Understanding farmers' nutrient management decision-making is critical to minimizing nutrient loss to water resources. This research examines farmer decision-making in the United States surrounding nutrients (primarily nitrogen and phosphorus) and water quality among 105 farmers in Missouri, North Carolina, and Ohio. Data were collected between 2015 and 2016 using a mixed-methods approach of in-person farmer interviews and accompanying quantitative surveys with demographic and Likert ranking questions. This work presents findings regarding 1) how farmers made decisions, 2) who and what they consult with when making decisions, and 3) how their views on local water quality and regional pollution impact their choices. Farmers reported many resources for information when making nutrient management decisions including yield data, market prices, weather, product availability, prior experience, risk management/avoidance, university research reports, soil and tissue sampling, and social networks. Location also shaped how farmers made nutrient management decisions both because of differences in the structure and types of professional and informal support available to farmers as well as how individuals perceived the severity of local water problems. Younger farmers saw more room for improvement in their nutrient management practices while older farmers were more likely to be satisfied with current practices and decisions. Ultimately, our findings suggest we need to tailor programs and education to regional economic, social norm, and environmental contexts with recognition that past experiences and long-term knowledge shape how farmers receive new interventions. Constructing multifaceted approaches to address these diverse conditions is a critical step in improving water quality when it comes to nutrient management choices.

To identify elements of crisis response that might hold lessons for resilience beyond the current moment, we studied a central North Carolina food system during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Based on ethnographic interviews with farmers, employees and volunteers of food access organizations, and local government employees, our work found that connection, networking, innovation, and technology adoption were sources of strength and growth. Lessons: food system actors found that their social connections helped them to exchange information and resources, meet increased food needs among SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) participants and Latina/os immigrants, and combine efforts to adopt technologies and learn from new labor pools. Challenges: while navigating COVID‐19, food system actors faced challenges spanning labor, safety, information, government policies, supply shortages, weather, and unreliable information. In addition to lessons and challenges, we offer a series of future research directions that we identified in our study findings. Our study shows that small‐scale production and local food organization and government responses are important and dynamic parts of a resilient food system. Regional systems’ actors were able to pivot more quickly than large‐scale systems and presented a more flexible, locally suitable model that will likely prove adaptive beyond the pandemic.

Over half of lakes, reservoirs, and ponds in the United States are threatened or impaired, mostly by nutrients. One policy to improve water quality is water quality trading (WQT). While the concept is appealing, adoption of conservation practices in these programs has been anemic at best. Using a case study in the newly-formed WQT market in Jordan Lake, North Carolina, we propose that part of the problem is a large adoption premium (AP) for this program. AP is the amount that farmers require over and above direct adoption costs to participate. In this study, farmers were asked at in-person interviews about their willingness to accept (WTA) a payment to adopt a particular conservation practice (riparian buffers) in order to generate and sell credits. We compared farmers’ WTA to their direct cost of participation, which allowed us to estimate an AP. On average, the AP more than doubles the cost of purchasing credits. The AP sums all of the known indirect costs already cited in the literature, and more, into a single value and is relatively simple to estimate. Knowing the AP would improve the ability of policy makers to accurately estimate what is needed to boost adoption rates in WQT programs and other conservation programs as well.