Extension and management pathways for enhanced farm sustainability: evidence from Irish dairy farms

Balaine, Lorraine; Läpple, Doris; Dillon, Emma J; Buckley, Cathal

doi:10.1093/erae/jbac033

Cited by 18Agricultural Innovations and PracticesAgricultural Development and ManagementSustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis

Extension and management pathways for enhanced farm sustainability: evidence from Irish dairy farms

Open access

Balaine, Lorraine, Läpple, Doris, Dillon, Emma J, Buckley, Cathal·2023·European Review of Agricultural Economics

DOI 10.1093/erae/jbac033

Open this paper in CoChat — free account Open PDF

Abstract

This article examines pathways among farmers’ extension participation, the uptake of recommended farm management practices and economic and environmental sustainability. We explore the ‘win-win’, efficiency-based focus of the Irish hybrid extension programme using an unbalanced panel dataset of dairy farms from 2010 to 2019. We apply two-way fixed effects regression models and sensitivity analyses to ensure the robustness of our results to effect heterogeneity and omitted variable bias. Our findings reveal that extension participation has a limited association with the adoption of recommended practices. These practices might be associated with economic benefits, while their environmental effects are not evident. Additionally, extension participation is not found to have a direct association with sustainability outcomes. These findings have important implications for extension programmes that focus on economic and environmental outcomes.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This paper examines whether participation in Ireland’s hybrid dairy extension discussion groups improved recommended management practices and farm economic/environmental sustainability from 2010 to 2019. It finds limited evidence that extension participation increased adoption of recommended practices, some economic links for those practices, and no robust evidence of environmental benefits.

Key findings

In the pooled 2010–2019 sample, discussion group members were 48.9% of observations and had participated for about 9.5 years on average; both members and non-members were below advisory targets, with homegrown grass at 78.12% vs 77.41% (target 93%) and calving rate at 83.45% vs 80.53% (target 90%).
TWFE results show discussion group participation had no significant association with homegrown grass (0.042, SE 0.095) or calving rate (0.13, SE 0.083); these insignificant effects for homegrown grass, cost and margin were robust to both sensitivity analyses.
Homegrown grass had a robust positive association with gross margin per cow (6.52, SE 1.02), while calving rate had positive TWFE associations with margin (4.93, SE 0.56) and negative associations with cost (−0.045, SE 0.017) but was not robust to effect heterogeneity.
Environmental effects were not evident: homegrown grass was negatively associated with nitrogen surplus (−0.94, SE 0.22) but not robust; calving rate was positively associated with nitrogen surplus (0.19, SE 0.10); neither practice significantly affected GHG per kg FPCM. Only 4 of 14 relationships were robust to both effect heterogeneity and omitted variable bias.

Methods

Uses an unbalanced panel of Irish dairy farms from the Teagasc National Farm Survey, 2010–2019: 2,848 observations across 437 farms, reduced to 2,241 observations for main analysis due to one-year lags; GHG models use 1,711 observations from 2013–2019.
Estimates two-way fixed effects regressions with individual and time fixed effects, farm-clustered standard errors, and one-year lags for discussion group participation and selected controls.
Robustness checks include subsample analyses for effect heterogeneity and the Cinelli and Hazlett (2020) omitted variable bias sensitivity analysis; the paper states it does not claim causal identification.

Limitations

The authors state three main limitations: only partial effects for selected indicators were explored; the analysis did not identify the benefits farmers perceive from continued participation; and observational data without natural experiments or instrumental variables make causal impact evidence difficult.
The text also notes data constraints: GHG data are available only after 2013, reducing that sample; calving rate is derived using national averages for stillbirths (about 4%) and twinning (about 2%); and for members who joined in or before 2010, initial participation year is self-declared.
Evident from the results: many estimates are sensitive to effect heterogeneity (only 6 of 14 coefficients robust) and omitted variable bias (11 of 14 robust), so only four relationships are robust to both, limiting strong conclusions.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/erae/jbac033

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 48 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Findingown data
Extension participation has a limited association with the adoption of recommended farm management practices under study.
“Our findings reveal that extension participation has a limited association with the adoption of recommended practices.”
- Also stated in: § 1. Introduction · plain
  “Overall, our findings reveal that extension participation has a limited association with the adoption of recommended practices under study.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
The recommended farm management practices under study might be associated with economic benefits.
“These practices might be associated with economic benefits”
- Also stated in: § 1. Introduction · hedged
  “These practices might be associated with economic benefits”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Extension participation is not found to have a direct association with sustainability outcomes.
“Additionally, extension participation is not found to have a direct association with sustainability outcomes.”
- Also stated in: § 1. Introduction · plain
  “Additionally, extension participation is not found to have a direct association with sustainability outcomes.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
The environmental effects of the recommended farm management practices under study are not evident.
“while their environmental effects are not evident”
- Also stated in: § 1. Introduction · plain
  “while their environmental effects are not evident”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
The effect of discussion group participation on nitrogen surplus is only significant for more established members who have been participating in discussion groups for longer than the median of members' pooled sample.
“the effect of discussion group participation is only significant for more established members who have been participating in discussion groups for longer than the median of members' pooled sample.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

