Identifying the Determining Factors of the Adoption of Ecological Practices by Dairy Farms in Suceava County, Romania

Abstract

The present paper aims to identify the main factors for the adoption of ecological practices by dairy farmers from Dornelor Basin, Suceava county. In the last decade, this topic has received increased attention from the academic sector, in order to better understand the determining factors that can lead to a transition to ecological farming practices, as part of the efforts to protect biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. The main results highlight that the decision to adopt ecological farming practices is based on a mix of economic, social, institutional, and behavioural factors, closely related to farmers’ self-identity, experience, motivation and social context in which they carry out their activity. Some studies indicate that the best method to support this transition to more sustainable practices is to influence farmers’ motivation and behaviour, while other studies focus on a broader approach that calls for social, economic, technological, and institutional changes at the level of different actors (farmers, supply chain, natural resource management, etc.). In this context, the present study uses a large-scale survey implemented on 52 dairy cow farms in the Dornelor Basin, in order to analyse the main factors for the adoption of ecological practices. The questionnaire used for data collection specifically sought to find out farmers’ opinions regarding different elements, of personal, institutional, and motivational nature. Data were processed using the SPSS software, standard statistical methods and non-parametric tests. The preliminary results indicate that in the case of dairy farms from the Dornelor Basin, the main factors that influence the decision to adopt ecological practices are related to individual motivation (mainly personal/family issues), social norms (e.g., their identification as farmers and belonging to the farming community), and certain economic and environmental benefits (such as high profitability and biodiversity improvement).

Full text

433
Chapter 36
Identifying theDetermining Factors
oftheAdoption ofEcological Practices
byDairy Farms inSuceava County,
Romania
MihaiAlexandruChițea , MarioaraRusu , VioletaFlorian ,
LorenaFlorentinaChițea, ElisabetaRoșu , MonicaMihaelaTudor ,
SorinelIonelBucur , LucianLuca , IulianaIonel ,
IoanSebastianBrumă , LucianTanasă , CodrinDinuVasiliu ,
andGabrielSimion
Abstract The present paper aims to identify the main factors for the adoption of
ecological practices by dairy farmers from Dornelor Basin, Suceava county. In the
last decade, this topic has received increased attention from the academic sector, in
order to better understand the determining factors that can lead to a transition to
ecological farming practices, as part of the efforts to protect biodiversity in agricul-
tural landscapes. The main results highlight that the decision to adopt ecological
farming practices is based on a mix of economic, social, institutional, and behav-
ioural factors, closely related to farmers’ self-identity, experience, motivation and
social context in which they carry out their activity. Some studies indicate that the
best method to support this transition to more sustainable practices is to inuence
farmers’ motivation and behaviour, while other studies focus on a broader approach
that calls for social, economic, technological, and institutional changes at the level
of different actors (farmers, supply chain, natural resource management, etc.). In
this context, the present study uses a large-scale survey implemented on 52 dairy
cow farms in the Dornelor Basin, in order to analyse the main factors for the
M. A. Chițea (*) · M. Rusu · V. Florian · L. F. Chițea · E. Roșu · M. M. Tudor · S. I. Bucur ·
L. Luca · I. Ionel
Institute of Agricultural Economics, Romanian Academy, Bucharest, Romania
I. S. Brumă
Mountain Economy Center CE-MONT, Romanian Academy, Bucharest, Romania
L. Tanasă · C. D. Vasiliu
Institute of Economic and Social Research “Gh. Zane”, Romanian Academy, Iași Branch,
Bucharest, Romania
G. Simion
University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024
L. Chivu etal. (eds.), Constraints and Opportunities in Shaping the Future: New
Approaches to Economics and Policy Making, Springer Proceedings in Business and
Economics, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47925-0_36

