Why wheat farmers could reduce chemical inputs: evidence from social, economic, and agronomic analysis
- 587 Downloads
Though European policies recommend pesticide reduction, most farmers still manage their crops with a high level of chemical inputs, notably in arable crop-based systems. Factors influencing farmers’ practices and the reasons why they do not adopt alternative techniques are not well-known. Actual reports on that topic are based on monodisciplinary analyses either in agronomy, sociology, or economics, whereas farmers’ motives are most probably manifold. Therefore, we surveyed winter wheat agricultural practices to understand the factors influencing the choice of crop management plans implemented by farmers. We interviewed 71 farmers in the French Department of Eure-et-Loir. Results revealed three main types of practices depending on inputs and wheat yield: (1) 29 % of farmers use low levels of inputs and get low yield, (2) 38 % of farmers use medium levels of inputs and get high yield, (3) 33 % of farmers use high levels of inputs and get medium yield. We found that the medium-input type is the most efficient with better economic results whatever the wheat price. On the other hand, the high-input type has a lower economic performance. We showed that farm profile, individual motives, and social commitments explain the level of input use. High-input practices are often implemented by farmers who have less family labor availability and who rarely join extension groups, whereas low-input practices are conducted by farmers bearing civic responsibilities and showing environmental awareness. The novelty of our study is to use a multidisciplinary analysis to take into account agronomic, social, and economic factors.
KeywordsCrop management plan Low-input systems Winter wheat Farmer typology
The authors thank the students from the DA AGRECINA (ecology and agronomic innovations) of Agricultural Engineering Schools of ESA Angers and ISARA Lyon, who conducted the surveys, and their professor Marie Mawois, as well as local institutions (cooperatives, Chamber of Agriculture, and advice organizations) for giving their time to students, and farmers who took part in the survey. We also want to thank Claire Lamine and Marianne Cerf for their contribution to this work. This research was done with the financial support of ANR Systerra—Popsy program (ANR 08-STRA 12).
- Arellanes P, Lee DR (2003) The determinants of adoption of sustainable agriculture technologies: evidence from the hillsides of Honduras. Proceedings of the 25th International Conference of Agricultural Economists (IAAE). 16–22 August 2003, Durban, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
- Aubertot JN, Barbier JM, Carpentier A, Gril JJ, Guichard L, Lucas P, Savary S, Savini I, Voltz M (2005) Pesticides, agriculture and the environment. Reducing the use of pesticides and limiting their environmental impact. Summary of the Collective Scientific Expert Report INRA and Cemagref, FranceGoogle Scholar
- Butault JP, Dedryver CA, Gary C, Guichard L, Jacquet F, Meynard JM, Nicot P, Pitrat M, Reau R, Sauphanor B, Savini I, Volay T (2010) Écophyto R&D. Quelles voies pour réduire l’usage des pesticides ? Synthèse du rapport d’étude, INRA Editeur (France), 90 p.Google Scholar
- Chikowo R, Faloya V, Petit S, Munier-Jolain NM (2009) Integrated Weed Management systems allow reduced reliance on herbicides and long-term weed control. Agr Ecosyst Environ 132:237–242. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2009.04.009
- Kohler U, Kreuter F (2012) Data Analysis Using Stata, 3rd edn. Stata Press, College StationGoogle Scholar
- Lamine C, Meynard JM, Bui S, Messéan A (2010) Réductions d’intrants: des changements techniques, et après? Effets de verrouillage et voies d’évolution à l’échelle du système agri-alimentaire. Innovations Agronomiques 8:121–134Google Scholar
- Loyce C, Meynard JM, Bouchard C, Rolland B, Lonnet P, Bataillon P, Bernicot MH, Bonnefoy M, Charrier X, Debote B, Demarquet T, Duperrier B, Félix I, Heddadj D, Leblanc O, Leleu M, Mangin P, Méausoone M, Doussinault G (2008) Interaction between cultivar and crop management effects on winter wheat diseases, lodging, and yield. Crop Prot 27:1131–1142. doi: 10.1016/j.cropro.2008.02.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Loyce C, Meynard JM, Bouchard C, Rolland B, Lonnet P, Bataillon P, Bernicot M, Bonnefoy M, Charrier X, Debote B, Demarquet T, Duperrier B, Félix I, Heddadj D, Leblanc O, Leleu M, Mangin P, Méausoone M, Doussinault G (2012) Growing winter wheat cultivars under different management intensities in France: a multicriteria assessment based on economic, energetic and environmental indicators. Field Crops Res 125:167–178. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2011.08.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Meynard JM, Girardin P (1991) Produire autrement. Courrier de la Cellule Environnement INRA 15:1–19Google Scholar
- Pingault N, Pleyber E, Champeaux C, Guichard L, Omon B (2009) Produits phytosanitaires et protection intégrée des cultures: l’indicateur de fréquence de traitement (IFT). Agreste - Notes et études socio-économiques 32:61–94Google Scholar
- Région Centre (2010) Document régional de développement rural (DRDR). Programme de développement rural 2007–2013. Version 4, p 345Google Scholar