Findingcitation
Both discussion group members and non-members are below the advisory target of 93 per cent of homegrown grass in the diet of dairy cows.
“However, both discussion group members and non-members are below advisory targets of 93 per cent of homegrown grass in the diet of dairy cows and 90 per cent in-calf rates (Teagasc, 2016).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Teagasc, 2016
  Not checked in the free run.
Findingown data
Calving rate is positively associated with nitrogen surplus per ha.
“While homegrown grass is negatively associated with nitrogen surplus per ha, the calving rate has a positive association with this indicator.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingreasoning
Discussion group members have larger nitrogen surpluses per ha than non-members.
“In terms of farm environmental sustainability, while discussion group members achieve lower GHG emissions per unit of output than non-members, they have larger nitrogen surpluses per ha.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
The effect of discussion group participation on nitrogen surplus is not stable across all three subsample estimations.
“The results suggest that the effect of discussion group participation is not stable across all three estimations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Household is the largest predictor of discussion group participation.
“we identify household and stocking rate as the largest predictors of discussion group participation and nitrogen surplus, respectively”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group members are more productive than non-members.
“In general, discussion group members are more productive than nonmembers, and more productive farms achieve lower GHG emissions per unit of output.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group members achieve higher shares of homegrown grass than non-members.
“They indicate that discussion group members achieve higher shares of homegrown grass and calving rates than non-members.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Homegrown grass is positively associated with gross margin per cow.
“Specifically, both management practices are negatively associated with direct production costs per kg of FPCM and positively associated with gross margin per cow.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group participation does not have a significant effect on the share of homegrown grass.
“the results in Table 2 indicate that discussion group participation does not have a significant effect on the share of homegrown grass nor calving rate.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group participation is positively associated with nitrogen surplus per ha.
“Discussion group participation is positively associated with nitrogen surplus per ha, but it has a negative association with GHG emitted per kg of FPCM.”
- Also stated in: § 6.3. Summary of findings and discussion · hedged
  “Moreover, the TWFE results suggest that discussion group participation has a positive association with nitrogen surplus and a negative association with GHG emitted per unit of milk produced (Table 2)”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Farm economic sustainability is higher for discussion group members than for non-members.
“Table 1 also shows that farm economic sustainability is higher for members than non-members.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group participation does not have a significant effect on calving rate.
“the results in Table 2 indicate that discussion group participation does not have a significant effect on the share of homegrown grass nor calving rate.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
If confounders explained 100 per cent of the residual variance of nitrogen surplus, they would need to explain 0.68 per cent of the residual variance of discussion group participation to fully account for the effect reported in Table 2.
“if confounders explained 100 per cent of the residual variance of nitrogen surplus, they would need to explain 0.68 per cent of the residual variance of discussion group participation to fully account for the effect reported in Table 2”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Homegrown grass has a positive association with farm economic performance.
“the results reveal that homegrown grass and calving rate have a positive association with farm economic performance.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Calving rate is negatively associated with direct production costs per kg of FPCM.
“Specifically, both management practices are negatively associated with direct production costs per kg of FPCM and positively associated with gross margin per cow.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Homegrown grass is negatively associated with direct production costs per kg of FPCM.
“Specifically, both management practices are negatively associated with direct production costs per kg of FPCM and positively associated with gross margin per cow.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Calving rate has a positive association with farm economic performance.
“the results reveal that homegrown grass and calving rate have a positive association with farm economic performance.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group participation does not have a significant effect on direct production costs per kg of FPCM.
“the results in Table 2 show that discussion group participation does not have a significant effect on economic outcomes, i.e. direct production costs per kg of FPCM and gross margin per cow.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Calving rate is positively associated with gross margin per cow.
“Specifically, both management practices are negatively associated with direct production costs per kg of FPCM and positively associated with gross margin per cow.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group members achieve higher calving rates than non-members.
“They indicate that discussion group members achieve higher shares of homegrown grass and calving rates than non-members.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Stocking rate is the largest predictor of nitrogen surplus.
“we identify household and stocking rate as the largest predictors of discussion group participation and nitrogen surplus, respectively”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingnone given
More productive farms achieve lower GHG emissions per unit of output.
“In general, discussion group members are more productive than nonmembers, and more productive farms achieve lower GHG emissions per unit of output.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Homegrown grass is negatively associated with nitrogen surplus per ha.
“While homegrown grass is negatively associated with nitrogen surplus per ha, the calving rate has a positive association with this indicator.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group participation does not have a significant effect on gross margin per cow.
“the results in Table 2 show that discussion group participation does not have a significant effect on economic outcomes, i.e. direct production costs per kg of FPCM and gross margin per cow.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingreasoning
Discussion group members achieve lower GHG emissions per unit of output than non-members.
“In terms of farm environmental sustainability, while discussion group members achieve lower GHG emissions per unit of output than non-members, they have larger nitrogen surpluses per ha.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
The strength of association with confounders as strong as household is R2_Y~Z|X,D = 0.14 per cent for nitrogen surplus.
“We find that the strength of association with confounders as strong as household would be 𝑅 2 𝐷∼𝑍|𝑋 = 0.05 per cent for discussion group participation and 𝑅 2 𝑌 ∼𝑍|𝑋, 𝐷 = 0.14 per cent for nitrogen surplus.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
If confounders explained less than 7.92 per cent of the residual variance of both discussion group participation and N surplus, they would not be strong enough to overturn or explain away the effect reported in Table 2.
“If confounders explained less than 7.92 per cent of the residual variance of both discussion group participation and N surplus, they would not be strong enough to overturn or explain away the effect reported in Table 2”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group participation is negatively associated with GHG emitted per kg of FPCM.
“Discussion group participation is positively associated with nitrogen surplus per ha, but it has a negative association with GHG emitted per kg of FPCM.”
- Also stated in: § 6.3. Summary of findings and discussion · hedged
  “Moreover, the TWFE results suggest that discussion group participation has a positive association with nitrogen surplus and a negative association with GHG emitted per unit of milk produced (Table 2)”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
The strength of association with confounders as strong as household is R2_D~Z|X = 0.05 per cent for discussion group participation.
“We find that the strength of association with confounders as strong as household would be 𝑅 2 𝐷∼𝑍|𝑋 = 0.05 per cent for discussion group participation and 𝑅 2 𝑌 ∼𝑍|𝑋, 𝐷 = 0.14 per cent for nitrogen surplus.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Homegrown grass has a negative and statistically significant effect on nitrogen surplus (coefficient -0.94, significant at 1%).
“group t-1 Home- | (0.095) | (0.083) | (0.043) -0.13 *** | (1.72) 6.52 *** | (0.38) -0.94 *** | (0.0014) 0.00048”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Improving calving rates is associated with positive economic outcomes.
“The findings also reveal that improving calving rates is associated with positive economic outcomes (Table 2)”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Calving rate has a positive and statistically significant effect on margin (coefficient 4.93, significant at 1%).
“Calving | | | -0.045 *** | 4.93 *** | 0.19 * | 0.00082”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
The sensitivity analysis to effect heterogeneity shows that participation is beneficial for more established members.
“but the sensitivity analysis to effect heterogeneity shows that participation is beneficial for more established members (Table D1 in Appendix D).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
All effects related to the calving rate are robust to OVB.
“As all effects related to the calving rate are robust to OVB (Table 5), effect heterogeneity is worth exploring in more detail.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
The TWFE results suggest that the effect of discussion groups on the calving rate is insignificant.
“the TWFE results suggest that the effect of discussion groups on the calving rate is insignificant (Table 2)”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Calving rate has a positive and statistically significant effect on nitrogen surplus (coefficient 0.19, significant at 10%).
“Calving | | | -0.045 *** | 4.93 *** | 0.19 * | 0.00082”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
The positive effect of homegrown grass on margin remains statistically significant when controlling for a confounder as strong as the largest predictor of the outcome (BTSCC).
“5.04 *** (3.92)”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Over the studied period, discussion group participation has a robust, insignificant association with homegrown grass.
“However, over the studied period, we find that discussion group participation has a robust, insignificant association with homegrown grass (Tables 2 and 5)”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
In none of the analyses performed in this study were the calving rate effects beneficial from an environmental perspective.
“Finally, it is worthwhile to highlight that in none of the analyses performed in this study were the calving rate effects beneficial from an environmental perspective.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Calving rate has a lack of robustness for nitrogen surplus.
“| Calving rate | No | Yes | Lack of robustness”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group participation has an insignificant effect on homegrown grass share.
“Homegrown | Discussion group t-1 | Yes | Yes | Insignificant effect”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
The effects of improving calving rates on gross margin per cow are more mixed.
“Notably, improving calving rates is associated with positive cost implications for farmers with low cow reproductive performance, while the effects are more mixed for gross margin per cow.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
The share of homegrown grass in the diet of dairy cows has a robust, positive association with gross margin per cow.
“the results reveal that the share of homegrown grass in the diet of dairy cows has a robust, positive association with gross margin per cow (Tables 2 and 5).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group participation has an insignificant effect on margin.
“Margin | Discussion group t-1 | Yes | Yes | Insignificant effect”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Homegrown grass has a positive effect on margin.
“| Homegrown grass | Yes | Yes | Positive effect”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
The results are more sensitive to effect heterogeneity than to OVB.
“As can be seen, the results are more sensitive to effect heterogeneity than to OVB.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Homegrown grass has a negative and statistically significant effect on cost (coefficient -0.13, significant at 1%).