434
adoption of ecological practices. The questionnaire used for data collection speci-
cally sought to nd out farmers’ opinions regarding different elements, of personal,
institutional, and motivational nature. Data were processed using the SPSS soft-
ware, standard statistical methods and non-parametric tests. The preliminary results
indicate that in the case of dairy farms from the Dornelor Basin, the main factors
that inuence the decision to adopt ecological practices are related to individual
motivation (mainly personal/family issues), social norms (e.g., their identication
as farmers and belonging to the farming community), and certain economic and
environmental benets (such as high protability and biodiversity improvement).
Keywords Ecological farming practices · Dairy farms
36.1 Introduction
In the recent decades, at the European level, an increase of concerns for the sustain-
ability of farming systems has been noticed, both from the academic sector and
from different European institutions with regulatory role in this eld, starting from
the need to identify new methods/technologies to limit the negative effects on the
environment, mainly in terms of biodiversity and agricultural landscapes. From the
perspective of European policies, the development of agro-environmental schemes
was the most used tool in this eld, which provided nancial support to farmers who
developed a specic environmental protection behaviour.
On the other hand, in the academic sector, efforts have been directed both to the
identication of new farming methods/technologies and practices to ensure the pro-
tection of the environment, and to the evaluation of factors that determine the adop-
tion of ecological practices by European farmers. In the latter case, the approach
includes many aspects related both to farmers’ personal domain (motivation, expec-
tations, belonging to the farming community, etc.) and to the economic domain
(benets, constraints, inuence of supply chain and buyers, etc.).
In this context, the aim of the study was to identify the factors that determine the
adoption of ecological practices by dairy farmers in the Dornelor Basin, Suceava
county, on the basis of a eld survey conducted in this area.
The main working hypotheses are the following:
• Personal elements and social norms are important factors in the decision to adopt
ecological farming practices.
• The economic benets associated with the transition to ecological practices can
support farmers’ decision in the study area.
M. A. Chițea etal.

435
36.2 Literature Review
The ever-increasing pressure on the agri-food sector, to cope with the growing
demand, at the European level, has recently brought to the core of debates the need
to protect agricultural landscapes, as an essential condition for preserving biodiver-
sity. The changes that have taken place at this level can increase the degradation of
land resources and represent a threat to agro-diversity. An alternative solution to
intensive farming is the shift to agro-ecological practices, which can contribute to
maintaining and even improving biodiversity (Schoonhoven & Runhaar, 2018). The
directions on which attention regarding the sustainability of different agricultural
systems concentrates, namely, the advancements in environmentally friendly tech-
nologies/practices, can be approached by farmers and support improved productiv-
ity (Pretty, 2008). However, the need to better understand/identify the factors that
explain the adoption of agro-ecological practices by farmers is equally important,
both personal (behaviour, motivation), economic (benets, constraints), as well as
institutional and social factors.
In this context, the studies and research in this eld can be grouped into several
categories, depending on the nature of investigated factors, which can determine the
adoption of practices/technologies based on ecological principles:
• Studies that focus on aspects related to motivation/behaviour/self-identity: an
example in this sense is the report elaborated in LIFT HORIZON 2020 Project–
“Low input farming and territories”, whose conceptual framework brings to the
foreground a behavioural approach centred on attitudes, values, perception, and
self-identity, associated to farmers (Hansson etal., 2019). At the same time, ele-
ments referring to the decision-making environment in which farmers operate
(farm characteristics and farming activities, specic policies) are also consid-
ered, together with issues related to supply chain, institutional conditions and
perception of consumers’ attitude and demand for organic products. Another
study brings into focus the factors associated with farmers’ goal to adopt some
agro-environmental nancial aid free measures (van Dijk etal., 2016). Results
highlight the importance of attitude, perception of social standards, and personal
skills as signicant factors related to farmers’ goal to adopt/apply agro-
environmental measures, without these being supported by nancial benets.
Overall, authors consider that farmer’s self-identity is the determining factor in
this case. With regard to behavioural and motivational elements, de Snoo etal.
(2013) embrace the idea that farmland conservation/protection represents a
social change that should seek to inuence the motivation and behaviour of indi-
vidual farmers. For this purpose, the authors propose the involvement of several
branches of social sciences (sociology, anthropology, economics, psychology) in
the conservation/protection process, in order to achieve effective communication
in terms of natural values, shaping of social norms and identity. Another approach
is presented by Greiner etal. (2009) who, on the basis of a survey of 94 farmers,
identied a clear correlation between motivation and attitude towards risk and
36 Identifying the Determining Factors of the Adoption of Ecological Practices…

