Comparing Australian public and farmer views on agricultural land use and management practices for sustainability

Using a survey of the public (n = 2032) and broadacre farmers (n = 351) in South Australia and Victoria, Australia, this research compares public and farmers' concerns regarding the acceptability and sustainability of agricultural operations. A principal component analysis was conducted on survey responses to 15 statements capturing environmental, social and governance issues related to agriculture practices and perceptions. This analysis revealed three dimensions: (1) issues related to animal welfare, greenhouse gas emissions and food safety; (2) issues related to farm input use; and (3) the use of socially valuable assets for private profits. Compared to farmers, the public were more concerned about the undersupply of public goods (e.g., farm animal welfare), and issues related to farm input use such as the use of synthetic fertilisers and chemicals. The public and farmers reported a similar level of concern regarding the use of socially valuable assets for private profit (e.g., irrigation water extraction). Regression analyses revealed associations between concerns and socio-demographic characteristics; environmental attitudes; sources of information; and farm characteristics. This study can act as a catalyst for developing practical strategies to analyse and overcome the issues, rather than symptoms, of concern affecting the agricultural industry and its sustainability

Climate change abatement and farm profitability analyses across agricultural environments

Management practices that reduce greenhouse gas emissions from farms or increase on-farm carbon storage can contribute to climate change mitigation. Farmers, however, are only likely to adopt new management practices if they contribute to farm profitability. We use the Agricultural Production Systems sIMulator (APSIM) to simulate how different cropping practices contribute to greenhouse gas abatement at case study farms in different grain growing regions across Australia. The APSIM simulations were subsequently used to calculate farm gross margins and conduct whole-farm economic modelling to estimate the costs of abatement under different management practices. Integrating detailed biophysical and economic analyses enables us to demonstrate the difference in potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions across agricultural environments. We show this for two case study farms in different grain growing regions, where we found both positive and negative relationships between greenhouse gas abatement and profitability for the management practices. This diversity in potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions across agricultural environments must be recognised in order to understand the role agriculture can play in climate change mitigation, and understand the implications of any potential future changes to include the industry in carbon pricing policies