“group t-1 Home- | (0.095) | (0.083) | (0.043) -0.13 *** | (1.72) 6.52 *** | (0.38) -0.94 *** | (0.0014) 0.00048”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group participation has a lack of robustness for calving rate.
“Calving rate Discussion group t-1 | No | Yes | Lack of robustness | |”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group participation (t-1) has a positive and statistically significant effect on nitrogen surplus (coefficient 1.35, significant at 1%).
“Discussion | 0.042 | 0.13 | -0.015 | -0.060 | 1.35 *** | -0.0029 **”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingreasoning
The hybrid extension programme does not have a direct association with farm sustainability outcomes.
“The results also suggest that the hybrid extension programme does not have a direct association with farm sustainability outcomes.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Improving calving rates is associated with positive cost implications for farmers with low cow reproductive performance.
“Notably, improving calving rates is associated with positive cost implications for farmers with low cow reproductive performance, while the effects are more mixed for gross margin per cow.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
The study did not provide statistically significant evidence of environmental benefits associated with the Irish hybrid extension programme.
“Our study did not provide statistically significant evidence of environmental benefits associated with the Irish hybrid extension programme”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
The Irish hybrid extension programme has a limited association with the uptake of recommended farm management practices.
“Overall, the findings of this study reveal that the Irish hybrid extension programme has a limited association with the uptake of recommended farm management practices.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Calving rate has a lack of robustness for margin.
“| Calving rate | No | Yes | Lack of robustness”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Homegrown grass has a lack of robustness for cost.
“| Homegrown grass | Yes | No | Lack of robustness”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Homegrown grass has a lack of robustness for GHG emissions.
“| Homegrown grass | Ye | No | Lack of robustness”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group participation has an insignificant effect on cost.
“Cost | Discussion group t-1 | Yes | Yes | Insignificant effect”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group participation has a lack of robustness for GHG emissions.
“GHG | Discussion group t-1 | No | Yes | Lack of robustness”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group participation (t-1) has a negative and statistically significant effect on GHG emissions (coefficient -0.0029, significant at 5%).
“Discussion | 0.042 | 0.13 | -0.015 | -0.060 | 1.35 *** | -0.0029 **”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group participation has a robust, insignificant association with farm economic performance (direct production costs per unit of milk produced and gross margin per cow).
“Our findings show that participation has a robust, insignificant association with farm economic performance (i.e.direct production costs per unit of milk produced and gross margin per cow) (Table 5).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Homegrown grass has a positive and statistically significant effect on margin (coefficient 6.52, significant at 1%).
“group t-1 Home- | (0.095) | (0.083) | (0.043) -0.13 *** | (1.72) 6.52 *** | (0.38) -0.94 *** | (0.0014) 0.00048”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Calving rate has a negative and statistically significant effect on cost (coefficient -0.045, significant at 1%).
“Calving | | | -0.045 *** | 4.93 *** | 0.19 * | 0.00082”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
Calving rate has a lack of robustness for GHG emissions.
“| Calving rate | No | Yes | Lack of robustness”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
11 out of 14 coefficients are robust to OVB.
“only 6 out of 14 coefficients are robust to effect heterogeneity, while 11 out of 14 coefficients are robust to OVB.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Discussion group participation has a lack of robustness for nitrogen surplus.
“Nitrogen | Discussion group t-1 | No | Yes | Lack of robustness”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingreasoning
Three out of the four homegrown grass effects are sensitive to OVB.
“Three out of the four homegrown grass effects are sensitive to OVB.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Only 6 out of 14 coefficients are robust to effect heterogeneity.
“only 6 out of 14 coefficients are robust to effect heterogeneity, while 11 out of 14 coefficients are robust to OVB.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Findingown data
Despite sensitivity to OVB, the TWFE estimates for cost and nitrogen surplus are in the expected direction.
“However, it is worth noting that, despite sensitivity to OVB, the TWFE estimates for cost and nitrogen surplus are in the expected direction (Table 2).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
The positive effect of calving rate on margin remains statistically significant when controlling for a confounder as strong as the largest predictor of treatment (BTSCC).
“4.81 *** (8.59)”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Findingown data
The negative effect of calving rate on cost remains statistically significant when controlling for a confounder as strong as the largest predictor of treatment (BTSCC).
“-0.043 *** (-2.56)”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Premisecitation
The TWFE estimator is sensitive to effect heterogeneity, notably when using continuous treatments.
“the estimator is sensitive to effect heterogeneity, notably when using continuous treatments (Callaway, Goodman-Bacon and Sant'Anna, 2021).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Callaway, Goodman-Bacon and Sant'Anna, 2021 source
  Not checked in the free run.
Interpretationreasoning
The study questions the 'win-win', efficiency-based approach for achieving greater farm sustainability in hybrid extension schemes.
“The study questions the 'winwin', efficiency-based approach for achieving greater farm sustainability in hybrid extension schemes.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Interpretationreasoning
Worst-case confounders explaining 100 per cent of the residual variance of the outcome and as strongly associated with discussion group participation as household would not eliminate the estimated effect either.
“because the bound for 𝑅 2 𝐷∼𝑍|𝑋 = 0.05 per cent is less than 𝑅 2 𝑌 ∼𝐷|𝑋 = 0.68 per cent, 'worst-case confounders' explaining 100 per cent of the residual variance of the outcome and as strongly associated with discussion group participation as household would not eliminate the estimated effect either.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Premisenone given
Only Nordin and Höjgård (2017) analysed the impact of extension participation on an environmental sustainability indicator, i.e. farm nutrient surplus.
“only Nordin and H ö jgård (2017) analysed the impact of participation on an environmental sustainability indicator, i.e. farm nutrient surplus.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Nordin and H ö jgård (2017)
  Not checked in the free run.
Interpretationreasoning
Differences in nitrogen surplus between discussion group members and non-members are likely explained by the larger dairy production scale and intensity of discussion group members.
“explained by a larger dairy production scale and intensity of discussion group members.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Interpretationown data
We cannot draw conclusions regarding the overall effect of discussion group participation on nitrogen surplus due to sensitivity to effect heterogeneity.
“Hence, we cannot draw conclusions regarding the overall effect of discussion group participation on this outcome due to sensitivity to effect heterogeneity.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Premisereasoning
Environmental outcomes are underrepresented relative to economic outcomes in the extension literature.
“In general, environmental outcomes are underrepresented relative to economic outcomes in the extension literature.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Interpretationreasoning
Confounders as strong as household could not fully eliminate the TWFE-estimated effect from Table 2.
“As the 𝑅𝑉 of 7.92 per cent is higher than either quantity, the findings reveal that confounders as strong as household could not fully eliminate the TWFE-estimated effect from Table 2.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Interpretationreasoning
Unaccounted differences in farm profiles and conditions might be a substantial source of unobserved heterogeneity.
“In this context, unaccounted differences in farm profiles and conditions (e.g.weather and agronomic conditions) might be a substantial source of unobserved heterogeneity.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Interpretationreasoning
There is a significant time lag between current breeding decisions and resulting improvements in cow reproductive efficiency.
“which suggests a significant time lag between current breeding decisions and resulting improvements in cow reproductive efficiency.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- Rests on an assumption: Improving herd genetic merit for fertility traits is a very slow process and hence a long-term breeding project.
Interpretationcitation
Time delays in the effect of extension participation exist because the herd calving rate is determined by complex practices that do not give an immediate and observable return and require more learning time.
“This could be due to time delays in the effect of extension participation as the herd calving rate is determined by complex practices that do not give an immediate and observable return and require more learning time (Foster and Rosenzweig, 2010;Kuehne et al., 2017;Montes de Oca Munguia and Llewellyn, 2020).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
- cites Foster and Rosenzweig, 2010 source
  Not checked in the free run.
- cites Kuehne et al., 2017 source
  Not checked in the free run.
- cites Montes de Oca Munguia and Llewellyn, 2020 source
  Not checked in the free run.
Interpretationnone given
Recommended practices do not always lead to the desired outcome at the farm level.
“Second, recommended practices do not always lead to the desired outcome at the farm level.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Interpretationreasoning
The main estimation result regarding the effect of discussion group participation on nitrogen surplus reported in Table 2 is robust to OVB.
“Thus, the main estimation result regarding the effect of discussion group participation on nitrogen surplus reported in Table 2 is robust to OVB.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Premisecitation
In Ireland, age at first calving is generally between 24 and 36 months.
“In Ireland, age at first calving is generally between 24 and 36 months (Berry and Cromie, 2009)”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Berry and Cromie, 2009
  Not checked in the free run.
Interpretationreasoning
Difficulties in identifying environmental benefits could be due to potential ambiguous effects of the 'win-win', efficiency-based approach to enhanced farm sustainability promoted by Irish extension.
“Difficulties in identifying environmental benefits could be due to potential ambiguous effects of the 'win-win', efficiency-based approach to enhanced farm sustainability, promoted by Irish extension.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Interpretationcitation
Extension programmes and new technologies may have conflicting effects on farm sustainability.
“as extension programmes and new technologies may have conflicting effects on farm sustainability (e.g.Godfray, 2015;Pretty, 2018).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
- cites Godfray, 2015 source
  Not checked in the free run.
- cites Pretty, 2018 source
  Not checked in the free run.
Interpretationown data
These effects might only be observed for certain farmer cohorts because of effect heterogeneity.
“but these effects might only be observed for certain farmer cohorts because of effect heterogeneity (Table D3 in Appendix D).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Interpretationreasoning
Without more detailed farm information, it is difficult to assess the effect of homegrown grass on sustainability outcomes and draw robust conclusions.
“Without more detailed farm information (especially in relation to grass production and utilisation), it is difficult to assess the effect of homegrown grass on sustainability outcomes and thus draw robust conclusions.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Interpretationreasoning
Improving farmers' grassland management skills can serve as an indirect pathway towards enhanced farm economic sustainability.
“Our findings suggest that improving farmers' grassland management skills can serve as an indirect pathway towards enhanced farm economic sustainability.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Interpretationcitation
The associations between discussion group participation and environmental outcomes are driven by more established members.
“Specifically, the associations between discussion group participation and environmental outcomes are driven by more established members.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