436
the adoption of best management practices, conservation practices aimed at
reducing diffuse pollution from agricultural activities.
• Studies based on multidisciplinary approaches: for example, Pretty J., (2008), in
a study on agriculture sustainability, advocates the need to develop new
approaches that include biological and ecological processes in agri-food produc-
tion, minimise the use of non-renewable resources, effectively use farmers’
knowledge and skills and the collective ability of people to work together to
solve common problems related to agricultural activities and natural resources.
Duru etal. (2015) support agricultural systems based on biodiversity as a substi-
tute for cost-effectiveness ones but highlight that such a transition might be dif-
cult in certain areas where intensive farming is highly developed. Therefore, the
authors consider that the adoption and development of biodiversity-based agri-
culture rests on actions that require changes at the level of different actors with
various interests and opinions. Schoonhoven & Runhaar (2018) propose an inte-
grated framework to explain farmers’ decision to adopt agro-ecological prac-
tices, which includes both the conditions that promote adoption and the elements
that support or hinder this process. The elements are grouped into four clusters
from the economic, social, informational, and political elds. The results show
that farmers’ rationality is based on their personal perspective and context. The
barriers perceived by farmers can represent a starting point for the identication
of certain structural factors, which in turn can support the development of inter-
ventions such as increasing the perception and demand of agro-ecological prod-
ucts and agro-ecology integration in agricultural education/training.
• Studies addressing economic factors (benets/barriers): in this sense, one exam-
ple brings to attention the tendency of the academic environment to focus mainly
on processes and less on results, expressing the benets in such a manner that is
not always relevant for farmers. This process creates a distance between research-
ers and farmers, at the level of perceived benets of ecological intensication
(Kleijn etal., 2019). According to the authors, these shortcomings could be over-
come if the studies on ecological intensication addressed the relevant issues for
farmers, like potential benets and costs. Therefore, the probable cost of ecologi-
cal intensication appears as an integrated component necessary to research
activities. Another study, elaborated by Brown etal. (2019), who investigated the
adoption of CAP measures strengthening biodiversity and ecosystem services by
farmers, argues that, at the national level, the actions that are relevant to farmers
are more likely to be chosen over those that support biodiversity. At the same
time, at the farm level, farmers had the tendency to opt for actions that maximize
yields, do not call for major management changes and involve fewer constraints
on the long term.
These are a few examples of studies and research works that aimed to identify the
determining factors of the adoption of environment-friendly practices by farmers
that can contribute to reaching the objectives of biodiversity protection and improve-
ment at the European level. In this context, the approach of the present study uses a
mix of elements referring to farmers’ behaviour and motivation, social norms,
M. A. Chițea etal.

437
information sources and the benets and constraints associated to the adoption of
ecological practices.
36.3 Methodology
The present study aims to identify the determinants of farmers’ adoption or ecologi-
cal farming practices, based on a eld survey conducted on 52 dairy farms in the
Dornelor Basin, Suceava county, Romania (Fig.36.1).
The questionnaire on which the eld survey was based was developed within the
European Union’s research project Horizon 2020 LIFT – Low-input farming and
territories, being adapted to the specicity of each study area where it has been
implemented, in Romania’s case inclusively.1
The questionnaire was intended to collect farmers’ opinions regarding different
elements, of personal, institutional, and motivational nature that inuence the adop-
tion of ecological practices in the study area. The collected data were centralised in
a database created using the SPPS software. Data were processed, taking into con-
sideration their nature, i.e., ordinal data (Likert scale– which falls into the category
of ordinal measurement instruments, where the categories of answers “have a rank
1 Tzouramani, I. etal. (2019). Deliverable D2.2– LIFT Large-scale farmer survey questionnaire,
2019, available at: https://www.lift-h2020.eu/
deliverable-d2-2-lift-large-scale-farmer-survey-questionnaire
Fig. 36.1 Study area in Romania (number of questionnaires/communes). (Source: authors’ pro-
cessing based on the eld survey data)
36 Identifying the Determining Factors of the Adoption of Ecological Practices…

438
order, but the intervals between them cannot be considered equal” (Jamieson, 2004),
using specic methods such as frequencies/percentages, median, contingency
tables).
36.4 Analysis/Results Interpretation
The section of the questionnaire dedicated to the determinants of the adoption of
ecological practices by farmers included 18 questions, each of them containing sev-
eral statements to be evaluated by participants, grouped into three categories,
according to their nature: personal, institutional, and motivational. The rst two
questions, however, sought to assess the relationship and interaction between farm-
ers and buyers with regard to farming practices, from farmers’ personal perspective
(Fig.36.2).
Participants’ answers with regard to their interaction with those to whom they
sell their products reveal the existence of an information/debate process with refer-
ence to the environmental and social benets, as well as a constant evaluation, by
buyers, of the farming practices used. At the same time, farmers had rather a neutral
opinion regarding both the possibility of buyers restricting their ability to practice a
greener agriculture and the low interest of these in the farming practices used by
farmers.
Referring to their personal relationships with the buyers of their products, farm-
ers evaluate positively the aspects related to the existence of a partnership; however,
in the case of trust/equity/long-term relationship, a neutral attitude of participants in
this questionnaire can be noticed.
36.4.1 Informal Institutional Conditions andSocial Norms
In this section, the questions addressed to farmers tried to nd out their opinion
regarding the information sources on farming practices, how other people see the
use of ecological practices, perception of farmers in the area regarding the adoption
of these practices, as well as aspects related to farmer’s self-identity, belonging to
the farming community and the multiplier effect at its level.
The most important information sources of farmers are the family, other farmers,
printed press/radio/TV as well as online sources (social platforms inclusively). At
the same time, there is an obvious reticence of farmers with regard to the informa-
tion disseminated by agricultural consultancy/extension bodies, by environmental
advisors, as well as by representatives of input suppliers (Fig.36.3).
At the same time, however, when it comes to association forms (cooperatives,
farmer organizations, associations of farmland owners) and non-governmental orga-
nizations/certication bodies, these are not a main information source for farmers,
the interactions with these being quite limited, most farmers not being afliated to
M. A. Chițea etal.

