Opportunities and constraints of farming styles to meet the landscape preferences of rural inhabitants

Opportunities and constraints of farming styles to meet the landscape preferences of rural inhabitants Derk Jan Stobbelaar 1,2,3, Florien Kuijper 3, Henk Renting 3, Jeroen C.J. Groot 1,3, Andre Jellema 1, Walter A.H. Rossing 1 Wageningen University and Research Centre 1 Biological Farming Systems Group, Marijkeweg 22, 6709 PG Wageningen. 2 Plant Production Systems Group, P.O. Box 430, 6700 AK Wageningen. 3 Rural Sociology Group, P.O. Box 8130, 6700 EW Wageningen, The Netherlands. Tel. +31 317 482498, E-mail: Derk-Jan.Stobbelaar@wur.nl Abstract More and more people are living in the rural areas because they want to enjoy the countryside. Farmers play an important role in providing the qualities attached to the countryside. Rural residents of the Northern Friesian Woodlands (The Netherlands) were interviewed about their landscape preferences. They all like the landscape they live in with its small plots and hedgerows and see an overall progress in landscape quality. They dislike the large modern barns, maize cultivation and boring green grasslands. All types of farmers can provide some of the preferred qualities, but farmers belonging to the farming styles Calm farmer and Stayers perform the best in this respect. Farmers’ cooperatives can play an important role in connecting the various landscape qualities of individual farmers on region level. 67.1 Introduction Landscape is becoming increasingly important for inhabitants and visitors of the rural area. Therefore, besides food production, the production of valuable rural landscapes can be regarded as a new goal for the agricultural sector (RLG 2005). As a result of this emerging demand, farmers are - individually or organised in environmental cooperatives - more and more presenting themselves as providers of this ‘green service’ for society. In order to match the demand of the landscape ‘consumers’, mainly inhabitants of the area, with the ‘supply’ of farmers (co-operatives), the question can be asked to what extent landscape maintenance that is being implemented by farmers is in accordance with this demand. De Bruin and Van der Ploeg (1991) showed that farming styles are linked to the landscape preferences of the farmers involved, and that these farmers strive to change the landscape on their farm in accordance with their preferences. Farming styles are thereby a possible analytical concept to analyse and influence the interrelations between landscape preferences of inhabitants, farm strategies and landscape images of farms. Therefore, our research question is: what are the opportunities and constraints of different farming styles to meet the landscape demands of rural inhabitants? This research was conducted in the Northern Friesian Woodlands, an area in the north of the Netherlands which is characterized by small, linear and long stretched plots, reflecting a history of peat reclamation. Plots are divided by hedgerows on wooded banks, which traditionally had a function as field boundary and for providing wood. Nowadays these hedgerows are valued because of their ecological function and as a cultural landmark in the landscape of the region, which furthermore is characterized by wide, open spaces (Renting 2004). The landscape is well-preserved by farmers and predominantly intact. 67.2 Methodology & outline To answer the research question, the following steps were taken and reported in this contribution: First, literature research into the psychology of landscape preferences was done, to be able to formulate hypothetical preferences of inhabitants of the research area. Second, these hypothetical preferences were tested by conducting a pilot survey among ten inhabitants. Besides testing the hypothetical preferences another goal of the pilot survey was to test the questionnaire for a larger survey and to offer a first insight in landscape preferences. Respondents were selected by key informants from NLTO (Northern Agricultural Organisation) and a nature education organisation. The questions involved three themes: 1. attractiveness of landscape, compared to other landscapes in the province of Friesland, taking into account overall beauty, special landscape features and possibilities for outdoor activities, 2. policy regarding landscape maintenance and 3. opinion on farmers’ contribution to landscape maintenance. All respondents are inhabitants of the Friesian woodlands with a known interest in landscape and nature. All were aged over 45 and had been living in the area for a long time. Third, a brief description of farming styles in the Northern Friesian Woodlands and their implications for the landscape quality is given. Fourth, these landscape qualities are matched with the answers from the pilot survey. 67.3 Theoretical landscape preferences Landscape psychological research distinguishes ‘shallow’ and ‘profound’ preferences of landscapes. Shallow preferences relate to physical features of landscape as such. Profound preferences take into account associations, memories, symbolic interpretations and geographic coherence of the landscape (Hendriks & Stobbelaar, 2003). Positively valued landscape features with respect to shallow preferences are (Arriaza et al., 2004): 1. water, 2. wilderness, 3. mountains, 4. vegetation, 5. colour contrast. Schupbach et al. (2004) mention – in order of importance - 1. character 2. naturalness and 3. variety. Naturalness is interpreted as the presence of natural elements as swamps and shrubs, but also extensively managed grassland. This is in line with Coeterier (1996) who argues that experiencing naturalness is not only related to natural or wild landscape elements, but on the contrary, can be a feature