May combine two claims. 20
Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 36
The quote only partly states this claim. 1

May combine two claims.
Findingcitation
Both discussion group members and non-members are below the advisory target of 90 per cent in-calf rates.
“However, both discussion group members and non-members are below advisory targets of 93 per cent of homegrown grass in the diet of dairy cows and 90 per cent in-calf rates (Teagasc, 2016).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Teagasc, 2016
  Not checked in the free run.
May combine two claims.
Findingown data
After EU quota removal, participation rates started dropping and reached the lowest figures of the panel in 2019 (43.0 per cent).
“After EU quota removal, participation rates started dropping and reached the lowest figures of the panel in 2019 (43.0 per cent).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown data
Discussion group members represent about 48.9 per cent of the pooled sample.
“Discussion group members represent about 48.9 per cent of the sample and have been involved in discussion groups for about 9.5 years, on average.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown data
Discussion group members have been involved in discussion groups for about 9.5 years on average.
“Discussion group members represent about 48.9 per cent of the sample and have been involved in discussion groups for about 9.5 years, on average.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
May combine two claims.
Findingown data
When controlling for confounders as strong as household or stocking rate, the adjusted effects remain significant and of positive sign.
“Finally, when controlling for confounders as strong as household or stocking rate, the adjusted effects remain significant and of positive sign.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
May combine two claims.
Findingown data
Neither homegrown grass nor calving rate has a significant effect on GHG emitted per kg of FPCM.
“Neither management practice has a significant effect on GHG emitted per kg of FPCM.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown data
The proportion of discussion group members gradually increased from 2010 (46.8 per cent) until 2015 (53.7 per cent).
“The proportion of discussion group members gradually increased from 2010 (46.8 per cent) until 2015 (53.7 per cent).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
May combine two claims.
Findingown data
For discussion group members with extension years above the median, the effect of discussion group participation on nitrogen surplus is positive and statistically significant (coefficient 4.07, significant at 5%).
“Nitrogen | 0.74 | 2.61 | 4.07 **”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
May combine two claims.
Findingown data
For confounders as strong as stocking rate, R2_D~Z|X and R2_Y~Z|X,D values are 0.53 and 0.86 per cent, respectively, and the adjusted effect is consistent.
“Similar results are found for confounders as strong as stocking rate, with 𝑅 2 𝐷∼𝑍|𝑋 and 𝑅 2 𝑌 ∼𝑍|𝑋, 𝐷 values of 0.53 and 0.86 per cent, respectively, and a consistent adjusted effect.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
May combine two claims.
Findingown data
Only four of the analysed relationships are robust to both effect heterogeneity and OVB: the insignificant coefficient estimates of discussion group participation on homegrown grass, cost and margin, and the positive association of homegrown grass with margin.
“Only four of the analysed relationships are robust to both effect heterogeneity and OVB; these are the insignificant coefficient estimates of discussion group participation on homegrown grass, cost and margin and the positive association of homegrown grass with margin.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown data
Homegrown grass has a lack of robustness for nitrogen surplus.
“| Homegrown grass | No | No | Lack of robustness”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
May combine two claims.
Findingown data
Both the effect of discussion group participation on nitrogen surplus and its effect on GHG emitted per unit of milk produced are sensitive to effect heterogeneity.
“but both effects are sensitive to effect heterogeneity (Table 3 and Table D1 in Appendix D).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
The quote only partly states this claim.
Findingown data
Calving rate has a lack of robustness for cost.
“| Calving rate | No | Yes | Lack of robustness”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown data
The effect of homegrown grass on cost becomes statistically insignificant when controlling for a confounder as strong as the largest predictor of the outcome.
“-0.032 (-1.21)”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductcitation
Sensitivity to omitted variable bias is tested using the Cinelli and Hazlett (2020) methodology.
“sensitivity to omitted variable bias (OVB) is tested using the Cinelli and Hazlett (2020) methodology.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Cinelli and Hazlett (2020) source
  Not checked in the free run.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Confounders are as strong as the bounding characteristics (the largest predictors of treatment and outcome) in terms of variance explained.
May combine two claims.
Study design and conductcitation
Individual and time fixed effects are controlled for and standard errors are clustered at the farm level in the regression models.
“where individual and time fixed effects are controlled for and standard errors are clustered at the farm level (Allison, 2009;McCullagh and Nelder, 1989).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
- cites Allison, 2009 source
  Not checked in the free run.
- cites McCullagh and Nelder, 1989
  Not checked in the free run.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
Study design and conductown data
The analysis does not identify causal impacts due to data constraints but credibly signs the effects of interest under investigation.
“This analysis does not claim to identify causal impacts due to data constraints; however, it credibly signs the effects of interest under investigation.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
Study design and conductcitation
Years of discussion group participation and some other control variables are included as one-year lags to limit simultaneity between dependent and independent variables.
“to limit the simultaneity between dependent and independent variables, we include years of discussion group participation, as well as some other control variables, as one-year lags”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
Study design and conductnone given
A wide set of farm and farmers' characteristics are included as control variables in the regression models to reduce omitted variable bias.
“We include a wide set of farm and farmers' characteristics as control variables in the regression models to reduce OVB.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
Study design and conductcitation
The econometric analysis is performed with two-way fixed effects regression models.
“The econometric analysis is performed with two-way fixed effects (TWFE) regression models (Allison, 2009).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Allison, 2009 source
  Not checked in the free run.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
Study design and conductown data
Robustness to effect heterogeneity is assessed by estimating equations on subsamples where treatment intensity varies and comparing results across subsamples and the full sample.
“we estimate equations (1-3) on subsamples of the dataset, where the 'intensity' of our treatments (i.e.𝐷𝐺, 𝐻𝐺 or 𝐶𝑅) varies.Then, we compare the results obtained across the different subsamples and the full sample.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
Premisecitation
Changing farm practices requires knowledge on available technologies and how to implement them.
“Yet, changing farm practices requires knowledge on available technologies and how to implement them (Chavas and Nauges, 2020).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Chavas and Nauges, 2020
  Not checked in the free run.
May combine two claims.
Premisecitation
To date, little empirical work has examined hybrid extension in depth and notably its success in striking a balance between farm economic and environmental sustainability.
“To date, little empirical work has examined hybrid extension in depth and notably its success in striking a balance between farm economic and environmental sustainability (Feder, Birner and Anderson, 2011;Klerkx, de Grip and Leeuwis, 2006;Klerkx and Jansen, 2010).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
- cites Feder, Birner and Anderson, 2011
  Not checked in the free run.
- cites Klerkx, de Grip and Leeuwis, 2006
  Not checked in the free run.
- cites Klerkx and Jansen, 2010
  Not checked in the free run.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
Premisecitation
Agricultural extension plays a key role in disseminating new information to farmers and supporting the transition towards more sustainable production systems.
“This underlines the key role of agricultural extension in disseminating new information to farmers and supporting the transition towards more sustainable production systems (Klerkx and Jansen, 2010;Norton and Alwang, 2020).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
- cites Klerkx and Jansen, 2010
  Not checked in the free run.
- cites Norton and Alwang, 2020
  Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation
Irish extension target for calving rate is 90 per cent, translated from a 90 per cent in-calf rate at final pregnancy diagnosis.
“Farmers should achieve a 90 per cent in-calf rate at the final pregnancy diagnosis (Teagasc, 2016), which can be translated into a 90 per cent target for the calving rate.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Teagasc, 2016
  Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation
High reproductive performance, notably represented by large calving rates, is key for matching spring pasture growth and cow intake demands.
“In such a production system, high reproductive performance, notably represented by large calving rates, is key for matching spring pasture growth and cow intake demands (O' Sullivan et al., 2020;Shalloo, Cromie and McHugh, 2014).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
- cites O' Sullivan et al., 2020
  Not checked in the free run.
- cites Shalloo, Cromie and McHugh, 2014
  Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation
Irish extension target for homegrown grass is that 93 per cent of dry matter fed to dairy cows should come from homegrown grass, distributed between 74 per cent grazed grass and 19 per cent grass silage.
“Ninety-three per cent of dry matter fed to dairy cows should come from homegrown grass, distributed between 74 per cent of grazed grass and 19 per cent from grass silage (Teagasc, 2016).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Teagasc, 2016
  Not checked in the free run.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
Premisecitation
GHG emitted per unit of milk produced reflects milk GHG emission efficiency and is used as an indicator of farm environmental efficiency.
“GHG emitted per unit of milk produced reflects milk GHG emission efficiency and is used as an indicator of farm environmental efficiency (Crosson et al., 2011).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Crosson et al., 2011 source
  Not checked in the free run.
May combine two claims.
Premisecitation
Because extension participation is voluntary and discussion groups may attract more motivated farmers with better performances, concerns remain regarding time-varying unobserved heterogeneity.
