Monoculture and simplified two-crop rotation systems compromise the ecosystem services essential to crop production, diminish agricultural productivity, and cause detrimental effects on the environment. In contrast to the simplified two-crop rotation, diversified crop rotation (DCR) refers to rotation systems that contain three or more crops. Despite multiple benefits generated by DCR, its usage has dwindled over the past several decades. This paper examined determinants of farmers' adoption decisions and perceived benefits of DCR in the west margins of the U.S. Corn Belt where crop diversity has declined. We analyzed 708 farmer responses from a farmer survey conducted in the eastern South Dakota in 2018, accounting for county-level climate variables, as well as cropland data, soil and topographic variables in close proximity of the farm. Our findings indicated that farmers were more likely to utilize DCR as an adaptive strategy to cope with water deficit and reduce soil erosion on marginal land. Additionally, livestock integration and organic farming helped necessitate DCR adoption and magnify its benefits. Producer concerns towards lack of equipment and new crop profitability diluted producers' interests in DCR practice and compromised its benefits. Enhanced technical and policy support, along with infrastructure and market development, could help producers fully utilize DCR benefits and expand DCR usage to more regions.

The possibility of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by ruminants using improved grazing is investigated by estimating GHG emissions for cow-calf farms under light continuous (LC), heavy continuous (HC) and rotational grazing, also known as multi-paddock (MP), management strategies in Southern Great Plain (SGP) using life cycle assessment (LCA). Our results indicated a GHG emission with these grazing treatments of 8034.90 kg·CO₂e·calf⁻¹·year⁻¹ for cow-calf farms in SGP region, which is high, compared to that for other regions, due to the high percentage (79.6%) of enteric CH₄ emissions caused by relatively lower feed quality on the unfertilized rangeland. Sensitivity analyses on MP grazing strategy showed that an increase in grass quality and digestibility could potentially reduce GHG emission by 30%. Despite higher GHG emissions on a per calf basis, net GHG emissions in SGP region are potentially negative when carbon (C) sequestration is taken into account. With net C emission rates of −2002.8, −1731.6 and −89.5 kg C ha⁻¹·year⁻¹ after converting from HC to MP, HC to LC and from LC to MP, our analysis indicated cow-calf farms converting from continuous to MP grazing in SGP region are likely net carbon sinks for decades.

The use of intelligent decision support systems (DSS) in precision farming provides an opportunity to improve agricultural recommendations and reduce the impacts of agriculture on the environment. Despite the benefits offered by DDS, many farmers remain skeptical of using these hardware and software tools, and their adoption rates have remained low. A survey of 312 South Dakota farmers examined the barriers and opportunities for their engagement with DSS. Exploratory factor analysis was used to analyze 13 Likert scale survey items that probed farmers’ concerns about DSS. Factor loadings indicated that farmers’ concerns are related to high cost, insufficient knowledge, lack of confidence, and cyber security and privacy. A latent profile analysis (LPA) method was used to classify respondents into profiles or groups based on their dimensions of concerns (cost, knowledge, confidence, and security). Results of the LPA revealed that the sample of farmers could be grouped into four distinct profiles that ranged from low to high confidence in the use of DSS for agronomic decision‐making. Giving attention to farmer comfort/concern profiles allows for a more inclusive and better targeted engagement with farmers and potentially increase the adoption of PA. This knowledge can be vital for technology developers, policymakers, and extension services who are keen to promote PA usage among large‐, medium‐, and small‐scale farmers in the United States.