of all landscape elements. Kaplan and Kaplan (1989) found that complexity in landscapes is valued (together with mystery, coherence and legibility). Coeterier (1996) adds to this point of view that should contribute to the unity of landscapes. He also states that the amount of elements that contribute to the perceived unity of the landscape (called satisfiers) can not easily be too much, whereas a very small amount of elements that do not contribute to the unity (dissatisfiers), can ruin the landscape quality. A basic theory in landscape research, the savannah theory, stipulates that humans prefer half open landscapes with good views, dispersed patches of trees and shrubs, grassy non swampy soil, but with surface water and the absence of danger and threat (Van den Berg, 1999). Absence of danger and threat also refers to the possibility to understand the landscape and to get an overview of it. When this theoretical knowledge is applied to the Friesian Woodlands, the hypothesis can be formulated that this landscape will be highly valued in terms of shallow preferences. We see a half open landscape, with grassland, water, shrubs, a variety of colours that refer to a specific time of the year and possibilities to view in the distance. The landscape has a natural character with sufficient variety or complexity. Very few dissatisfiers are present. 67.4 Actual landscape preferences All respondents praise the characteristic landscape of small plots and hedgerows and see an overall progress in landscape quality. Half of the respondents even consider the landscape the most important factor determining the quality of their living environment. All respondents consider hedgerows and small pools as most characteristic features of the landscape, followed by farmyards, shrubs and grassland. Arable land is considered a-typical for the area. When asked about ‘dissatisfiers’; elements that are considered annoying and not fitting in the landscape, large modern farm sheds, silo’s and electricity lines were most frequently mentioned. Maize cultivation was mentioned as well. Most respondents considered the hedgerow structure just good as it is, and are satisfied with the current maintenance activities. With respect to the grassland, all respondents answered that the grass is ‘boring’ and ‘too green’, due to high fertilizer use, some referring to traditional grasslands with lots of herbs and flowers. Nevertheless, most respondents are moderately positive about the role of farmers in landscape and nature conservation, a statement that is confirmed by earlier research in the region (SNM 2005). They predominantly responded neutrally to the statement that farmers should do more in this respect, half of them adding that ‘farmers already do a lot’. Also remarkable is that most respondents were positive on increasing subsidies to farmers for contributing to landscape value. The promotion of regionspecific farm buildings and farmyard planting was also considered important, while improving the accessibility of the region by creating more walking and biking routes was less valued. When asked their opinion on creating passages in the hedgerows or occasionally removing a hedgerow completely to improve agricultural efficiency, respondents differed, being either completely positive or (moderately) negative. In short: the respondents generally asked for a landscape with hedgerows, traditional farmyards with region-specific buildings and trees, and diverse grassland with flowers and herbs. They also considered farmers as important maintainers of the landscape, who should receive subsidies for those activities. 67.5 Farming styles Agricultural activity in the Woodlands is dominated by dairy farming, but shows a variety of farm household strategies or ‘farming styles’. Farming styles are the total of interrelated, share ideas of farmers about the organization of production and the developments of the farm (Van der Ploeg, 2003) and represent different modes of ordering natural and social aspects within farming activities (Renting 2004). Recent research in the Friesian Woodlands indicates that farm strategies are differentiated according to the level on which nature and landscape may be integrated with farming activities (Swagemakers and Wiskerke 2006). Some farms cannot integrate nature and landscape on owned farm land, but have possibilities to take up management activities on additional rented land in nature reserves. Other farms have more possibilities for management activities, as long as these are limited to field boundaries and do not affect the management of agricultural fields. Again other farms see extensive possibilities to integrate nature and landscape, also when situated on parcels, and effectively build their farming strategy on the integrated and sustainable use of natural resources. These variable possibilities to integrate nature and landscape are related to different underlying farming styles. According to De Bruin & Van der Ploeg (1991) four farming styles can be distinguished in the Woodlands region: (1) Business farmers, (2) Breeders, (3), Calm farmers, and (4) Stayers. Business farmers aim at large farms, both in terms of scale and intensity, in order to produce milk at the lowest costs per unit. Possibilities to integrate nature and landscape are limited, and are only taken up when these can be developed in a cost-effective way that compensates productivity losses. Breeders base their strategy on high milk yields per cow and premium prices for high fat and protein levels. This style has fewer problems to work within the smallscale landscape, active management of hedgerows may easily be integrated, but there are little possibilities to adjust the management of fields (due to loss of fodder