Socio-Technical Scenarios as a Tool to Improve Farm Advisory Services

This article examines the use of the socio-technical scenarios (STSc) method to explore the future needs of farmers in the adoption of more sustainable farming practices. It also examines the changes needed for advisory services to meet those identified needs. It presents the results from four STSc workshops organised as part of the H2020 AgriLink project. Workshop participants (farmers, advisors, policymakers, researchers), jointly explored future changes towards more sustainable agricultural systems paying special attention to the role of advisory services in these transitions. Despite the diversity of national contexts, common results emerged concerning both the shortcomings of the current advisory systems and directions for improvement. Participants agreed that advising on single aspects would not achieve the required systemic changes; these would require more integrated advisory systems at different levels (improved cooperation and knowledge flow), supported by more consistent policies. We indeed identified discrepancies between policy expectations and the broader innovation context. Policies should facilitate the role of advisors in supporting farmers to adopt sustainable innovations, but more often they also create barriers for such innovations. Participants’ concrete recommendations for more farmer-centered advisory services illustrate the usefulness of the STSc to explore potential solutions to key problems in contemporary farm advisory systems.     

Who are Advisory Services Leaving Out? A Critical Reflection on ‘Hard to Reach’ Farmers

Although the Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union has broadened its objectives to integrate social issues, several hard-to-reach groups of farmers and workers continue to be ignored by advisory services and associated policies. Connecting with these groups has a strong potential to increase the economic and social cohesion of European agricultures. We interviewed over 1,000 farmers across Europe and identified features of these groups that are often overlooked by advisory services. We critically reflected on the social cohorts omitted from advisory services and how they could be better reached; they include farm labourers, new entrants or ‘career changers’, and later adopters. We clarify the different types of advisors in the advisory landscape, distinguishing between those who are linked to or independent from sales of inputs or technologies. We make concrete recommendations about how to engage advisors with hard-to-reach groups, with approaches suited to different national contexts of Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems (AKIS); thus contributing to the ‘AKIS dimension of National Strategic Plans of the next Common Agricultural Policy, 2023–2027. We argue for the more effective use of advances in the social sciences through a better understanding of advice as social interaction which can bolster the inclusiveness of public policies.     

Building knowledge systems for sustainable agriculture: supporting private advisors to adequately address sustainable farm management in regular service contacts

Advisory service provisioning on sustainability issues such as environmental care and food safety is considered suboptimal in privatized extension systems, which comprise a diverse set of private advisors. Apart from funding dedicated ‘public good’ projects, government also relies on these advisors to address sustainability issues in their regular service contacts with farmers. Policy measures have hence been proposed to stimulate farmer demand for such sustainable farm management (SFM) advice (pull measures) and to build capacity among advisors (push measures). This paper assesses two interventions, in nutrient management and mastitis prevention, that integrate pull measures (awareness building and economic incentives) and push measures (promoting facilitative advisory styles and optimizing knowledge system linkages) to stimulate advisory service provisioning on SFM. Results indicate that effectiveness appears to depend on an adequate mix of, and balance between, push and pull measures. Awareness building is a prerequisite to creating demand for such services and appears more important than economic incentives. However, awareness is not built by the interventions alone; indeed, a lack of awareness may not be the main problem: the broader institutional context may not be conducive to a proactive approach to addressing SFM if regulatory frameworks are unclear and inconsistent. The main conclusion is that, despite interventions having an impact, it is uncertain whether the demand for, and supply of, SFM advice will be sustained after interventions are withdrawn.     

New Entrants Need Tailored Farm Advice

Supporting new entrants in farming is an increasingly important political and practical issue in European agriculture. This article looks at a specific group of new entrants – career changers – who move into agriculture from other occupational and educational backgrounds. As they bridge several worlds, they are often important innovators. One of the main challenges encountered by this group is the lack of tailored advice and insufficient capacity of the existing agricultural advisory services to respond to their specific innovation needs. The article examines how career changers use the knowledge from their background and access new knowledge on agriculture. The research is based on biographical interviews with individuals who have changed their careers and in-depth interviews with advisors in Latvia. The results suggest that the gap between knowledge needs and knowledge services is being filled through the creation of professional networks by new entrants with each other and with industry experts and customers and to a lesser degree with formal advisory services. We discuss how in this situation various actors in the EU’s agricultural knowledge and innovation system (AKIS) may better help the career changers to professionalise in farming and undertake sustainability-oriented innovations.     

