Finding common ground: Identifying barriers to sustainable agriculture transitions among Upper Midwest row crop farmers

View the project final report

Commodities

• Agronomic: corn, grass (misc. perennial), soybeans
• Animals: bovine

Practices

• Animal Production: feed/forage, grazing - rotational
• Education and Training: participatory research
• Production Systems: agroecosystems, integrated crop and livestock systems
• Sustainable Communities: local and regional food systems, partnerships, public participation, sustainability measures

Agricultural systems that build soil carbon and diversify our landscapes provide ecosystem services that benefit farmers and society at large. Perennial pastures with well-managed rotational grazing seem to offer the best opportunity for achieving these benefits, while also contributing to an agricultural system that is profitable and resilient. However, if we are to transform our agricultural system from one dominated by annual row crops to one dominated by perennial pastures, we need the perspective of row crop farmers to create a successful transition.

This work aimed to identify barriers and opportunities for row crop farmers to transition to perennial agriculture by exploring social norms around farming. This included listening to farmers’ motivations for their practices, future goals, and current challenges via semi-structured interviews and two farmer workshops. Specifically, row crop farmers in eastern Iowa and southwest Wisconsin were contacted using a snowball sampling approach, first beginning with farmer contacts known to the research team. Interviews were conducted with 34 farmers, with 22 and 12 farmers located in Iowa and Wisconsin, respectively. After preliminary analyses of the interviews, we held one workshop in Wisconsin followed by one in Iowa to share our initial interpretations from the interviews, receive feedback, and ask follow-up questions. This research was important in building relationships with farmers and identifying shared goals.

Through engaging row crop farmers in these conversations, we learned that farmers are striving for economic, environmental, and social goals simultaneously. Farmers used comparisons across space (e.g., neighboring farmers) and time (e.g., how the previous generation farmed) to assess if they were meeting these goals. Importantly, the environmental impacts of farming today were often described in comparison to prior practices, such as moldboard plowing, contributing to farmers’ sense of being good environmental stewards. Thus, this sentiment could limit the desire for change if farmers feel their environmental goals are already met. Some social goals farmers highlighted were maintaining small family farms and their rural communities, and when compared to previous generations, several farmers expressed a feeling of moving away from those ideals. Therefore, focus on these goals could be an important step in motivating change. However, most farmers did not view grazed perennial pastures as an economically viable farming practice, at least not on ground perceived as suitable for row crops. Rather, it was described as a practice better suited for marginal land.

Thus, these results illustrate that while these farmers have goals that align with the outcomes that could result from more grazed perennial pasture on the landscape, this practice is not seen as feasible. As a result, next steps should include collaboratively identifying which specific outcomes farmers and community members desire. By adopting this forward-thinking approach, rather than comparisons to the past, we can clearly define goals for these regions. These visions for the future can then facilitate conversations about what transitions are necessary to get there and if practices beyond conservation adoption within row crop systems must be part of the solution.

Through conversations with row crop farmers about transitions to sustainable agriculture, learning opportunities are present for both farmers and researchers. For researchers, two key outcomes of this work were to 1) increase knowledge of barriers and opportunities to transitioning towards more grazed perennial pasture on the landscape, and 2) strengthen relationships with row crops farmers. These outcomes would ensure more row crop farmer perspectives are represented in perennial agriculture discussions, which is important given that row crop farmers are often less likely to engage in these conversations. As a long-term outcome of this research, increased adoption of perennial agriculture is anticipated as strategies to address identified barriers are incorporated into transformation plans. We pursued these objectives by using semi-structured interviews and farmer workshops as an opportunity to ask to understand, listen intently, and value farmer expertise.

While the emphasis of this research was on listening to row crop farmers and learning from them, we also anticipated two learning outcomes for row crop farmers: 1) to reflect on the opportunities and limitations of our current agriculture system, and 2) to hear from and engage with other farmers, including those whose perspective may differ from their own. We aimed to achieve those outcomes through asking open-ended, thought-provoking questions during the semi-structured interviews as well as by offering an opportunity to come together with other farmers during an in-person workshop.