439
I discuss the
environmental and
social benefits of my
faring practices with
those who buy my
products
9.6% 7.7% 25.0% 30.8% 26.9% 4
My farming practices
are regularly assessed
against environmental
and/or social farming
practices standards by
those who buy my
products
9.6% 3.8% 26.9% 25.0% 34.6% 4
The requirements of
those who buy my
products restrict my
ability to farm using
more ecological farming
practices
23.1% 11.5% 21.2% 30.8% 13.5% 3
The buyers of my
products have little
interest in the farming
practices that I use
15.4% 9.6% 36.5% 23.1% 15.4% 3
5.8% 5.8% 40.4% 9.6% 38.5% 3
25.0% 19.2% 25.0% 3.8% 26.9% 3
7.7% 5.8% 38.5% 13.5% 34.6% 3
17.3% 7.7% 19.2% 21.2% 34.6% 4
Our relationship is
truthful and frank
Our relationship is fair
and equal
We have a long-term
relationship
We have a partnership
How would you describe your relationship with the buyers of your paroducts?
Do you discuss your farming practices with the buyers of your products?
Strongly
disagree
Disagree Neither
agree or
disagree
Agree Strongly
agree
Median
*
Source: authors’ processing of field survey data
Fig. 36.2 Interactions/relationship between farmers and buyers
*Likert scale, from 1 to 5, where 1, strongly disagree and 5, strongly agree
such organizations. The farmers who participated in this survey consider that in the
study area, there is recognition of the importance of using ecological practices by
those involved in farming activities, with obvious environmental benets.
36 Identifying the Determining Factors of the Adoption of Ecological Practices…

440
How often do you consult the following sources of information to ge id eas for
farming practices?
Family and friends
Agricultural advisors
Environmental advisors
Supplier representatives
Buyer representatives
Open days.
demonstration
activites training
Other farmers
Press/Radio/TV
Internet. including
social media
9.6%
63.5%
3.8%
2.0%
5.8%
5.8%
21.2%
44.2%
40.4%
11.5%
25.0%
1.9%
3.9%
11.5%
15.4%
53.8%
28.8%
28.8%
7.7%
3.8%
21.2%
9.8%
23.1%
13.5%
13.5%
9.6%
1.9%
19.2%
1.9%
13.5%
7.8%
17.3%
13.5%
7.7%
3.8%
3.8%
51.9%
5.8%
59.6%
76.5%
42.3%
51.9%
3.8%
13.5%
25.0%
5
1
At least
monthly
Several
times
per year
Once
a year
Less than
once a
year
Never
Median
5
5
4
5
2
2
2
Fig. 36.3 Main information sources. (Source: authors’ processing of eld survey data)
*Likert scale, from 1 to 5, where 1, at least monthly and 5, never
Furthermore, more than 70% of respondents rather agree that this is a current
practice of farmers in the area, by their adoption of at least one farming practice that
is very similar to ecological ones.
Referring to aspects related to self-identity and belonging to the farming com-
munity in the area, participants strongly agree on the importance of their identica-
tion as farmers, as well as on the existence of a strong feeling of belonging to the
farming community, which is also a very important factor for them (Fig.36.4).
A similar agreement is manifested in: (1) personal projection, identication as
ecological farmer, (2) assimilation of ecological farming, as an intrinsic part of
respondents, (3) effects that overall changes have on personal life (at the level of
farmers’ situation), (4) importance of understanding farm ecology as fundamental
to agriculture.
As regards the multiplying effect at the level of farming community, most par-
ticipants considered that the important factors in supporting the decision on farm-
ers’ agricultural practices are the following: identication of a certain practice at the
level of other farms in the area, large-scale use on similar farms and the innovating
character of the practice.
M. A. Chițea etal.

