There are usually differences in environmental attitudes between organic adopters and non-adopters, a situation that is not as consistently reported for adoption of other environmental systems (Just and Heinz, 2000; Welsh and Rivers, 2011; Reimer, 2012). But other factors are significantly in play. Attitudes, although a driving force for many organic pioneers, are not necessarily as relevant for later adopters. To understand organic adoption at the farm level, we reviewed literature on barriers to adoption of environmental practices and systems, several dozen reports in the peer-reviewed literature over the past 25 years. We have identified 10 critical and interacting barriers that consistently appear (adapted from MacRae et al., 2009).
1 Anxiety about finances (investments, markets and revenue stream)
Financial anxieties occur when a major change is being considered. Most studies show that organic farming is more profitable than conventional farming (MacRae et al., 2007; MacRae et al., 2014), but this information is not, of itself, sufficient to stimulate many growers to convert. Even dramatically higher organic commodity prices will not necessarily attract conventional farmers because a mix of other barriers (presented below) is so significant that price and income alone are insufficient incentives. The sunk costs of conversion, and uncertainty in the policy environment may explain reluctance to convert in the face of high organic price premiums (Kuminoff and Wossink, 2010) . In Rogers’ terms, the trialability of organic farming is quite low (Parras-Lozez et al., 2007). The absence of proximate processing and marketing infrastructure aggravates these financial worries (Constance and Choi, 2010).
2 Labour challenges
Labour requirements per unit area of production are typically higher on organic farms, though the nature of the work often is more varied than that found on conventional farms (Jansen, 2000). However, given current farm labour shortages in Canada, and the more specialized knowledge required, organic farmers may be even more disadvantaged.
3 Difficulty acquiring information
Information becomes especially important as the degree of inherent complication in the conservation technology increases (Nowak, 1987), and organic farming is complicated. Although information on organic farming has increased dramatically the last 20 years, farmers cannot consistently rely on the dominant institutions of agricultural development to provide pertinent information. Although there is evidence that with greater farmer involvement in selecting research priorities comes increased adoption rates of the practices (Drost et al., 1996), such opportunities remain relatively rare. Information is often found more useful when the receiver has a relationship with the information provider (King and Rollins, 1995; Kroma, 2006).
4 Difficulty thinking through the sequence of changes, in part because of limited access to trusted advisors
Only a few countries have transition advisory services that help farmers with the transition process. Evaluations in Europe (Lampkin, 1996; Morris and Winter, 1999), the USA (GAO, 2001; Lynch et al., 2001; CAST, 2003; Constance and Choi, 2010) and Canada (MacCallum, 2003) identify limited advisory supports (whether publicly funded or private crop consultants) as key obstacles to adoption of agri-environmental programming.
5 Few nearby farms modelling the change
There is evidence (see discussion below) that farmers are more likely to convert upon seeing neighbours succeed (Centre for Rural Economics Research, 2002; Parras-Lopez et al., 2007).
6 Challenges obtaining suitable equipment or inputs
Organic farmers are restricted in the types of inputs they can use and have also found historically that some conventional farm equipment is not well adapted to their conditions (MacRae et al., 1990). As such, the transition frequently involves getting rid of conventional equipment and capital losses may thus be sustained.
7 Lack of confidence in new approaches and in abilities to manage the transition
Increased management requirements are common in organic production (Jansen, 2000), largely because of the knowledge required to manage ecological processes (Kroma, 2006).
8 Don't like the "look" of the changes and don't believe they reflect good management
Conventional farmers, even those participating in non-organic agri-environmental schemes, often still favour “tidy landscapes” over conservation and biodiversity. The need to model good farmer behaviour, or cultural capital, may trump financial payments that support transition to environmental practices. One criticism of European agri-environmental schemes is the failure to recognize this in programme designs (Burton et al., 2008). Organic farms definitely have a different look to them than conventional ones, associated, for example, with such features as more diverse landscapes and less “clean” fields. These realities are emblematic of what Burton et al. (2008) call “messy” symbols.
9 Fear changes will be stressful and inconsistent with family traditions
Many farms are already under financial or health – related stress when transition is being considered. The possibility of even greater stressors while converting is frequently a significant obstacle.
10 Anxiety about changes to one's status in the community and with supporting institutions, e.g., banks
Farmers are influenced by their social environment. Those interested in organic farming have historically reported that pressure from community members to stay with conventional production has had a dampening effect on their transition trajectory (Constance and Choi, 2010). A French study found that 21% of producers with a transition plan claimed that poor acceptance by neighbours was a brake on their transition. The changes have to be acceptable within the farming sub-culture (Vanclay and Lawrence, 2009). Support of regional bodies is important, especially those with environmental purposes, the idea that this is part of larger effort to protect the environment is important (Centre for Rural Economics Research,, 2002; Santereau, 2009). Alternately, organic conversions do have an influence on conventional neighbours, with heightened likelihood of conversion reported in England with higher concentrations of organic adopters (Centre for Rural Economics Research, 2002).
Not all these barriers are in play for every farmer, but many are. Most of these barriers are sensible, given the current lack of support for adoption. In this sense, non-adoption is not so much a “farmer failure” as it is a “system failure” (Nowak et al., 1996). These last-listed barriers are often viewed as “soft” obstacles, yet they are often more significant determinants of adoption than financial ones.