New knowledge networks of small-scale farmers in Europe’s periphery

In this paper we assess the types of knowledge networks utilised by small-scale farmers in four case studies (located in Bulgaria, Poland, Portugal, and the United Kingdom). We focus on knowledge acquired to inform three new activities being undertaken by study participants: agricultural production, subsidy access and regulatory compliance, and farm diversification (specifically agritourism). Findings demonstrate that the new knowledge networks are dominated by different forms of expertise: formal ‘agricultural advisors’ identified in the case studies primarily offer codified managerial knowledge through centralised networks, suggesting that state-funded services for small-scale farmers are largely embedded in traditional, linear models of knowledge transfer. Production and diversification knowledge is exchanged through ‘distributed’ and ‘decentralised’ networks, where a range of actors are involved across varying geographical distances. Findings highlight issues associated with the quality and independence of both ‘free’ and paid advice, as well as the importance of combining tacit and codified knowledge for credibility. In all four cases, we found that small-scale farmers utilise formal advisory services primarily for accessing subsidies (e.g. completing application forms), rather than acquiring production knowledge. The authors argue that by utilising the state funding allocated to advisory services for small-scale farmers primarily to enable these farmers to access subsidies, important opportunities for innovation by both advisors or farmers can be lost.     

Should ‘Impartial’ Advice be a Priority of European Agricultural and Rural Policies?

Recent EU legislation will require Member States to ensure that farm advice which is supported by EU funding is impartial. In this article we present the findings of an online workshop which asked whether this should be a priority for European advisory supports within the Common Agricultural Policy. The answer was ‘no’. At the workshop, results of AgriLink were presented for discussion with international experts. These results highlighted major pitfalls for setting the boundaries of independent advice. Participants from Europe and North America agreed that ‘impartial’ advisors providing or selling only advice are rare in many contexts. Key organisations offering farm advice in many European countries, such as farmers’ cooperatives, often have established relationships with commercial suppliers. Being apparently independent from industry is also not sufficient for ensuring that advice addresses societal issues. Farmers’ choice for advice is more likely to reflect established trusted relationships than the ‘impartiality’ of the advisor. Workshop participants instead argued that policies should focus on increasing transparency (revealing vested interests); investing in ‘back office’ activities to ensure that advisors have access to reliable and relevant evidence; and ensuring that the full range of EU farmers have access to professional advice.     

Young farmers’ support under the Common Agricultural Policy and sustainability of rural regions: Evidence from Lithuania

The present study examines the influence of young farmers’ support system including both direct payments for young farmers and rural development measures initiatives under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) on the sustainability of rural regions. The intentions and decisions taken by young farmers in Lithuania are analysed within the rural sustainability concept. The empirical analysis relies on the questionnaire survey. In order to disentangle the possible effects of the CAP support on the farming sustainability (as it is perceived by the young farmers), we consider payments for farm establishment and expansion along with support for advisory services. The results show that young farmers’ support system under the CAP has the strongest perceived effect on income support in Lithuania without significant differences across different groups of farmers. The effect on investments is significantly lower for crop farms if opposed to the other farming types. Still, the results also indicate that environmental awareness of Lithuanian farmers is rather low as the demand for such advisory services appeared to be relatively low. The relatively high demand for advisory services on the business plan preparation suggests low levels of business administration and marketing skills among the young farmers, which indicates the need for development of the social dimension.     

Criteria for a system level evaluation of farm advisory services

Agricultural advisory services are meant to provide farmers with relevant knowledge and networks for innovation, as well as adjustments to policy and markets in agriculture. Despite substantial investment into these services, there has been little evaluation of their performance and impact, in particular at a system level. A system level analysis is especially challenging in countries with a diverse and fragmented advisory community such as the United Kingdom. This paper proposes criteria for assessing advisory services based on a conceptual framework for analysing characteristics of advisory services as a component of the wider Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System (AKIS). Using the example of the UK, we investigated characteristics pertaining to governance structures, capacity, management and advisory methods. Data were collected in an online survey of 80 agricultural advisory organisations. Findings showed that most criteria for functional advisory services were met: agricultural advisory organisations utilised diverse knowledge sources and cooperated to fill knowledge gaps; there was a stable workforce of advisors who received regular training; advisory organisations were flexible and adaptive; and all relevant advisory topics were covered. However, a number of client groups were not targeted by advisory organisations and some organisations used only a narrow range of advisory methods. The proposed criteria reflect a balance between a thorough assessment of a country’s advisory services and the typically limited time and budget available for regular evaluations. The criteria and associated proxy indicators should be fine-tuned to reflect the individual country’s situation, and quantitative survey data complemented by qualitative data.     