441
To what extent do you agree with the following statement about farmers and
farming?
Being a farmer is an
important reflection of
who I am
What happens to
farmers as a whole will
have an effect on what
happens in my life
I have a strong sense
on belonging to the
farming community
I see myself as a
farmer who prioritises
the environment
Understanding the
ecology of the farm is
what farming is about
Faarming in a way that
preserves the
environment is part of
who I am
5.8% 1.9% 23.1% 21.4% 48.1% 4
5.8% 1.9% 15.4% 28.8% 48.1% 4
3.8% - 23.1% 25.0% 48.1% 4
--17.3% 25.0% 57.7% 5
1.9% 1.9% 28.8% 26.9% 40.4% 4
11.5% 1.9% 21.2% 23.1% 42.3% 4
Strongly
disagree
Disagree Neither
agree or
disagree
Agree
Strongly
agree
Median
*
Fig. 36.4 Identity, community, ecology. (Source: authors’ processing of eld survey data)
*Likert scale, from 1 to 5, where 1, strongly disagree and 5, strongly agree
36.4.2 Individual Motivational Factors
In this section, the questions addressed to farmers tried to nd farmers’ opinions
referring to their personal objectives, the relationship between the ecological prac-
tices and farm production, management style and farmers’ change/adaptive
capability.
Regardless of the category in which the objectives are found (agricultural activ-
ity, recognition by the community or personal/family aspects), these were consid-
ered important by participants (Fig.36.5).
The objectives that stand out, by the signicant share of (important and very
important) answers, are those from the sphere of personal life, such as being t and
healthy, providing a satisfying lifestyle and helping (nancially) the next genera-
tion. To a very large extent, farming in a way that improves the environment,
enhancing land quality and producing high-quality products are also very important
objectives for the farmers in the study area.
In general, the objectives that farmers consider easy to achieve at the farm level
are related to their own farming experience and the farming experience in the
36 Identifying the Determining Factors of the Adoption of Ecological Practices…

442
Fig. 36.5 Personal and professional objectives. (Source: authors’ processing of eld survey data)
*Likert scale, from 1 to 5, where 1, not at all important and 5, very important
investigated area. These refer to the improvement of soil quality, use of alternatives
to chemical farm inputs (fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides) as well as the recy-
cling of a greater amount of biomass. At the same time, the integration of different
agro-ecosystems within the farming activities and maintaining or creating habitats
for wild species seem to be rather achievable objectives in the study area.
From the perspective of professional training, the possibilities to have access to
information and advisory services related to organic farming and the complexity
level in terms of understanding and easy use of ecological practices, farmers largely
agree on the possibility of developing this sector in the study area, in the next period.
Most farmers consider that they are prepared to use ecological farming practices,
have the ability to achieve their set goals, have access to advice and support for
farming ecologically, that there are opportunities to shift to organic farming and,
last but not least, that the farming practices that comply with ecological principles
are easy to understand and use.
M. A. Chițea etal.

443
36.4.3 Benets, Triggering Factors andBarriers
As regards the inuence of adopting ecological farming practices on aspects refer-
ring to farm economy, environment and necessary labour resources, most partici-
pants consider that farm protability and biodiversity would largely benet from
adopting these practices. However, the farmers who participated in the survey con-
sider that the following would not be affected by an eventual transition to ecological
practices: farm production, labour requirements for the farm, ability to meet current
and future support payment requirements, ability to meet farming objectives, time
spent working on the farm, soil fertility, farms’s dependence on external inputs,
intensity of seasonal peaks of work during the year, physical nature of work and
mental workload.
The most important aspects for farmers who participated in the survey, in terms
of changing the farming practices, are mainly grouped, on the basis of the cumu-
lated value of answers “important” and “very important”, into two categories: eco-
nomic/meeting standards and environmental. In the category of economic aspects,
the most important are the ability to meet product quality and safety standards, the
market rewards, the availability of necessary skilled labour and the cost of adopting
practices. As regards the environment, the most important for farmers are the ability
to cope with climate change and to cope with pests and diseases. Besides these two
categories, another aspect that met the majority of farmers’ options is related to
personal projection, namely, challenge and personal interest.
Farmers’ experience with regard to the changes of farming practices adopted in
the past highlights two important categories of aspects that have inuenced this
process: economic aspects and personal/family aspects. From the rst category, in
farmers’ opinion, the most important factor considered was the changes in the prices
of products, followed by the nancial difculties of farm, availability of skilled
labour, changes in the regulations on farming activities, as well as access to new
(domestic or export) markets. At the personal/family level, farm succession plan-
ning and farm inheritance represented important factors considered by farmers in
supporting the decision to change the farming practices of the past.
36.5 Conclusions
At the level of the study area, behaviours compatible with the requirements of eco-
logical agriculture are manifested, both from the perspective of farming activities
and of the personal projection of farmers, through the use of practices that can be
assimilated to ecological practices, and also through farmers’ strong ties to the natu-
ral and social environment in which they operate. All these create a favourable
framework to farming ecologically in the area in the next period.
The analysis reveals the existence of a mix of factors that can inuence the adop-
tion of ecological practices by dairy farms, among which the most important of
36 Identifying the Determining Factors of the Adoption of Ecological Practices…