“because extension participation is voluntary and discussion groups may attract more motivated farmers with better performances, concerns remain regarding time-varying unobserved heterogeneity (Imbens and Wooldridge, 2009).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Imbens and Wooldridge, 2009 source
  Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation
The Irish dairy sector relies on a grass-based production system, where cows graze outdoors from early spring until late autumn through rotational grazing.
“the Irish dairy sector relies on a grass-based production system, where cows graze outdoors from early spring until late autumn through rotational grazing (Kelly et al., 2020;L ä pple, Hennessy and O'Donovan, 2012).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
- cites Kelly et al., 2020 source
  Not checked in the free run.
- cites L ä pple, Hennessy and O'Donovan, 2012
  Not checked in the free run.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
Premisecitation
Nitrogen surplus gives a farm-level estimation of nitrogen potentially available for loss to the atmosphere and water bodies, and serves as an indicator of nutrient management and farm environmental pressure.
“Nitrogen surplus gives a farm-level estimation of nitrogen, potentially available for loss to the atmosphere and water bodies, and hence serves as an indicator of nutrient management and farm environmental pressure (Buckley et al., 2016;Schr ö der et al., 2003).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
- cites Buckley et al., 2016 source
  Not checked in the free run.
- cites Schr ö der et al., 2003
  Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation
The public extension body Teagasc operates under a mixed public-private arrangement.
“The public extension body (Teagasc, the Agriculture and Food Development Authority) operates under a mixed public-private arrangementfoot_1 (Donnellan, Hennessy and Thorne, 2015).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Donnellan, Hennessy and Thorne, 2015
  Not checked in the free run.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
Premisecitation
The general consensus in Irish studies is that adoption rates of practices in grassland management and reproductive performance are relatively low, notably due to information constraints.
“To date, the general consensus in Irish studies is that adoption rates of practices in the areas of grassland management and reproductive performance are relatively low, notably due to information constraints (Hyland et al., 2018;Regan et al., 2021;Shalloo et al., 2021Shalloo et al., , 2018)).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
- cites Hyland et al., 2018 source
  Not checked in the free run.
- cites Regan et al., 2021 source
  Not checked in the free run.
- cites Shalloo et al., 2021 source
  Not checked in the free run.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
Premisenone given
The Irish hybrid extension programme adopted a 'win-win', efficiency-based approach to improve farm management practices and thereby enhance farm economic and environmental sustainability.
“The programme adopted a 'win-win', efficiencybased approach to improve farm management practices and thereby enhance farm economic and environmental sustainability.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation
Best practice for Irish dairy farmers is to maximise homegrown grass in the diet of dairy cows with appropriate supplementation from concentrate feed when grass supply and grazing conditions are not adequate.
“Best practice for Irish dairy farmers is to maximise homegrown grass in the diet of dairy cows with appropriate supplementation from concentrate feed when grass supply and grazing conditions are not adequate (O'Brien, Moran and Shalloo, 2018).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites O'Brien, Moran and Shalloo, 2018
  Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.
Premisecitation
The overarching aim of extension is to improve farmers' decision-making and analytical skills, as well as to reduce information constraints associated with the adoption of new technologies.
“The overarching aim of extension is to improve farmers' decision-making and analytical skills, as well as to reduce information constraints associated with the adoption of new technologies (Chavas and Nauges, 2020;Davis et al., 2012;Norton and Alwang, 2020).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
- cites Chavas and Nauges, 2020
  Not checked in the free run.
- cites Davis et al., 2012 source
  Not checked in the free run.
- cites Norton and Alwang, 2020
  Not checked in the free run.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
Interpretationcitation
Time delays in learning about new practices, implementing adjustments in farm management and observing changes in farm performance explain the associations.
“This could be because of time delays in learning about new practices, implementing adjustments in farm management and observing changes in farm performance (Chavas and Nauges, 2020;Foster and Rosenzweig, 2010;Weersink and Fulton, 2020).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
- cites Chavas and Nauges, 2020
  Not checked in the free run.
- cites Foster and Rosenzweig, 2010 source
  Not checked in the free run.
- cites Weersink and Fulton, 2020
  Not checked in the free run.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
Study design and conductnone given
The econometric analysis was bound by available data and methods.
“Third, the econometric analysis was bound by available data and methods.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductnone given
The study only explored partial effects by focusing on a selected set of farm management and sustainability indicators.
“First, we only explored partial effects by focusing on a selected set of farm management and sustainability indicators.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
May combine two claims.
Interpretationreasoning
Promoting recommended practices might serve as an indirect pathway towards some economic benefits, while their effect on environmental sustainability is not evident.
“Promoting these practices might serve as an indirect pathway towards some economic benefits, while their effect on environmental sustainability is not evident.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
Interpretationnone given
In the absence of natural experiments or instrumental variables, it is difficult to provide evidence on extension impact with observational data.
“In the absence of natural experiments or instrumental variables, it is difficult to provide evidence on extension impact with observational data.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).
Interpretationnone given
Recommended practices to improve homegrown grass may not be applicable to all discussion group members because of differences in their profiles and farm conditions.
“Alternatively, recommended practices to improve homegrown grass may not be applicable to all discussion group members because of differences in their profiles and farm conditions.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation
TWFE estimates can give a misleading summary of the overall average causal response because the estimator puts more weight on doses close to the average than on the tails.
“TWFE estimates can give a misleading summary of the overall average causal response because the estimator puts more weight on doses close to the average than on the tails.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Callaway, Goodman-Bacon and Sant'Anna (2021) source
  Not checked in the free run.
May combine two claims.
Interpretationcitation
In the context of dairy sector growth, farm-level efficiency gains may have provided incentives to further increase the production scale, thereby outweighing environmental efficiency benefits or even resulting in unintended deterioration as a 'rebound' effect.
“In the context of dairy sector growth, farm-level efficiency gains may have provided incentives to further increase the production scale, thereby outweighing environmental efficiency benefits or even resulting in unintended deterioration as a 'rebound' effect (Alcott, 2005;Barnes et al., 2019).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
- cites Alcott, 2005 source
  Not checked in the free run.
- cites Barnes et al., 2019 source
  Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation
Cinelli and Hazlett (2020) extends the OVB framework to analyse the sensitivity to unobserved confounders.
“Cinelli and Hazlett (2020) extends the OVB framework to analyse the sensitivity to unobserved confounders.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Cinelli and Hazlett (2020) source
  Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).
Interpretationnone given
Over the 2010s, the 'win-win' approach of the Irish hybrid extension programme may not have been suitable to achieve the desired balance between economic and environmental objectives.
“Over the 2010s, the 'win-win' approach of the Irish hybrid extension programme may not have been suitable to achieve the desired balance between economic and environmental objectives.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation
When estimating the intensity of a continuous treatment with the TWFE estimator, the obtained effect mixes both the level effect and the slope effect.
“when estimating the intensity of a continuous treatment d with the TWFE estimator (e.g.𝐷𝐺 in equations (1 and 2)), the obtained effect mixes both the 'level effect' and the 'slope effect'.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Callaway, Goodman-Bacon and Sant'Anna (2021) source
  Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Interpretationcitation
Many factors influencing grass production and utilisation are outside the farmer's direct control, such as weather and agronomic conditions.
“A potential explanation for this insignificant finding is that many factors influencing grass production and utilisation are outside of the farmer's direct control, such as weather and agronomic conditions (Hanrahan et al., 2017).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Hanrahan et al., 2017 source
  Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.
Interpretationnone given
Farmers may have different breeding strategies or varying needs to generate dairy replacements.
“A potential explanation for these heterogeneous effects is that farmers may have different breeding strategies or varying needs to generate dairy replacements.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
Interpretationreasoning
Econometric tools such as the Cinelli and Hazlett (2020) sensitivity analysis can help applied researchers expand knowledge on extension or technology effect when detailed information about farmers' extension participation, technology adoption behaviours and sustainability performance is available over time.
“econometric tools, such as the Cinelli and Hazlett (2020) sensitivity analysis, can help applied researchers to expand the level of knowledge on extension or technology effect, especially when detailed information about farmers' extension participation, technology adoption behaviours and sustainability performance is available over time.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
- cites Cinelli and Hazlett, 2020 source
  Not checked in the free run.
May combine two claims.
Interpretationreasoning
Extension can fail to improve farmers' management skills and get them to adopt recommended practices.
“First, extension can fail to improve farmers' management skills and get them to adopt recommended practices.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