What Can We Learn from Droppers and Non-adopters About the Role of Advice in Agricultural Innovation?

In this article we assess the diversity of sources of advice identified by 678 adopters, 295 non-adopters and 107 droppers (or dis-adopters, who have ceased or reduced the use) of agricultural innovations across 13 European countries. For most innovations, the volume and composition of advisory supports (e.g. public advisory services, farm business organisations, NGOs, research and development sector, other farmers), at the whole farm level were similar between adopters, non-adopters and droppers. However, there were significant differences in relation to specific innovations. Farmers adopting digital technologies, soil-improving cropping systems, and common management of natural resources identified more diverse sources when assessing innovations, suggesting that more diverse advisory support supported successful implementation. For new on-farm activities, non-adopters had more varied sources of advice than adopters. This demonstrates that non-adoption can be a well-informed decision. Droppers typically identified fewer sources of advice on an innovation than adopters, particularly in the later stages of the innovation process, suggesting that lack of advice impeded successful implementation. The findings suggest that public funding for advisory services could usefully target emergent gaps: to support the provision of up-to-date advice on topics to farmers who have difficulty accessing advice, and to prevent unnecessary dropping by supporting the implementation of innovations.     

Style and Performance of Agricultural Market Advisory Services

This article develops measures of marketing style for advisory programs in corn and soybeans and estimates the relationship between style characteristics and pricing performance. Style is measured by the intensity of futures and options use, degree of activeness in marketing, and seasonality of sales. The data set consists of advisory programs tracked by the AgMAS project at the University of Illinois between 1995 and 2004. Results indicate that active programs making large bets on price movements obtain a higher average price than more conservative programs. This is consistent with active advisors possessing superior information and/or analytical skills rather than being overconfident. However, estimates of the relationship between pricing performance and activeness are sensitive to the inclusion of a single high-performing program.     

The EU’s ecological focus areas – How experts explain farmers’ choices in Germany

Ecological Focus Areas (EFAs) have recently been introduced as key element in the greening of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy. In 2015, farmers across the EU have implemented EFAs for the first time. Data for German federal states indicate a strong variance in EFA decisions with an overall dominance of catch crops, nitrogen fixing crops and fallow land – two of which bear limited benefits for biodiversity conservation. This article explores how experts explain EFA choices. We conducted 35 qualitative, semi-structured interviews with representatives from the Ministry for Agriculture, farm advisory services, and farmers’ associations in each federal state. Applying content analysis we clustered the factors mentioned as determinants for farmers’ EFA choices into the categories administrative considerations, economic considerations, local factors, ecosystem considerations and policy incentives. According to the interviewed experts, farmers have primarily registered measures that already existed on their farms. Administrative considerations dominate the identified determinants for farmers’ EFA decisions, and together with economic considerations appear to function as a negative incentive for EFA options that are beneficial for biodiversity, such as landscape elements and buffer strips. We conclude that conditions for EFA implementation were found to not effectively incentivise a higher share of biodiversity supporting characteristics in German agricultural landscapes. Based on a detailed discussion we extract recommendations on how to improve EFA implementation.     

Innovation in Labour Organisation and Social Conditionality: Implications for Farm Advisory Services

There is growing concern about the evolution of working conditions for employees on European farms. In the new Common Agriculture Policy (CAP), financial support to farmers will soon be subject to a social conditionality clause. As a result of this change in CAP regulations, in this paper we ask if the need for specific advice can already be foreseen? Examining recent investigations that focused on new forms of labour organisations on farms can help to answer this question. Investigations were conducted across France, combining qualitative field studies with a comprehensive analysis of statistical and administrative data. The results show a growing complexity of farm labour organisation that generates needs for new types of advice. In particular, an increasing proportion of the people working on farms are employed by another organisation (foreign and domestic service providers, employers’ alliances, etc.). The administrative data provides strong evidence of the scale of this trend which has little visibility in the agricultural census data. We should therefore be cautious about oversimplified representations of labour patterns at farm level. They can distort policy design, implementation and assessment by overlooking a part of the worker population and needs for new types of advice, including those that will be required to meet social conditionality requirements.     

