Associate professor of natural resource social science, Linda Prokopy and fellow researchers surveyed 6,795 people in the agricultural sector in 2011-12 to determine their beliefs about climate change and whether variation in the climate is triggered by human activities, natural causes or an equal combination of both.

More than 90 per cent of the scientists and climatologists surveyed said they believed climate change was occurring, with more than 50 per cent attributing climate change primarily to human activities.

In contrast, 66 per cent of corn producers surveyed said they believed climate change was occurring, with eight per cent pinpointing human activities as the main cause. A quarter of producers said they believed climate change was caused mostly by natural shifts in the environment, and 31 per cent said there was not enough evidence to determine whether climate change was happening or not.

Division

The survey results highlight the division between scientists and farmers over climate change and the challenges in communicating climate data and trends in non-polarizing ways, Prokopy said.

“Whenever climate change gets introduced, the conversation tends to turn political,” she said. “Scientists and climatologists are saying climate change is happening, and agricultural commodity groups and farmers are saying they don’t believe that. Our research suggests that this disparity in beliefs may cause agricultural stakeholders to respond to climate information very differently.”

Climate change presents both potential gains and threats to agriculture. Warmer temperatures could extend the growing season in northern latitudes, and an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide could improve the water use efficiency of some crops. But increases in weather variability and extreme weather events could lower crop yields.

Growers can manage the potential risks linked to extreme rain events and soil degradation by using adaptive strategies such as planting cover crops, using no-till techniques, increasing the biodiversity of grasses and forage and extending crop rotations, Prokopy said. These strategies contribute to soil health and water quality and also help capture carbon dioxide, reducing the amount of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere by agricultural systems.

Currently, agriculture accounts for 10-12 per cent of the total human-caused greenhouse gas emissions globally.

Focus on cause

Focusing on the causes of climate change, however, is likely to polarize the agricultural community and lead to inaction, said study co-author Lois Wright Morton, professor of sociology at Iowa State University. To foster productive dialogue, she said, scientists and climatologists need to “start from the farmer’s perspective.”

“Farmers are problem solvers,” she said. “A majority of farmers views excess water on their land and variable weather as problems and are willing to adapt their practices to protect their farm operation. Initiating conversations about adaptive management is more effective than talking about the causes of climate change.”

The gap in views on climate change is caused in part by how individuals combine scientific facts with their own personal values, Morton said.

“Differences in beliefs are related to a variety of factors, such as personal experiences, cultural and social influences, and perceptions of risk and vulnerability,” she said.

Prokopy advises scientists to “recognize that their world views may be different than those of farmers. Moderating communication of climate information based on that realization is key.”

Relevant to growers

Climate science could also be better communicated by using intermediaries such as extension educators and agricultural advisers to translate data in ways that are most relevant to growers, she said.

“Farmers are by necessity very focused on short-term weather, in-season decisions and managing immediate risks,” she said. “They’re thinking about when they can get in their field to do what they need to do, rather than looking 20 to 30 years down the road.”

A table of the complete survey results is available at https://news.uns.purdue.edu/images/2014/prokopy-climatetable.pdf.

The study was published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society and is available for download here.

The post Study finds farmers and scientists divided over climate change appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

While prices regularly rise and fall, they have trended upward in a way that suggests they’ve reached a plateau, said Mike Boehlje. He attributed much of the price movement to bullish export markets, weather-shortened supplies and the effect monetary policies have had on interest rates and investors.

“This higher level may be the new normal,” Boehlje said. “But volatility has increased significantly for agricultural prices, as well as for agricultural inputs. In terms of corn, for example, it’s not unusual in the futures markets to see prices moving 30 cents or more on a daily basis. And although prices may be higher, so are costs to producers. So margins are not likely to stay unusually high.”

Corn, wheat and soybeans in recent weeks have been trading about double the prices five years ago.

Another major cause of surging prices is global food demand. Along with having more money to spend, people in those nations are demanding more and better food.

“There’s been a very rapid growth of income in Asia and, particularly, China,” Boehlje said. “They’ve been very aggressive in buying food and trying to improve their diets. That was a big part of why agriculture in the United States didn’t have the same level of pain from the recession as most of the rest of the U.S. economy.”

While many nations were still reeling from the global recession, China recovered quickly and continued to import agricultural products. Concerns about inflation have since cooled China’s economic expansion, Boehlje said.

Less obvious, but significant, influences on agricultural prices are actions the Federal Reserve has taken to strengthen the U.S. economy, Boehlje said. The Fed’s moves to both keep a lid on interest rates and provide U.S. capital markets with dollars have made agriculture an attractive option for those with cash to invest.

“When you’ve got very low interest rates it’s not particularly attractive to put those funds into financial instruments that have low rates of return. So you start looking at other places to invest those funds.”

Commodities, farmland and other real assets often are better hedges against inflation than financial assets, he said.

Although signs point to continued high commodity prices, Boehlje noted that markets can retreat at any time. He urged farmers to carefully consider any additional risk they might take in their operations and be prepared for market corrections.

“When you’re on a higher plateau you also have the potential to fall a lot farther when things don’t go well,” Boehlje said. “We need to acknowledge that we do have a lot more downside potential than we might have had otherwise.”

The post Are Higher Commodity Prices The “New Normal?” appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.