51 of 51

The authors state this as an assumption.
Farmers' decision to participate in discussion groups is motivated by economic and/or environmental considerations.
“based on the key assumption that farmers' decision to participate in discussion groups is motivated by economic and/or environmental considerations”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Confounders are as strong as the bounding characteristics (the largest predictors of treatment and outcome) in terms of variance explained.
“Assuming that confounders are as strong as these bounding characteristics (in terms of variance explained)”
The paper relies on this without support.
Little empirical work has been conducted to assess the Irish hybrid extension system.
“Nevertheless, to date, little empirical work has been conducted to assess this type of extension system.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
It is not plausible to expect time-varying confounders to be more than as strong as the largest predictors of treatments or outcomes.
“Thus, we assume that it is not plausible to expect time-varying confounders to be more than as strong as the largest predictors of our treatments or outcomes.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Confounders equally affect both treatment and outcome.
“which is the assumption taken to estimate the 𝑅𝑉 value.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Improving herd genetic merit for fertility traits is a very slow process and hence a long-term breeding project.
“Improving herd genetic merit for fertility traits is a very slow process and hence a long-term breeding project.”

6 of 6

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

Stocking-rate coefficient has the wrong significance marker
Minor
In the calving-rate model, −2.26 divided by its reported standard error of 0.038 gives a test statistic of about −59.5. That warrants the paper's 1% marker (***), not the reported 5% marker (**).

