Cited by 260Agricultural Innovations and PracticesAgriculture and Rural Development ResearchSustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis

Triggering Change: Towards a Conceptualisation of Major Change Processes in Farm Decision-Making

Open access
Sutherland, Lee-Ann, Burton, Rob J.F., Ingram, Julie, Blackstock, Kirsty, Slee, Bill, Gotts, Nick·2012·Journal of Environmental Management

Abstract

In this paper, we present a broad conceptualisation of major change in farm level trajectories. We argue that as a result of path dependency, major changes in farming practice primarily occur in response to 'trigger events', after which farm managers intensify their consideration of the options open to them, and may set a new course of action. In undertaking new actions, the farm system enters a period of instability, while new practices become established. Over time these new practices, if successfully achieving anticipated aims, lead to a further period of path dependency. Recognising and capitalising upon this pattern of events is important for the development of policies oriented towards incentivising major change in farming practices, and may explain why similar projects and/or policies influence some 'types' of farmers differently, and at different times. To illustrate our arguments, examples of this process are described in relation to empirical examples of major on-farm change processes, drawn from qualitative interviews with organic and conventional farmers in two English case study areas.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.03.013

Cites

79 of 79 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Bourdieu, P., 1990. The logic of practice. Cambridge, Polity Press.
  2. Bryman, A., 2001. Social Research Methods. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
  3. Burton, R.J.F., Dwyer, J., Blackstock, K., Ingram, J., Brown, K., Mills, J., Schwarz, G., Mathews, K., Slee, B., 2007. Influencing positive environmental behaviour among farmers and landowners -a literature review. Report to DEFRA.
  4. Burton, R.F., Wilson, G.A., 2006. Injecting social psychology theory into conceptualizations of agricultural agency: towards a post-productivist farmer self-identity? J. Rural Stud. 22, pp. 95-115.
  5. Dumas, C., Richer, F., St. Cyr, L., 1995. Factors that influence the next generation's decision to take over the family farm. Fam Business Review 82, 99-120.
  6. Kay, A., 2003. Path dependency and the CAP. Journal of European Public Policy 10, 405-420
  7. Kirk, E.A., Sherlock, K.L., Reeves, A.D., 2004. SUDS Law: Non-state actors and the haphazard route to the implementation of international obligations. J. Non-State Actors Int. Law 4, 87-109. · DOI
  8. Lockey, S., Halpin, D., 2005. The 'conventionalisation' thesis reconsidered: Structural and ideological transformation of Australian organic agriculture. Soc. Ruralis 45, 284-307.
  9. Maye, D., Ilbery, B., Watts, D., 2009. Farm diversification, tenancy and CAP reform: Results from a survey of tenant farmers in England. Journal of Rural Studies 25, 333-342.
  10. North, D.C., 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  11. Wilson, G.A., 2001. From productivism to post-productivism… and back again? Exploring the unchanged natural and mental landscapes of European Agriculture. Trans. Inst. Brit. Geog. 26, 77-102

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sutherland, L.-A., Burton, R. J. F., Ingram, J., Blackstock, K., Slee, B., & Gotts, N.
Affiliations
  • James Hutton Institute (GB)
  • Ruralis - Institute for Rural and Regional Research (NO)
  • Countryside and Community Research Institute (GB)
Corresponding author
Sutherland, Lee-Ann
Venue
Journal of Environmental Management
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-08
Volume
104
Pages
142-151
ISSN
0301-4797 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2021087969
Cited by
260
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 2
FWCI
29.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Environmental Management (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Repository (University of Gloucestershire) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agricultural Innovations and Practices
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Agriculture and Rural Development Research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Sustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
Keywords
major change, agricultural decision-making, path dependence, triggering events, organic farming, conventional farming, agricultural policy
MeSH terms
Agriculture, Decision Making

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review