Understanding what factors can positively or negatively affect farmers’ decisions to adopt new practices is of particular importance to agricultural researchers and practitioners. Few studies in adoption research have examined the role that fenceline neighbours can play in influencing the decisions of their neighbours to adopt new practices, especially in North America. Prior research on adoption suggests that there are spatial effects that exist in adoption decisions, such as the uptake of new farming practices. For example, previous qualitative research with (...) farmers has suggested that fenceline neighbours are influential but can have both positive and negative effects on adoption decisions. A standardized way of understanding fenceline neighbour influences is lacking. Our study presents a novel question set to examine fenceline neighbour dynamics and discusses its application in a survey examining the alternative practice adoption of adaptive multi-paddock grazing (AMP) by Canadian beef farmers. Our study highlights both the utility of our question set and how our question set can be used to provide new insights into local farmer social dynamics (e.g., how farmers engage with their neighbours and what factors influence engagement) and their influence on decisions to adopt. Specifically, our results identified two types of fenceline neighbour behaviors—engagers, and avoiders—and AMP farmers were more likely to be involved in engaged behaviors. Overall, we provide a question set that can be further integrated with trust, risk, and normative theoretical lenses to examine the role of fenceline neighbour dynamics in agricultural adoption and other contexts and call for more landholder research that examines neighbour-to-neighbour effects. (shrink)

Establishing interdisciplinary academic departments has been a common response to the challenge of addressing complex problems. However, the assumptions that guide the formation of such departments are rarely questioned. Additionally, the designers and managers of interdisciplinary academic departments in any field of endeavour struggle to set an organisational climate appropriate to the diversity of their members. This article presents a preliminary analysis of collaborative dynamics within two interdisciplinary university departments in Australia focused on sustainability. Social network diagrams and metrics of (...) coauthorship and cosupervision are analysed qualitatively. A "vicarious interdisciplinarity" was identified among key academics working narrowly in order to earn the resources that allow them to support others working interdisciplinarily. Those supported in this way appear to benefit from the esteem and nonredundant collaborative connections their mentors provide via this strategy, but they experience uncertainty about their own career opportunities in similar settings. This article thus unearths a conundrum of succession for interdisciplinary academic environments, and suggests that simple colocation of diverse academic stars is an inadequate strategy to achieve effective intradepartmental collaboration. (shrink)

Regenerative agriculture is an approach that places soil conservation at the center of its practices. As part of this approach, regenerative agriculture seeks to address concerns related to environmental and socio-economic dimensions of food production through the promotion of a range of best management practices. While regenerative agriculture has received support at various levels in many countries, including Canada, adoption remains low. Systems thinking strength has been recognized as facilitating farmer adoption of several regenerative agricultural practices including rotational grazing (RG). (...) However, few approaches have examined multiple types of systems thinking nor the breadth of a system which may underlay the diverse ways that systems thinking influences agricultural practice adoption and persistence. Furthermore, few studies have taken a quantitative approach into understanding how different systems are emphasized by adopters of RG within the context of systems thinking. Using survey data from program participants in a national producer training program, we explored the use of two measures of systems thinking, systems thinking strength and diversity of a system in RG adopters. Our research highlights how the inclusion of the breadth of systems farmers consider can help us better understand RG adopters and support efforts to recruit new adopters. Furthermore, our results suggest that adopters are not homogenous in the types of systems they emphasize in their farming nor in the strength of their systems thinking. Future training programs can utilize these insights to leverage existing system emphases of RG producers and integrate them in the development of training programs to attract potential adopters. (shrink)

Regenerative agriculture is an approach that places soil conservation at the center of its practices. As part of this approach, regenerative agriculture seeks to address concerns related to environmental and socio-economic dimensions of food production through the promotion of a range of best management practices. While regenerative agriculture has received support at various levels in many countries, including Canada, adoption remains low. Systems thinking strength has been recognized as facilitating farmer adoption of several regenerative agricultural practices including rotational grazing (RG). (...) However, few approaches have examined multiple types of systems thinking nor the breadth of a system which may underlay the diverse ways that systems thinking influences agricultural practice adoption and persistence. Furthermore, few studies have taken a quantitative approach into understanding how different systems are emphasized by adopters of RG within the context of systems thinking. Using survey data from program participants in a national producer training program, we explored the use of two measures of systems thinking, systems thinking strength and diversity of a system in RG adopters. Our research highlights how the inclusion of the breadth of systems farmers consider can help us better understand RG adopters and support efforts to recruit new adopters. Furthermore, our results suggest that adopters are not homogenous in the types of systems they emphasize in their farming nor in the strength of their systems thinking. Future training programs can utilize these insights to leverage existing system emphases of RG producers and integrate them in the development of training programs to attract potential adopters. (shrink)