1 of 1

Climate change 2007 : the physical science basis : contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Solomon, S. (2007) · Cited by 17,554 · see citing works
Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach
Wooldridge, J. M. (1999) · Cited by 14,354 · see citing works
2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Paustian, K. H., Ravindranath, N. H., & van Amstel, A. R. (2006) · Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling · Cited by 6,706 · see citing works
Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation
Imbens, G. W., & Wooldridge, J. M. (2009) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.47.1.5 · Cited by 4,926 · see citing works
Fixed Effects Regression Models
Allison, P. (2009) · doi:10.4135/9781412993869 · Cited by 3,999 · see citing works
Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: a policy-oriented review
Dessart, F. J., Barreiro‐Hurlé, J., & van Bavel, R. (2019) · European Review of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1093/erae/jbz019 · Cited by 1,105 · see citing works
Making sense of sensitivity: extending omitted variable bias
Cinelli, C., & Hazlett, C. (2020) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/rssb.12348 · Cited by 1,088 · see citing works
Microeconomics of technology adoption
Foster, A. D., & Rosenzweig, M. R. (2010) · Annual Review of Economics · doi:10.1146/annurev.economics.102308.124433 · Cited by 1,055 · see citing works
Jevons’ paradox
Alcott, B. (2005) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.03.020 · Cited by 859 · see citing works
Ruminant nutrition : recommended allowances and feed tables
Jarrige, R. (1989) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 692 · see citing works
Intensification for redesigned and sustainable agricultural systems
Pretty, J. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aav0294 · Cited by 655 · see citing works
Government Spending, Growth and Poverty in Rural India
Fan, S., Hazell, P., & Thorat, S. (2000) · American Journal of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/0002-9092.00101 · Cited by 597 · see citing works
Agricultural Extension: Good Intentions and Hard Realities
Anderson, J. R. (2004) · The World Bank Research Observer · doi:10.1093/wbro/lkh013 · Cited by 579 · see citing works
Impact of farmer field schools on agricultural productivity and poverty in East Africa
Davis, K., Nkonya, E., Kato, E., Mekonnen, D. A., Odendo, M., Miiro, R., & Nkuba, J. (2012) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2011.05.019 · Cited by 561 · see citing works
Two-Way Fixed Effects, the Two-Way Mundlak Regression, and Difference-in-Differences Estimators
Wooldridge, J. M. (2021) · SSRN / The Econometrics Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3906345 · Cited by 517 · see citing works
Exploring the adoption of precision agricultural technologies: a cross regional study of EU farmers
Barnes, A. P., Soto, I., Eory, V., Beck, B., Balafoutis, A., Sánchez, B., Vangeyte, J., Fountas, S., van der Wal, T., & Gómez-Barbero, M. (2019) · Land Use Policy · doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.10.004 · Cited by 494 · see citing works
Technology adoption, impact, and extension in developing countries’ agriculture: A review of the recent literature
Takahashi, K., Muraoka, R., & Otsuka, K. (2019) · Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/agec.12539 · Cited by 475 · see citing works
Predicting farmer uptake of new agricultural practices: a tool for research, extension and policy
Kuehne, G., Llewellyn, R., Pannell, D. J., Wilkinson, R., Dolling, P., Ouzman, J., & Ewing, M. (2017) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2017.06.007 · Cited by 367 · see citing works
Uncertainty, Learning, and Technology Adoption in Agriculture
Chavas, J., & Nauges, C. (2020) · Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy · doi:10.1002/aepp.13003 · Cited by 329 · see citing works
Changes in Agricultural Extension and Implications for Farmer Adoption of New Practices
Norton, G. W., & Alwang, J. (2020) · Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy · doi:10.1002/aepp.13008 · Cited by 322 · see citing works
A review of whole farm systems models of greenhouse gas emissions from beef and dairy cattle production systems
Crosson, P., Shalloo, L., O’Brien, D., Lanigan, G. J., Foley, P. A., Boland, T. M., & Kenny, D. A. (2011) · Animal Feed Science and Technology · doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2011.04.001 · Cited by 312 · see citing works
Climate Smart Agriculture
Basist, A., Dinar, A., Blankespoor, B., Bachiochi, D., Houba, H., Lipper, L., McCarthy, N., Zilberman, D., Asfaw, S., & Branca, G. (2017) · Natural resource management and policy · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-61194-5 · Cited by 247 · see citing works
Difference-in-Differences with a Continuous Treatment
Callaway, B., Goodman-Bacon, A., & Sant'Anna, P. H. C. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2107.02637 · Cited by 243 · see citing works
Current available strategies to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in livestock systems: an animal welfare perspective
Llonch, P., Haskell, M. J., Dewhurst, R. J., & Turner, S. P. (2016) · animal · doi:10.1017/s1751731116001440 · Cited by 207 · see citing works
An evaluation of whole-farm nitrogen balances and related indices for efficient nitrogen use
Schröder, J. J., Aarts, H. F. M., ten Berge, H. F. M., van Keulen, H., & Neeteson, J. J. (2003) · European Journal of Agronomy · doi:10.1016/s1161-0301(03)00070-4 · Cited by 205 · see citing works
The environmental impact of fertility in dairy cows: a modelling approach to predict methane and ammonia emissions
Garnsworthy, P. C. (2003) · Animal Feed Science and Technology · doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2003.10.011 · Cited by 194 · see citing works
New Zealand Dairy Farming: Milking Our Environment for All Its Worth
Foote, K. J., Joy, M., & Death, R. G. (2015) · Environmental Management · doi:10.1007/s00267-015-0517-x · Cited by 189 · see citing works
Factors associated with profitability in pasture-based systems of milk production
Hanrahan, L., McHugh, N., Hennessy, T., Moran, B., Kearney, R., Wallace, M., & Shalloo, L. (2018) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.2017-13223 · Cited by 188 · see citing works
Measuring Farm and Market Level Economic Impacts of Improved Maize Production Technologies in Ethiopia: Evidence from Panel Data
Kassie, M. B., Marenya, P., Tessema, Y. M., Jaleta, M., Zeng, D., Erenstein, O., & Rahut, D. B. (2017) · Journal of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/1477-9552.12221 · Cited by 182 · see citing works
Considering the source: Commercialisation and trust in agri-environmental information and advisory services in England
Sutherland, L., Mills, J., Ingram, J., Burton, R. J. F., Dwyer, J., & Blackstock, K. (2013) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.12.020 · Cited by 168 · see citing works
Smallholder Productivity and Weather Shocks: Adoption and Impact of Widely Promoted Agricultural Practices in Tanzania
Arslan, A., Belotti, F., & Lipper, L. (2016) · Food Policy · doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2017.03.005 · Cited by 162 · see citing works
Rebound effects in agricultural land and soil management: Review and analytical framework
Carsten, P., Techen, A., Robinson, J. S., & Helming, K. (2019) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.115 · Cited by 160 · see citing works
A case study of the carbon footprint of milk from high-performing confinement and grass-based dairy farms
O’Brien, D., Capper, J. L., Garnsworthy, P. C., Grainger, C. I., & Shalloo, L. (2014) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.2013-7174 · Cited by 158 · see citing works
PastureBase Ireland: a grassland decision support system and national database
Hanrahan, L., Geoghegan, A., O'Donovan, M., Griffith, V., Ruelle, E., Wallace, M., & Shalloo, L. (2017) · Computers and Electronics in Agriculture · doi:10.1016/j.compag.2017.01.029 · Cited by 151 · see citing works
The debate over sustainable intensification
Godfray, H. C. J. (2015) · Food Security · doi:10.1007/s12571-015-0424-2 · Cited by 149 · see citing works
Building knowledge systems for sustainable agriculture: supporting private advisors to adequately address sustainable farm management in regular service contacts
Klerkx, L., & Jansen, J. (2010) · International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability · doi:10.3763/ijas.2009.0457 · Cited by 136 · see citing works
Limits to Profit Maximization as a Guide to Behavior Change
Weersink, A. J., & Fulton, M. (2020) · Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy · doi:10.1002/aepp.13004 · Cited by 134 · see citing works
The Roles of Adoption and Behavior Change in Agricultural Policy
Pannell, D. J., & Claassen, R. (2020) · Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy · doi:10.1002/aepp.13009 · Cited by 132 · see citing works
Prevalence of, and risk factors associated with, perinatal calf mortality in pasture-based Holstein-Friesian cows
Mee, J. F., Berry, D. P., & Cromie, A. R. (2008) · animal · doi:10.1017/s1751731108001699 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Effect of fertility on the economics of pasture-based dairy systems
Shalloo, L., Cromie, A. R., & McHugh, N. (2014) · animal · doi:10.1017/s1751731114000615 · Cited by 128 · see citing works
The private sector's role in agricultural extension systems: potential and limitations
Feder, G., Birner, R., & Anderson, J. R. (2011) · Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies · doi:10.1108/20440831111131505 · Cited by 122 · see citing works
How does commercialisation impact on the provision of farm advisory services? Evidence from Belgium, Italy, Ireland and the UK
Prager, K., Labarthe, P., Caggiano, M., & Lorenzo-Arribas, A. (2016) · Land Use Policy · doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.12.024 · Cited by 113 · see citing works
Extended grazing: A detailed analysis of Irish dairy farms
Läpple, D., Hennessy, T., & O’Donovan, M. (2011) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.2011-4512 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
Self-citation
Hands off but Strings Attached: The Contradictions of Policy-induced Demand-driven Agricultural Extension
Klerkx, L., de Grip, K., & Leeuwis, C. (2006) · Agriculture and Human Values · doi:10.1007/s10460-005-6106-5 · Cited by 98 · see citing works
The influence of strain of Holstein-Friesian cow and feeding system on greenhouse gas emissions from pastoral dairy farms
O’Brien, D., Shalloo, L., Grainger, C. I., Buckley, F., Horan, B., & Wallace, M. (2010) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.2009-2790 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
The adopters versus the technology: which matters more when predicting or explaining adoption?
de Oca Munguia, O. M., & Llewellyn, R. (2020) · Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy · doi:10.1002/aepp.13007 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
A national methodology to quantify the diet of grazing dairy cows
O’Brien, D., Moran, B., & Shalloo, L. (2018) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.2017-13604 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
Measuring progress in agricultural sustainability to support policy-making
Dillon, E., Hennessy, T., Buckley, C., Donnellan, T., Hanrahan, K., Moran, B., & Ryan, M. (2015) · International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability · doi:10.1080/14735903.2015.1012413 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Self-citation
The Irish dairy industry – recent history and strategy, current state and future challenges
Kelly, P., Shalloo, L., Wallace, M., & Dillon, P. (2020) · International Journal of Dairy Technology · doi:10.1111/1471-0307.12682 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Associations between age at first calving and subsequent performance in Irish spring calving Holstein–Friesian dairy cows
Berry, D. P., & Cromie, A. R. (2008) · Livestock Science · doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2008.10.005 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
Nutritional management to optimize fertility of dairy cows in pasture-based systems
Butler, S. T. (2014) · animal · doi:10.1017/s1751731114000834 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
An appraisal of carbon footprint of milk from commercial grass-based dairy farms in Ireland according to a certified life cycle assessment methodology
O’Brien, D., Brennan, P., Humphreys, J., Ruane, E. M., & Shalloo, L. (2014) · The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment · doi:10.1007/s11367-014-0755-9 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
Factors influencing dairy farmers’ adoption of best management grazing practices
Hyland, J. J., Heanue, K., McKillop, J., & Micha, E. (2018) · Land Use Policy · doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.07.006 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Review: Grass-based dairy systems, data and precision technologies
Shalloo, L., Donovan, M. O., Leso, L., Werner, J., Ruelle, E., Geoghegan, A., Delaby, L., & O’Leary, N. (2018) · animal · doi:10.1017/s175173111800246x · Cited by 73 · see citing works
The Impact of Extension Services on Farm‐level Income: An Instrumental Variable Approach to Combat Endogeneity Concerns
Cawley, A., O’Donoghue, C., Heanue, K., Hilliard, R., & Sheehan, M. (2018) · Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy · doi:10.1093/aepp/ppx062 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Farm gate level nitrogen balance and use efficiency changes post implementation of the EU Nitrates Directive
Buckley, C., Wall, D. P., Moran, B., O’Neill, S., & Murphy, P. N. C. (2016) · Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems · doi:10.1007/s10705-015-9753-y · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Self-citation
Farm household risk balancing: empirical evidence from Switzerland
de Mey, Y., Wauters, E., Schmid, D., Lips, M., Vancauteren, M., & Passel, S. V. (2015) · European Review of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1093/erae/jbv030 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Impact of training on the intensification of rice farming: evidence from rainfed areas in Tanzania
Nakano, Y., Tanaka, Y., & Otsuka, K. (2017) · Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/agec.12408 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
An Analysis of Abatement Potential of Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Irish Agriculture 2021-2030
Lanigan, G. J., Donnellan, T., Hanrahan, K., Carsten, P., Shalloo, L., Król, D., Forrestal, P. J., Farrelly, N., O’Brien, D., Ryan, M., et al. (2018) · T-Stór (Teagasc) · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Relationship between dairy cow genetic merit and profit on commercial spring calving dairy farms
Ramsbottom, G., Cromie, A. R., Horan, B., & Berry, D. P. (2011) · animal · doi:10.1017/s1751731111002503 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Reproductive efficiency and survival of Holstein-Friesian cows of divergent Economic Breeding Index, evaluated under seasonal calving pasture-based management
O’Sullivan, M., Butler, S. T., Pierce, K. M., Crowe, M. A., O’Sullivan, K., Fitzgerald, R., & Buckley, F. (2019) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.2019-17374 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Can Peers Improve Agricultural Revenue?
Songsermsawas, T., Baylis, K., Chhatre, A., & Michelson, H. (2016) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.01.023 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
The evaluation of a participatory extension programme focused on climate friendly farming
Knook, J., Eory, V., Brander, M., & Moran, D. (2020) · Journal of Rural Studies · doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.03.010 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Assessing the Impact of Financial Incentives in Extension Programmes: Evidence From Ireland
Läpple, D., & Hennessy, T. (2015) · Journal of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/1477-9552.12108 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Self-citation
Exploring the Role of Incentives in Agricultural Extension Programs
Läpple, D., & Hennessy, T. (2015) · Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy · doi:10.1093/aepp/ppu037 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Self-citation
Multi-actor co-design of extension interventions: paradoxes arising in three cases in the Republic of Ireland
Macken‐Walsh, Á. (2019) · The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension · doi:10.1080/1389224x.2019.1604390 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Risk factors associated with multiple ovulation and twin birth rate in Irish dairy and beef cattle
Fitzgerald, A. M., Berry, D. P., Carthy, T. R., Cromie, A. R., & Ryan, D. P. (2014) · Journal of Animal Science · doi:10.2527/jas.2013-6718 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
How can grass-based dairy farmers reduce the carbon footprint of milk?
O’Brien, D., Geoghegan, A., McNamara, K., & Shalloo, L. (2016) · Animal Production Science · doi:10.1071/an15490 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
The Growing Heterogeneity in the Farm Sector and Its Implications*
Weersink, A. J. (2017) · Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomie · doi:10.1111/cjag.12163 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Choice of artificial insemination beef bulls used to mate with female dairy cattle
Berry, D. P., Ring, S. C., Twomey, A. J., & Evans, R. D. (2019) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.2019-17430 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Exploring farmers’ decisions to engage in grass measurement on dairy farms in Ireland
Regan, Á., Douglas, J., Maher, J., & O’Dwyer, T. (2021) · The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension · doi:10.1080/1389224x.2020.1858892 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
An evaluation of extension services in Sweden
Nordin, M., & Höjgård, S. (2016) · Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/agec.12294 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Cross-sectional analyses of a national database to determine if superior genetic merit translates to superior dairy cow performance
Ring, S. C., Evans, R. D., Cromie, A. R., & Berry, D. P. (2021) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.2020-19957 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
A review of precision technologies in pasture-based dairying systems
Shalloo, L., Byrne, T., Leso, L., Ruelle, E., Starsmore, K., Geoghegan, A., Werner, J., & O’Leary, N. (2021) · Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research · doi:10.15212/ijafr-2020-0119 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
The influence of cow and management factors on reproductive performance of Irish seasonal calving dairy cows
Lane, E. A., Crowe, M. A., Beltman, M. E., & More, S. J. (2013) · Animal Reproduction Science · doi:10.1016/j.anireprosci.2013.06.019 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
The role of extension in dynamic economic adjustments: the case of Irish dairy farms
Läpple, D., Barham, B. L., & Chavas, J. (2018) · European Review of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1093/erae/jby048 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Self-citation