The Territorial Dimension of CAP and Spatial Cohesion

Since the start of the CAP reform in the 1990s the demand for an increase of rural development measures has been intensified. However, up to now no comprehensive assessment of the territorial impacts of the CAP has been achieved. This article summarises the main findings of a recent study which was carried out under the European Union's ESPON programme on this issue. The regional analysis suggests that, at present, the CAP is not contributing towards the goal of more balanced and sustainable development across European territory. This finding is both valid for the more "traditional" CAP (Pillar 1) and the Rural Development measures, referred to as Second Pillar measures, indicating the emerging priority for these types of instruments. Yet, the great variation in the RDP priorities and implementation in the Member States underscore the wide scope for taking account of the spatial dimension more explicitly. In addition, the numerous best practice examples and the political support for RD action point to the untapped potential of local activities in rural areas. Strengthening the link to the spatial cohesion objectives is therefore a prerequisite for securing support by European citizens for future CAP payments.     

A Competitive,Sustainable and Diverse Agriculture: A View of the CAP Beyond 2013 Pour une agriculture compétitive,durable and variée : un point de vue sur la PAC après 2013 Eine wettbewerbsfähige,nachhaltige und vielfältige Landwirtschaft: Ein Ausblick auf die GAP nach 2013

A Competitive, Sustainable and Diverse Agriculture: A View of the CAP Beyond 2013 New challenges make clear that past achievements of the CAP cannot be taken for granted. A strong European agricultural policy remains necessary after 2013, at the service of Europe’s citizens and agricultural sector. However, in order to realise the vision embedded in the European agricultural model, the CAP will have to evolve. Beyond dealing with the negative consequences of the economic crisis, more attention should go to competitiveness and entrepreneurship. The functioning of the supply chain should be improved leading to a fairer distribution of costs and benefits. Producer organisations should be expanded and strengthened. Work is needed to put into practice the concept of green growth and to explore the synergy between the demand for public goods and the need for higher farm income. An improved system of direct support remains justified, to compensate for extra costs and to stabilise income. The CAP post-2013 should offer a strong EU framework, able to meet shared challenges, with clear objectives and sufficient funding. Within that framework, diversity is a fact, and regions should be able to deploy CAP policies and funds in a more flexible way to accommodate local needs and problems and to be able to react to changing circumstances.     

The Performance of Agricultural Market Advisory Services in Corn and Soybeans

The purpose of this article is to evaluate the performance of market advisory services for the 1995–2003 corn and soybean crops. A new database from the Agricultural Market Advisory Services (AgMAS) Project is used in the evaluation. This database should not be subject to survivorship and hindsight biases. Overall, the results provide little evidence that advisory services as a group outperform market benchmarks, particularly after considering risk. The evidence is more positive versus the farmer benchmarks, even after taking risk into account. Results also suggest that it is difficult to predict the pricing performance of advisory services across crop-years.     

Professional urban agriculture and its characteristic business models in Metropolis Ruhr,Germany

‘Low-cost specialization’, ‘differentiation’, and ‘diversification’ are three overarching business models of professional urban agriculture in developed countries. Manifold city-adjusted farm activities belong to these business models resulting in the characteristic farm heterogeneity of urban areas. This paper makes use of the business models as tool for a geo-statistical analysis to spatially investigate farming patterns in reference region Metropolis Ruhr, Germany. Additional farm interviews substantiate findings of the geo-statistical analysis by focusing on horticulture as a common farm activity towards ‘low-cost specialization’, direct marketing and participatory farming belonging to ‘differentiation’, and equestrian services as a representative of the ‘diversification’ business model. These farm activities and underlying business models concentrate and tend to spatially cluster in the metropolitan’s center where population density is highest and farmland proportion is lowest. Agriculture plays a significant role in Metropolis Ruhr cultivating about one-third of the metropolitan area, but on-going loss of farmland and short-term lease of land affect farms considerably by complicating access to land. Most differentiated and diversified farms require certain amount of farmland to be successful, which is threatened by further farmland losses along with increased competition for the remaining farmland. Long-term planning security is crucial for farms focusing on high added value crops and organic farming. Progressively emerging participatory farming activities demonstrate urban farms’ abilities to innovatively adapt to societal demands. Better knowledge on professional urban agriculture’s farm activities and business models is of importance for farms and their related advisory services to address the urban context in farm development strategies more accurately, but also for public authorities’ planning and policies in land-related decision making. Economic viability of professional urban agriculture is the key requirement for additional social, environmental, and landscape functions within urban areas.     

