Human Dimensions That Drive Soil Degradation - Principles of Sustainable Soil Management in Agroecosystems - page 180

economics, technology) affect land manager choices. Next we turn to key individual
psychological factors affecting land manager choices: risk perception and risk toler-
ance. In particular, we discuss the substantial literature focusing on one aspect of
agricultural land management, weed control.
The health of soil is, in part, the result of how each individual farmer perceives the
risks of weeds and decides to act on it. Key drivers of farmer weed management deci-
sions that either improve or degrade the health of the soil are social risk tolerances,
worldviews, and decision making based on rational, heuristic, or dual processes.
7.4.7.1 Social Risk Tolerances
Many farmers are risk-averse and would rather stick with what has been working
than try something new, even if a new weed management practice may reduce soil
erosion (Finnoff et al. 2006). In addition, perceived risks from the presence of any
weeds may lead farmers to seek eradication. Conventional farmers have very low or
zero tolerance for weeds (Johnson and Gibson 2006). This may stem in part from
established norms that encourage farmers to make their fields look “clean” for the
neighbors (Wilson et al. 2008). A clean field, an easy harvest, and preventing the
future spread of weeds are all cited as reasons to stay with the status quo.
7.4.7.2 Worldviews
Since the middle of the twentieth century, farmers in the United States have largely
shared a dominant social paradigm (DSP) that includes trust in progress, growth,
and private property rights; faith in science and technology; and the belief that nature
must be subdued and made useful (Beus and Dunlap 1994). But an emerging group
of alternative farmers exhibits a new environmental paradigm (NEP) (Beus and
Dunlap 1991). As a whole, farmers operating under the NEP reject economic growth
as inherently good and resist the notion that nature is primarily for human use. These
two worldviews can influence a farmer's decision making regarding land use in sig-
nificant ways. Farmers who fall more in line with the DSP may find it difficult to try
alternative farming methods that emphasize environmental health rather than eco-
nomic health. Their implicit trust in science and technology may make it difficult to
consider alternative strategies (Bell 2004). Many farmers believe that “science” will
consistently produce new technology to compensate for the lost in soil nutrients and
quality (Lyson and Welsh 1995; Lyson 2004).
Eckert and Bell (2005) found that conventional farmers split their “domains of
influence” when making decisions. They put the environment, family, and commu-
nity health and sustainability, all characteristics of the NEP, in a different domain
than economic profit and efficiency, part of the DSP. The decision to use chemicals
is facilitated by avoiding trade-offs between these domains of influence. Such deci-
sions are consistent with theories of judgment and decision making that highlight
how difficult it is for individuals to make trade-offs with values that are difficult to
quantify (Tetlock et al. 2000).
7.4.7.3 Rationality in Decision Making
While social risk tolerances and worldviews may play a key role in a farmer's likelihood
to be open or averse to weed management practices that decrease soil degradation,