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 77 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

International Dairy Federation, 2015, A common carbon footprint approach for the dairy sector: the IDF guide to standard life cycle assessment methodology
McCullagh, 1989, Generalized Linear Models, 2nd edn, Monographs on Statistics and Applied Probability

Sorted by citations

Wine waste valorisation: crushing the research domain
Abbate, S., Centobelli, P., & Gregorio, M. D. (2024) · Review of Managerial Science · doi:10.1007/s11846-024-00779-5 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Information provision and preferences for more sustainable dairy farming: Choice experimental evidence from Sweden
Oyinbo, O., & Hansson, H. (2024) · Agricultural and Resource Economics Review · doi:10.1017/age.2023.33 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
The role of hired labour on technical efficiency in an expanding dairy sector: The case of Ireland
García, L. F., Läpple, D., Dillon, E., & Thorne, F. S. (2024) · Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics · doi:10.1111/1467-8489.12553 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Self-citation
Climate Change Mitigation in the Dairy Sector: Uncovering Heterogeneity Through Eco‐Efficiency Clubs
Läpple, D., Stetter, C., & Buckley, C. (2024) · Agribusiness · doi:10.1002/agr.21992 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Self-citation
Information about Climate Change Mitigation: What Do Farmers Think?
Läpple, D. (2023) · EuroChoices · doi:10.1111/1746-692x.12384 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Self-citation
The impact of access to agricultural advisory services on input use and farm performance: Evidence from Senegal
Ricome, A., Faye, A., Fall, C. S., & Gomez‐y‐Paloma, S. (2024) · Agribusiness · doi:10.1002/agr.21932 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Do farm advisory organizations promote sustainability? A study in Greece
Charatsari, C., Michailidis, A., & Lioutas, E. D. (2024) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104003 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Factors influencing environmental sustainability performance: A study applied to coffee crops in Colombia
Ospina, A. R., Zúñiga-Collazos, A., & Castillo-Palacio, M. (2024) · Journal of Open Innovation Technology Market and Complexity · doi:10.1016/j.joitmc.2024.100361 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
The role of advisory provision and policy objective information in dairy farmers’ preferences for methane-reducing feed additives
Gottlieb, U., & Rommel, J. (2025) · European Review of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1093/erae/jbaf053 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Model for assessing environmental sustainability performance in the agricultural sector: A case study on plantain cultivation
Ospina, A. R., & Zúñiga-Collazos, A. (2025) · Global Transitions · doi:10.1016/j.glt.2025.04.001 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
From metrics to insights: Evaluating cereal farming sustainability in Catalonia using composite index approach
Khezri-nejad-gharaei, M., Guesmi, B., & Roig, J. M. G. (2025) · Agricultural Economics (Zemědělská ekonomika) · doi:10.17221/462/2024-agricecon · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Learning about best management practices: Theory and experimentation under the umbrella of crop insurance
Aubert, C., Raineau, Y., & Raynal, M. (2026) · European Review of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1093/erae/jbaf065
Economic and environmental impacts of mitigation technologies on dairy and cattle farms in the Republic of Ireland
Francisco-Cruz, C. A., Buckley, C., & Breen, J. (2025) · Q Open · doi:10.1093/qopen/qoaf021
Self-citation
Sustainability Effects of the Uptake of More Grass‐Based Feeding Practices: Evidence From Sweden
Bedi, S. M., Oyinbo, O., Manevska‐Tasevska, G., & Hansson, H. (2025) · Journal of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/1477-9552.70003
Information economics to support sustainable and resilient agri-food systems: Special issue introduction
Läpple, D., Colen, L., & Hermann, D. (2025) · European Review of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1093/erae/jbaf059
Self-citation
Policy Schemes for More Sustainable Dairy Farming: The Role of Financial Instruments and Policy Implementation Modes
Oyinbo, O., & Hansson, H. (2026) · Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/agec.70114
The relationship between pesticides and risk in apple production
Casati, M., Arata, L., Varacca, A., & Sckokai, P. (2026) · European Review of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1093/erae/jbag010
Agricultural extension services for farm resilience in Russian–Ukrainian Conflict
Egamberdiev, B., Djuraeva, M., Bobojonov, I., Kuhn, L., & Glauben, T. (2026) · European Review of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1093/erae/jbag014

Mixed public-private and private extension systems: A comparative analysis using farm-level data from Ireland
Balaine, L., Buckley, C., & Dillon, E. (2022) · Land Use Policy · doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106086 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Self-citation
The role of extension services and technology adoption in farm sustainability
Balaine, L. (2021) · Arrow@dit (Dublin Institute of Technology) · doi:10.13025/17138
Self-citation
Factors Associated with Extension Programme Participation: The case of discussion groups for Irish cattle farmers.Preprint
O’Callaghan, D., Hennessy, T., & Breen, J. (2016) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · doi:10.22004/ag.econ.236329
The Role of Innovation in Farm Economic Sustainability: Generalised Propensity Score Evidence from Irish Dairy Farms
Läpple, D., & Thorne, F. S. (2018) · Journal of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/1477-9552.12282 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Self-citation
Agricultural sustainability: implications for extension systems.
Allahyari, M. S. (2009) · International Journal of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development · doi:10.5897/ajar.9000027 · Cited by 47 · see citing works

Authors: Balaine, L., Läpple, D., Dillon, E. J., & Buckley, C.
Affiliations: Teagasc - The Irish Agriculture and Food Development Authority (IE)
Ollscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway (IE)
Corresponding author: Balaine, Lorraine
ORCID: Balaine, Lorraine
Läpple, Doris
Dillon, Emma J
Buckley, Cathal
Venue: European Review of Agricultural Economics
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published: 2023-01-27
Volume: 50
Issue: 2
Pages: 810-850
ISSN: 0165-1587 (ISSN-L)
1464-3618
DOI: 10.1093/erae/jbac033
OpenAlex: W4318315753
Semantic Scholar: 94abeb205db54ff09222cb4518bdc8da0a3ee77a
Cited by: 18
References: 77
Citations by year: 2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 1
FWCI: 5.24
Type: journal article
Language: en
Open access: hybrid
doi.org
Licence: cc-by
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor)
Locations: European Review of Agricultural Economics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
GoeScholar The Publication Server of the Georg-August-Universität Göttingen (Georg-August-Universität Göttingen) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders: Teagasc (Teagasc Walsh Scholarship Scheme)
Topics: Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agricultural Innovations and Practices
Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agricultural Development and Management
Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Sustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
Keywords: agricultural extension, extension participation, technology adoption, farm management practices, farm sustainability, economic sustainability, environmental sustainability, dairy farms

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-07.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-07.

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

Extension and management pathways for enhanced farm sustainability: evidence from Irish dairy farms

Abstract

AI snapshot

TL;DR

Key findings

Methods

Limitations

Integrity signals

Claims the paper makes

Self-check

Cites

Cited by

Related

Record

About these checks