Understanding the factors associated with adoption of ecological farming practices is a well-established topic of interest to agricultural economists. As the transition to more sustainable agriculture has become a policy priority for the European Union, broad and balanced reviews of this literature are important. We develop a systematic map of quantitative observational studies which describes the ecological practice(s) adopted, the frequency of inclusion and significance of a range of independent variables, and how the dependent variable is measured. We also conduct a quality assessment. We find that while socio-demographic variables and farm structural variables are frequently included, they were insignificant more often than they were significant. For behavioural factors we find stronger evidence for the importance of cognitive or attitudinal variables compared to dispositional attitudinal variables. We also find a growing interest in social factors which will be valuable for researchers to explore further and reflect on the policy implications of our findings.

Crop diversification (CD) encompasses practices such as extending crop rotation, cover cropping and intercropping practices, and growing minor crops. It has attracted increasing interest because it can produce both private benefits for farmers, including improved crop and soil health, and reduced inputs, and public goods for society, including greater biodiversity, carbon sequestration, and climate resilience. Nevertheless, CD is not widely practiced in Europe. This paper uses a conceptual framework based upon the literature on barriers to agricultural innovation and CD to guide a systematic-like literature review of existing review articles on the barriers to CD in Europe and a review of research from the European Crop Diversification Cluster, comprising six EU research projects. We compare barriers to CD uptake and identify opportunities to accelerate CD uptake, drawing four main conclusions. First, the barriers to CD are influenced by many factors: the specific crop, cropping method, geographical region, the farmer, the supply chain or market, and the institutional environment. Second, the barriers to CD uptake are interconnected and occur at multiple points along the supply chain; addressing barriers to CD uptake therefore requires a simultaneous and coordinated approach. Third, the inclusion of farmers' perspectives in the CD cluster research revealed novel barriers and solutions demonstrating that participatory and transdisciplinary agricultural research is needed to understand the on-farm reality and its influence on CD uptake. Lastly, farmers' decision-making warrants greater attention. The results highlight that farmers' decision-making is unpredictable and likely to focus on utility rather than profit maximization.

Greater resilience is needed for farms to deal with shocks and disturbances originating from economic, environmental, social and institutional challenges, with resilience achieved by adequate adaptive governance. This study focuses on the resilience capacity of farms in the context of multi-level adaptive governance. We define adaptive governance as adjustments in decision-making processes at farm level and policy level, through changes in management practices and policies in response to identified challenges and the delivery of desired functions (e.g. private and public goods) to be attained. The aim of the study is twofold. First, we investigate how adaptive governance processes at farm level and policy level influence the resilience capacity of farms in terms of robustness, adaptability and transformability. Second, we investigate the “fit” between the adaptive governance processes at farm level and policy level to enable resilience. We study primary egg and broiler production in Sweden taking into consideration economic, social and environmental challenges. We use semi-structured interviews with 17 farmers to explain the adaptive processes at farm level and an analysis of policy documents from the Common Agricultural Policy program 2014–2020, to explain the intervention actions taken by the Common Agricultural Policy. Results show that neither the farm level nor policy level adaptive processes on their own have the capacity to fully enable farms to be robust, adaptable and transformable. While farm level adaptive processes are mainly directed toward securing the robustness and adaptability of farms, policy level interventions are targeted at enabling adaptability. The farm- and the policy level adaptive processes do not “fit” for attaining robustness and transformability.