Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 375

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Farmers’ intrinsic motivations, barriers to the adoption of conservation practices and effectiveness of policy instruments: Empirical evidence from northern Australia

Open access
Greiner, Romy, Gregg, Daniel·2011·Land Use Policy

Abstract

The rate and extent of adoption of conservation practices by farmers is influenced, in principle, by characteristics of the practices and those of the farmers. Governments use policy instruments to increase the rate of adoption of practices which generate public benefits if it is deemed that privately optimal adoption rates will not lead to publicly optimal conservation outcomes. Recent nation-wide conservation programs in Australia have attracted criticism for low levels of effectiveness and efficiency. Could it be that program design has ignored key adoption factors, in particular characteristics of the target audience? If adoption is subject to personal factors, such as the motivations for farming, then it is likely that so are farmers’ responses to policy approaches and instruments. In this case study, surveys were conducted of farmers in three regions within the tropical savannas of northern Australia, where land-use systems are characterized by large-scale broad-acre beef grazing enterprises. Inter alia, these surveys collected data on graziers’ motivations, impediments to adoption of conservation practices, and perceived effectiveness of policy instruments in overcoming impediments. The research found that graziers had a very high level of conservation and lifestyle motivation and were motivated to lesser extents by financial/economic and social considerations, pointing to a strong stewardship ethic of graziers, or altruistic motif. Motivational profiles were significantly correlated with farmers’ perceptions about what constrained them from implementing conservation based management systems. Motivational profiles also explained differences in farmers’ perceptions of and stated propensity to interact with policy instruments, particularly at a regional scale and in the context of historical government interventions. On the basis of the empirical evidence presented, governments would be well advised to harness the diverse set of aspirations and motivations of farmers when designing conservation programs rather than. In particular, conservation programs need to take advantage of farmers’ stewardship ethic for maximum effectiveness and efficiency, and minimize the risk of crowding out intrinsic motivation and altruistic behaviours.

Overview

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.landusepol.2010.06.006

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 27 references

Cited by

See all 375

Metadata

Authors
Greiner, R., & Gregg, D.
Venue
Land Use Policy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-01
Volume
28
Issue
1
Pages
257-265
ISSN
0264-8377 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2075605817
Cited by
375
References
27
FWCI
23.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Farmers’ intrinsic motivations, barriers to the adoption of conservation practices and effectiveness of policy instruments: Empirical evidence from northern Australia. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.landusepol.2010.06.006
The paper
Greiner, R., & Gregg, D. (2011). Farmers’ intrinsic motivations, barriers to the adoption of conservation practices and effectiveness of policy instruments: Empirical evidence from northern Australia. Land Use Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2010.06.006

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.