Mediated Climate Change Perceptions: How Local Concerns and Global Attitudes Affect Farmer's Willingness to Adopt Agricultural Mitigation and Adaptation Practices

Background: This research analyzes how farmers’ past perceptions of climate, future climate change concerns, climate change belief, and risk perceptions influences their potential to adopt mitigation and adaptation practices.  While climate change is a global phenomenon, agricultural strategies for adaptation and mitigation are largely dependent on local efforts by rural communities and individual farmers.  Farmers’ attitudes about climate change and their willingness to adopt practices for mitigation and adaptation benefits may be affected by both local and global perspectives. Few studies have examined mitigation and adaptation together and what variables may affect the adoption of one type of practice over another. Methods: A mail survey of Yolo County, California farmers was conducted in the spring of 2011 with a total response rate of 34% (n=162). Survey questions measured the willingness of farmers to adopt 14 mitigation practices and nine adaptation practices (dependent variables) as well as demographics, farm characteristics, past climate perceptions, future local climate concerns, general belief in climate change, and the risks it poses to agriculture globally (independent variables).  Multiple mediation models for both mitigation and adaptation, which controlled for farmer demographics and farm characteristics, were built using regression methods to test for direct and indirect effects. Results: Farmers who believed that water availability had decreased in the past were more likely to believe in climate change and future risks to agriculture from climate change impacts (p < 0.001). As well, results suggest that farmers’ perceptions of past changes in water availability have indirect rather than direct effects on the adoption of mitigation and adaptation practices.  For adaptation, past water availability perceptions are mediated through local concerns for future water impacts (p <0.05).  In contrast, the indirect effect of past perceptions on mitigation practice adoption is mediated through farmers’ beliefs about climate change and perceptions of global rather than local risks to agriculture (p <0.05). Conclusions: Local concern for future impacts affects the adoption of adaptation practices while climate change belief and risk perceptions influence likelihood to adopt mitigation practices.  While these hypotheses should be tested in other regions and comparative studies, the results suggest that for policymakers and others trying to change behavior in agriculture, different strategies are necessary depending on the type of practice to be implemented.  Education and outreach related to climate change impacts may be best suited for encouraging adoption of adaptation practices, while information about general climate change science and risks may be necessary for mitigation adoption.