Pro-environmental water quality behaviours: Understanding the barriers and facilitators from the perspective of farmers and agricultural advisors

Introduction. Water is one of the most important natural resources on Earth, essential for the survival of human, animal, and plant species. Protecting the quality of ground and surface waters is of utmost importance to preserve biodiversity, safeguard the environment, and protect human and animal health. The Grand Challenges of the 21st century include population growth, climate change, energy, and water supply. Agriculture is faced with the challenge of increasing food production at the pace of population growth and preserving the environment at the same time. Pollutants deriving from agricultural production are the leading cause of water quality deterioration worldwide with its detrimental impacts on the environment, and on the depletion of water supply. In this context, increasing the adoption of pro-environmental water quality behaviours by farmers is of utmost importance for the preservation of water quality. It is crucial for scientists in the fields of social, environmental and behavioural psychology, social economics, environmental science, and policy worldwide to join forces to address this urgent topic. There is a need to provide a deeper understanding of what is currently preventing farmers’ adoption of pro-environmental water quality behaviours in order to inform future policies. This understanding can only be reached through the consideration that several other actors may play a role in influencing farmers’ adoption of these behaviours. For instance, agricultural advisors may be uniquely capable of encouraging farmers to adopt pro-environmental water quality behaviours because of their facilitating role in the Agricultural Innovation System (AIS), depicting the close relationship they have with farmers. However, there is limited understanding of what is required for advisors to effectively support proenvironmental behaviour change by farmers. This research focused on the Republic of Ireland where several collaborative projects are in place to ensure cooperation between different actors involved in water quality management, monitoring and policy. Aims. The current research had three main aims: a) to understand the barriers and facilitators experienced by farmers in engaging with pro-environmental water quality behaviours using a bottom-up approach; b) to explore the barriers and facilitators experienced by advisors in supporting farmers’ pro-environmental water quality behaviours adopting a bottom-up approach; and c) to understand the factors influencing farmer behavioural readiness to engage with proenvironmental water quality behaviours adopting a second hand estimation approach. Methodology. The current research was conducted as part of the behavioural Psychology work package of the Irish WaterMARKE project, a research project funded by the Irish Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Irish Department of Agriculture, Food and The Marine (DAFM). It comprises of three studies addressing multiple stakeholders in the AIS. Specifically, Study 1 presented in Chapter 5 describes a qualitative study addressing farmer perspectives on the barriers and facilitators to farmers’ engagement with pro-environmental water quality behaviours; Study 2 presented in Chapter 6 describes a qualitative study addressing agricultural advisor barriers and facilitators in supporting farmers’ engagement with proenvironmental water quality behaviours; Study 3 presented in Chapter 7 describes a quantitative assessment survey completed by agricultural advisors, addressing the factors influencing farmer behavioural readiness to engage in pro-environmental water quality behaviours. The Capability Opportunity Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model (Michie et al., 2011) approach was used to allow the results of the three studies to be framed into specific behavioural components, namely: Psychological Capability which refers to Knowledge; Physical Capability which refers to Skills; Automatic Motivation which refers to Habits; Reflective Motivation which refers to Interest; Social Opportunity which refers to Social Support; Physical Opportunity which refers to Resources. Results. Farmer level barriers and advisor level barriers were equally identified. Farmer level barriers to the adoption of pro-environmental water quality behaviours were indicated by farmers (Study 1) in relation to Social and Physical Opportunity, while Psychological Capability and both Automatic and Reflective Motivation represented the perceived facilitators. However, agricultural advisors (Study 2) recognised that barriers for farmers exist also in the context of both Psychological and Physical Capability, and Automatic and Reflective Motivation. Both farmers and advisors have indicated that the level of trust in their professional relationship is important for a successful cooperation. However, farmer level barriers represented in turn obstacles to advisors’ ability to support farmers’ engagement with pro-environmental water quality behaviours. This shows a bidirectionality of the relationship between farmers and advisors. Indeed, the findings from Study 2 also highlighted the presence of advisor level barriers in relation to the advisor ability to support farmers’ engagement with pro-environmental water quality behaviours, other than just farmer level barriers. These included excessive workload, different levels of competency between advisor types, conflicting interests between advisor types, a lack of support at both management and policy levels, and inadequate resources, assessments and regulations. Finally, the findings from Study 3 suggested that COM-B behavioural components are affected differently by separate farmer cohorts, showing that farmer characteristics such as the type of farm system, the farm size, the engagement in activities producing Phosphorus (P) or Nitrogen (N) diffuse pollution, and the engagement in agri-environmental schemes are able to influence farmer behavioural readiness to engage with pro-environmental water quality behaviours. Conclusions. Increasing the desired adoption of pro-environmental water quality behaviours in farmers is a priority for the prevention of the detrimental impacts that agriculture pollution has on water quality, limiting the devastating consequences that decreasing water quality has on lives all over the planet. This research highlighted serious current direct and indirect limitations to farmers’ adoption of these behaviours, highlighting a need to approach the issue at multiple actor levels to enhance the effectiveness of pro-environmental policies. These findings represent an important advancement in the understanding of pro-environmental water quality behaviour adoption and suggest a need to rethink the direction of the advisor-farmer relationship within the AIS. This research presents relevant implications for policy making, setting an example on how to use behavioural models and framework to approach complex issues in intricate and dynamic systems, producing relevant and applicable recommendations derived directly from research findings. The Grand Challenges of the 21st century call for a cohesive, comprehensive and multidisciplinary approach to research and policy making and this research thesis, as part of the WaterMARKE project, represents an important step forward in this direction.2024-09-2