| dc.description.abstract | Biodiversity in the Netherlands is decreasing rapidly and its primary driver is agriculture (Kleijn et al., 2020). In an attempt to slow this trend, the Dutch government published a vision for Nature Inclusive Agriculture(NIA) as the future of farming (Ministerie van Economische Zaken, 2014). However, the uptake of NIA remains low (Vermunt et al., 2022). As a result, it is relevant to understand what factors improve its uptake among Dutch farmers. Literature indicates that social factors are important for the uptake of new practices among farmers. The influence of social norms in the wider agricultural network on individual farmers has been well-studied (E.g.:Case, 1992; Kuhfuss et al., 2016; H. Liu & Ruebeck, 2020; X. Liu et al., 2014; Munasib & Jordan, 2011). However, there is an academic lacuna concerning how early adopters influence the attitudes towards NIA among their local social network. This has led to the research question: How do early adopters of NIA influence the attitude towards NIA practices among their neighboring farmers? This was divided into three sub-questions focused on understanding the NIA farmers’ influence on legitimacy, knowledge diffusion, and adoption interest among their neighboring farmers. Legitimacy and knowledge are important components in understanding the farmers’ attitudes towards NIA. Furthermore, both are prerequisites for increasing the adoption of NIA.
Due do the lack of previous research, the theoretical framework was built using a range of theoretical concepts. This included concepts such as ‘good farming’ and communities of practice for the sub-question about legitimacy. The bounded normative influence(BNI) framework and boundary spanners for understanding knowledge diffusion, and characteristics important for adoption. The research aimed to empirically verify the theoretical framework. The research followed a case study design, focusing on farmers that received long-term land leases from Staatsbosbeheer(SBB) in exchange for turning their farm nature-inclusive. Data was collected through interviews.
The results suggested that the NIA farmer's influence is limited in their local environment. This is due to the limited personal acceptance of NIA by neighbors. Furthermore, knowledge diffusion from NIA farmers to neighbors was found to be surface-level. This is because the NIA farmers and conventional neighbors learn in different social networks. Lastly, barriers such as lack of additional land or compensation limited adoption interest among neighbors. However, though the results point to a limited impact of NIA farmers on their neighbors’ attitudes towards NIA, the results also point to the influence of NIA farmers on adoption in their wider network. Overall, the theory proved useful for the legitimacy-related research question. The BNI framework used for understanding knowledge diffusion was modified to include a wider set of circumstances. Lastly, the data was unable to provide significant insight into the theory used for adoption interest. However, the research was able to produce policy recommendations for the Dutch government to enhance NIA uptake. | |