Implementing the EU eco-scheme in the Netherlands: A results-based points system approach

The latest reform of the EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) aimed at making it more results-oriented in order to ensure the sustainability of the sector. From 1 January 2023, in the new policy framework, the European Commission introduced a new tool – eco-schemes. This tool presents several advantages compared to the former ‘greening’ since it includes more ambitious targets than the previous policy framework. Another difference with the previous system is that the eco-schemes focus on results rather than efforts, while creating some room for the EU Member States to design measures which take into account existing local circumstances and needs. For the implementation of the eco-schemes, the Netherlands has developed a menu-points-system. The Dutch system is a good policy improvement compared to the previous ‘greening’ measures. Nevertheless, due to its hybrid form, it does not yet lead to the best possible cost-efficiency measures. To achieve that, a ‘pure’ point-reward (instead of an effort-reward) should have been implemented. Another novelty of the Dutch eco-scheme policy is the development of a simulation tool, which can assist farmers to test different choices before they make their final decisions.     

Our Common European Model of Agriculture

Our Common European Model of Agriculture
Future internal and external forces on European agriculture mean that the CAP may look very different after 2013. However large these changes, the CAP will need to retain its common principles based on the European Model of Agriculture (EMA). This became clear in an informal September meeting of EU agriculture ministers in Oulu, arranged by the Finnish Presidency. A strong CAP will be needed in the future but it will have to evolve to meet upcoming challenges. Work on the future CAP will need to start soon and the Oulu meeting may become known as the starting point for those discussions. The CAP will have to provide a reasonable environment for practicing agriculture for very different farmers in very diverse conditions, and facilitate the supply of a wide variety of goods and services to consumers and taxpayers as only truly multifunctional agriculture can. If the CAP can maintain these characteristics it has an important role to play in a future Europe. The meeting in Oulu was also an important milestone for a very special reason: for the first time, all ten New Member States took an active part in the EMA-debate with full rights and responsibilities as part of the Union. Once again this underlines the central role of our common European Model of Agriculture.     

Unconventional adjustment strategies for rural households in the less developed areas in Greece

International competition in agricultural production is intensifying following the implementation of the 1993 accord of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. The production of conventional farm products in surplus is being discouraged by means of indirect economic disincentives. The Common Agricultural Policy has already adjusted to unprotected national markets within the European Union and greater market orientation is being achieved mainly through price reductions. Farmers in the less developed areas in Greece, where agricultural activity is still the main source of income and employment, have been responding to policy reforms by seeking part-time employment and income in non-farm enterprises. The adoption of alternative, unconventional farm enterprises that use farm resources in an innovative and quantitatively different way does have the potential for bringing in a new source of income to farm business. For the purpose of this research three adjustment strategies were recognised. The ‘conventional’ (no change) pathway is based on traditional, region-specific products, production methods and services. The adoption of the ‘new crop’ pathway refers to the redeployment of resources into new agricultural products, whereas farms on the market integration Pathway redeploy resources into new marketing services and agricultural product processing on the farm. The new crop and the market integration pathways are identified as unconventional adjustment strategies. Results derived from multinomial logit analysis highlight the major constraints and opportunities associated with the adoption of new crops and market integration practices. Farmers who have adopted unconventional practices are influenced by factors external to the farm. such as contacts with institutions, and have a high probability of having higher debts. These farmers are likely to depend heavily on seasonal labour and rented land. The fact that market integration activities are associated with smaller farms in conjunction with off-farm work signifies the importance of establishing an integrated rural development policy approach. Public policy involvement in enhancing dissemination of information concerning unconventional enterprises is emphasised.     

What's in a Name? Defining New Entrants to Farming

New entrants to farming are eligible for CAP targeted supports. The intention of these supports is to promote innovativeness and sustainability in the agricultural sector through generational renewal. However, new entrants (successors or those completely new into the industry), still face multiple barriers above other longstanding farmers, including lack of access to necessary capital, land and housing. There is also ambiguity about the success of new entrant supports in achieving their stated objectives. We draw on results from an online survey distributed to anyone involved in farming in Europe, including European new entrants and those working in new entrant support services. Survey respondents were asked how they would define a ‘new entrant farmer’. A clear majority of respondents indicated that new entrants should be new to the industry; that is, not successors to existing farm businesses. A substantial minority of respondents indicated that new entrants should be establishing innovative new businesses, with an overlapping cohort emphasising sustainability. Very few respondents identified age as an important criterion. We argue that the new entrant definition utilised in policy supports could be more targeted towards policy objectives, distinguishing social justice supports (enabling newcomers to enter the sector), from supports for innovation (e.g. venture capital funds) and sustainability (greening the CAP).