quality). Calm farmers develop their farm gradually in order to avoid indebtedness and keep overall cost levels low, while the available family labour is an important starting point for farm development. This style knows low levels of external inputs and relatively extensive land-use, resulting in a wider range of possibilities to integrate nature and landscape management. Lastly, Stayers tend to have small farms and a low milk yield per cow. They aim to optimally valorise their own labour and actively search for complementary income sources. The implications of this particular style for nature and landscape are differentiated. Some representatives actively take up management activities as alternative income source, while in other cases limited labour availability (allocated to other activities) hinders the integration of nature and landscape management. Farming styles therefore have different implications for nature and landscape. This is illustrated by Figure 1, which represents farming styles according to their possibilities to work in small-scale landscapes (macro nature of the landscape) and the preferred micro-production conditions in terms of type of farm buildings and type of pasture. Breeders and Calm farmers see the most possibilities to integrate their farm management within the small scale landscape as opposed to business farmers whose style requires larger parcel sizes. On the other hand, Calm farmers and Stayers express the highest preference for rich and varied grasslands and regionspecific farm buildings, while other styles tend to have cubicle sheds and homogenous grasslands. Small-scale closed landscape Calm farmers Breeders Traditional farm buildings Diverse grassland Stayers Cubicle sheds Uniform grassland Business farmers Large-scale open landscape Figure 1: Styles of farming according to the dimensions 'micro production conditions' and 'macro nature of the landscape' 67.6 Conclusion and discussion The preferences of respondents in the pilot survey are in line with the theoretically expected outcomes. The inhabitants value natural grasslands and the dense, complex hedgerow structure. They also like the region-specific buildings and farm yard planting. Large barns and sheds are disliked. Being a dissatisfier, these elements can lower the perceived landscape quality dramatically. Farming styles can potentially contribute to landscape qualities, although specific opportunities are differentiated. Some styles, like Calm farmers and Stayers, have good opportunities to add to preferred landscape features like diverse grasslands, region-specific buildings and ecologically managed hedgerows. Others, like Breeders and to some extent Business farmers, see fewer possibilities but can still contribute to basic landscape qualities by the management of linear elements. Especially promising is the role of the farmers’ cooperative for nature and landscape management that is active in the region. It could play an important role in the collective development of landscape networks at regional scale that interconnect the qualities offered by different farmers from different styles. In such networks fields and boundaries with high nature quality on some farms can be linked by linear elements of basic landscape quality managed by others. The positive attitude of inhabitants to the creation of passages in the hedgerows suggests that plans could also include landscape adjustments to improve farm efficiency. New research will be conducted among a larger and more aselect population of inhabitants and tourist visitors. The preliminary results show that a closer look should be taken at the role of dissatisfiers in the landscape. Also the role of Stayers, being a very diverse group including hobby farmers needs closer examination. References Arriaza, M., J. F. Canas-Ortega, J. A. Canas-Madueno and P. Ruiz-Aviles, 2004. Assessing the visual quality of rural landscapes. Landsc. & Urban Plan. 69 (1). pp. 115-125. Coeterier, J. F., 1996. Dominant attributes in the perception and evaluation of the Dutch landscape. Landsc. and Urban Pl. 34 (1). pp. 27-44. De Bruin, R.& J.D. van der Ploeg, 1991. Maat houden. Bedrijfsstijlen en het beheer van landschap in de Noordelijke Friese Wouden en het Zuidelijk Westerkwartier. Landbouwuniversiteit Wageningen, Vakgroep Agrarische Ontwikkelingssociologie. Hendriks, K. and D. J. Stobbelaar, 2003. Agriculture in a legible landscape. How conventional and organic farms contribute to landscape quality. (In Dutch, with English summary). Chair Landuse Planning, Wageningen University. 268 pp. Kaplan, R. and S. Kaplan, 1989. The experience of nature: a psychological perspective. Cambridge University Press, New York. 340 pp. Ploeg, J.D. van der (2003) The Virtual Farmer. Past, Present and Future of the Dutch Peasantry.Van Gorcum. Assen. Raad Landelijk Gebied (2005). Nationale Landschappen: Vaste koers en lange adem. Raad voor het Landelijk gebied, Amersfoort. Publicatie RLG 05/1. 80 pp. Renting, H.,2004. Mapping the nature conservation potential of agricultural land-users. 3rd WUR/INRA seminar on Multifunctional Agriculture, Paris, 17-18 Sept. 2003. SNM, 2005. The Netherlands can be so beautiful; the perception of 52 areas by inhabitants (In Dutch). Stichting Natuur en Milieu, Utrecht, 45 pp. Swagemakers, P. and J.S.C. Wiskerke, 2006. Integrating nature conservation and landscape management in farming systems in the Frisian Woodlands. From landscape research to landscape planning: aspects of integration, education and application. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. pp. 321-334. Van den Berg, A. E., 1999. Individual differences in the aesthetic evaluation of natural landscapes. Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, The Netherlands. 149 pp.