This is a comprehensive review of all published, quantitative studies focused on adoption of agricultural conservation practices in the United States between 1982 and 2017. This review finds that, taken as a whole, few independent variables have a consistent statistically significant relationship with adoption. Analyses showed that variables positively associated with adoption include the farmer self-identifying primarily as stewardship motivated or otherwise nonfinancially motivated, environmental attitudes, a positive attitude toward the particular program or practice, previous adoption of other conservation practices, seeking and using information, awareness of programs or practices, vulnerable land, greater farm size, higher levels of income and formal education, engaging in marketing arrangements, and positive yield impact expected. Some variables often thought to be important, such as land tenure, did not emerge as consistently important in this cross-study review. Other variables, such as farmers' sense of place, training, presence of institutional conditions supporting adoption, and the role of collective decision making are not measured in enough studies to draw conclusions but potentially have a relationship with adoption decisions. Implications for how to promote conservation adoption and directions for future research are discussed. Because positive attitudes and awareness of conservation programs or practices are positive predictors of adoption, practitioners should share benefits of specific practices and programs and leverage existing practice adoption. Further work to explore relationships between conservation adoption and the role of farmer identity, nuances of land tenure, and the influence of structural factors is needed. Moreover, we suggest that future research should focus on the impact of different messages and avenues of reaching farmers in order to continue to inform conservation practices. Future research should consider both individual and institutional factors that facilitate and constrain adoption.

Conservation practices (CPs) are integral to maintaining the long-term viability of agro-ecological systems. Because farming systems and farmers' values and attitudes are heterogeneous, factors that consistently predict conservation behaviors remain elusive. Moreover, heterogeneity is present among studies regarding the type of CPs examined, and whether behavioral intentions or actual behaviors were measured. This study considers the characteristics of each CP, and whether a given study measured behavioral intention or actual behavior, to better understand farmers' adoption of CPs. We reviewed and analyzed 35 years (1982-2017) of quantitative conservation adoption literature in the United States. We categorized CPs based on their primary purpose, the type of benefit they provide, and whether they are operational or structural. We also examined the following five CPs: conservation tillage, buffers or borders, soil testing, grassed waterways, and cover crops. In our behavioral intention and actual behavior analysis, we found that attitudinal factors predicted both conservation intention and action (actual behavior), whereas current or previous use of practices only influenced actions, not stated conservation intentions. In our analysis focusing on CP characteristics, we found that having specific knowledge about and positive attitudes toward the CP, adoption of other CPs, seeking and using information, larger farm size, and vulnerable land predicted actual adoption across nearly all CP categorizations. Nuances emerge when comparing predictors of CPs that share a particular characteristic. For example, we found farm characteristics to be comparatively more important in predicting adoption of soil management CPs than nutrient and livestock management CPs, and farmers' stewardship identity to be more important for permanent practices than operational practices.

In this paper, framing effects are investigated in a new context: farmer decision making about conservation tillage practices. Primary hypotheses include the following: (1) frames (i.e., different arguments about or conceptions of an issue) portraying conservation tillage as “profitable” will generate more interest in the tillage technique among farmers than a control frame presenting only basic information; (2) frames discussing potential payments for “environmental benefits” will generate more positive attitudes than frames discussing payment for “storing carbon (C)” to limit climate change; and (3) framing effects will vary based on subjects' prior beliefs and experiences. These hypotheses were tested using a survey-based experiment administered to a national sample of row-crop farmers. Contrary to expectations, the profit frame and both payment frames had no effect on farmers' interest in conservation tillage across our entire sample. Consistent with the third hypothesis, however, a negative framing effect was found for the profit frame on nonadopters who reported no use of no-till in the past two years. These results support the argument regarding the importance of prior beliefs in reactions to frames. They also suggest the possibility of modest financial payments “crowding out” intrinsic motivations for contributions to public goods such as soil conservation. From a policy perspective, these findings also suggest the relative inefficacy of offers of modest conservation payments or profitability frames in promoting no-till farming, especially among nonadopters, and the need to find alternative frames that avoid reinforcing an argument that nonadopters appear to have already considered and rejected.

Despite its economic and social benefits, agriculture is now a leading source of water pollution in the United States. While significant research effort has attempted to understand adoption of conservation practices on agricultural lands, relatively little research has explored the operation of specific agri-environmental policies in the United States. This research attempts to gain an understanding of how differing agricultural and sociopolitical contexts across the United States influence attempted participation in national agricultural conservation programs. Application rates in the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) differ across the 50 states, indicating potentially important differences in state setting that influence behavior of individual farm operators. A variety of agricultural and sociopolitical measures were included in a fractional logit model to assess factors contributing to varying rates of application to EQIP. Significant explanatory variables included high sales farm prevalence, tenancy rates, and views on federal environmental spending. There also appears to be a large regional effect, with states in the Southeast, Mountain West, and Northeast having higher application rates than those in the Corn Belt. The results of this analysis indicate that certain types of farmers are more likely to seek participation in this large agricultural conservation program. Further research is needed to assess the role of government agencies (federal, state, and local) in influencing participation rates and what role individual political opinion may play in decisions related to federal cost share programs.