444
which refer (without creating a hierarchy) to aspects related to institutional condi-
tions and social norms (expectations from the society, recognition of the importance
of using ecological farming practices, farmer identity and sense of belonging to the
farming community, multiplying effect at community level), individual/identity fac-
tors (from the sphere of personal life, related to health, ensuring a satisfactory stan-
dard of living and support for the next generation, and also the necessary knowledge
and training to practice organic farming) and benets/constraints (increased prot-
ability, market rewards, cost of adoption). To sum up, the determining factors of the
adoption of ecological practices by dairy farmers in the Dornelor Basin are clus-
tered around elements from personal, economic, professional and social contexts.
Acknowledgements This research study was carried out within the LIFT project – “Low-Input
Farming and Territories. Integrating knowledge for improving ecosystem-based farming” that
received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme
under Grant Agreement no. 770747, May 2018– April 2022.
References
Brown, C., Kovacs, E.K., Zinngrebe, Y., Albizua, A., Galanaki, A., Grammatikopoulou, I., Herzon,
I., Marquardt, D., McCraken, D., Olsson, J., & Villamayor-Tomas, S. (2019). Understanding
farmer uptake of measures that support biodiversity and ecosystem services in the Common
Agricultural Policy (CAP). Report prepared by an EKLIPSE Expert Working Group. Centre
for Ecology & Hydrology.
de Snoo, G, R., Herzon, I., Staats, H., Burton, R.J. F., Schindler, S., Van Dijk, J., Lokhorst, A.M.,
Bullock, J.M., Lobley, M., Wrbka, T., Schwarz, G., & Musters, C.J. M. (2013). Towards effec-
tive nature conservation on farmland: Making farmers matter. Conservation Letters, 6, 66–72.
Duru, M., Therond, O., & Fares, M. (2015). Designing agroecological transitions– A review.
Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 35(4), 1–21.
Greiner, R., Patterson, L., & Miller, O. (2009). Motivations, risk perceptions and adoption of con-
servation practices by farmers. Agricultural Systems, 99(2–3), 86–104.
Hansson, H., Thompson, B., Manevska-Tasevska, G., Toma, L., Leduc, G., & Vranken, L. (2019).
Drivers of farmers’ up-take of ecological approaches– A conceptual framework with a behav-
ioural focus. Deliverable D2.1, Project H2020 Lift. https://publications.slu.se/?le=publ/
show&id=100106
Jamieson, S. (2004). Likert scales: How to (ab)use them? Medical Education, 38(12), 1217–1218.
Kleijn, D., Bommarco, R., Fijen, T. P. M., Garibaldi, L. A., Potts, S. G., & van der Putten,
W. H. (2019). Ecological intensication: Bridging the gap between science and practice.
Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 34(2), 154–166.
van Dijk W, F.A., Lokhorst, A.M., Berendse, F., & de Snoo, G, R. (2016). Factors underlying
farmers’ intentions to perform unsubsidized agri-environmental measures. Land Use Policy,
59, 207–216.
Pretty, J. (2008). Agricultural sustainability: Concepts, principles and evidence. Philosophical
Transactions of The Royal Society B Biological Sciences, 363, 447–465.
Schoonhoven, Y., & Runhaar, H. (2018). Conditions for the adoption of agro-ecological farm-
ing practices: A holistic framework illustrated with the case of almond farming in Andalusia.
International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 16(6), 442–454.
M. A. Chițea etal.