about the Iowa

Nutrient Reduction Strategy prior to reading the description

Sources through which farmers had heard about the Nutrient Reduction Strategy: Does support vary by type of source, private or public?

Source PercentI had not heard about it until now 18The farm press (magazines, TV programs, websites) 63Iowa State University Extension and Outreach 45Natural Resources Conservation Service or Soil and Water Conservation District 41Government agency (e.g., Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship) 39Commodity or farm organization (e.g., Soybean Assn, Corn Growers, Farm Bureau) 35The popular press (general interest newspapers, magazines) 30Local agricultural retailer (e.g., fertilizer, agricultural chemical dealer) 14Seed company salesperson 9Independent/private crop adviser or agronomist 8Number of private ag sources heard about it from .31Number of public sources heard about it from 2.23

MOST trusted Information SourcesConsidering the [following] topics, which group would you trust the most

for information to help you make decisions?Is trust in Extension associated with greater support for NRS?

 Fertilizer or Ag

Chemical DealerSeed

Dealer

USDA/NRCS/SWCD Service

Center

PrivateCrop

Consultant

Iowa StateUniversityExtension

Fertilizer type 67.0 0.8 0.8 5.7 15.1

Fertilizer timing 64.8 1.7 1.2 6.1 15.0

Fertilizer application rates 64.3 1.2 1.3 6.0 17.4

Insect pest management 51.9 6.2 2.0 7.7 23.3

Weed management 61.2 2.2 2.1 7.2 18.5

Crop disease management 42.3 11.2 2.6 8.6 26.1

Soil and water conservation 3.8 0.7 62.3 1.4 19.1

Dealing with extreme weather (e.g., drought, hail, excess water)

5.8 3.6 17.5 4.0 37.3

Livestock production 1.8 0.0 2.3 0.7 28.9

Farm financial management 1.6 0.1 2.3 3.8 23.3

Mean number private sector most trusted  5.15   

Mean number Extension most trusted 

 1.46   

Awareness: “Nutrients from Iowa farms contribute to hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico”

Concern: “I am concerned about agriculture’s impacts on Iowa’s water quality”

Economic barriers: “The cost of further reduction of nutrient losses from my farm operation would be too high”

Fertilizer and ag chemical dealers should do more to help farmers address nutrient losses into waterways

Individual and Farm Characteristics 2013

Average Age: 65 yearsPercent of farmers who rented land: 48%Percent of farmers who raised livestock: 26%Corn and soybean acres: 7-categories 0 – 1000+Gross farm income: 10 categories $0 – 1m+

  Standardized

Coefficients

(Constant) 

Knowledge of NRS .054

Learned about NRS from agribusiness .000

Learned about NRS from public sources .108**

Number info types Extension most trusted .073*

Number info types private sector most trusted -.010

Nutrients from Iowa farms contribute to hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico .123***

I am concerned about agriculture’s impacts on Iowa’s water quality .387***

Cost of further reduction of nutrient losses too high -.133***

Fertilizer/ag chemical dealers should help farmers address nutrient losses .130***

Age -.019

Gross farm sales 2013 -.031

Number of crops 2013 .037

Corn and soy acres categories .101*

Livestock raised in 2013 .050

Rented land in 2013 -.026

*p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 

OLS regression results

Conclusions

• Iowa farmers seem to have positive attitudes toward Iowa NRS, are supportive of NRS goals

• Larger-scale row crop farmers more supportive• Awareness and concern strong predictors of

support: Need to continue building awareness of agriculture’s impact on water quality, knowledge of solutions

• Connection with public sector agencies and Extension associated with higher support: However, farmers tend to rely on private sector for most farming decisions

Multiple-Benefit Prairie Conservation Strips. Photo courtesy of A. McDonald

Pathways to change: Private sector advisors

• Most farmers look to ag retailers for info on nutrient management

• Few farmers report hearing about NRS through ag retailers

• But many think that ag retailers should do more to help farmers reduce nutrient loss into waterways

• Need to engage advisors more, especially fertilizer dealers – Advisors need to take more responsibility for helping farmers to

reduce nutrient losses.

• Are stakeholders doing enough engage ag retailers and other private sector advisors?

Multiple-Benefit Prairie Conservation Strips. Photo courtesy of A. McDonald

Limitations

• Intention to act is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for behavior change

• Willingness to improve conservation in support of the Iowa NRS important first step, but does not necessarily lead to action

• Omitted variables– Perceptions of threat of regulations?

• A lot has changed since spring 2014: Much more information and emphasis on NRS

Multiple Benefit Prairie Conservation Strips. Photo courtesy of A. McDonald

Conclusions

• Early returns encouraging• In Iowa, dialogue on agriculture and water quality is lively,

and despite some contentiousness, there is a lot of consensus that although progress is being made, there’s a long way to go

• Unprecedented institutional commitment to water quality in ag community, both public (agencies and universities) and private sector (ag retailers) are taking both symbolic real steps

• Social science research increasingly viewed as key to progress: New 5-year survey effort funded by Iowa Dept. of Ag to examine farmer perspectives over time

Multiple Benefit Prairie Conservation Strips. Photo courtesy of A. McDonald

Thank you!

Multiple Benefit Prairie Conservation Strips. Photo courtesy of A. McDonald