Download as a PDF - CiteSeerX

improved further as a result of attending the ESF event.
The ESF Campaign has influenced the attitudes of 59% of land managers and 40%
of the advisors and influencers interviewed 3 and 5 months after the ESF events
held in February to April 2005 towards diffuse pollution. Forty-four per cent of land
managers and one in three advisors and influencers said that as a result of attending
the ESF event, they now have a greater sense of personal responsibility towards
tackling diffuse pollution at farm level and a further 15% of land managers and 7%
of advisors and influencers said that they have been persuaded that agriculture does
cause some pollution problems. One in ten of the attending land managers still do
not accept that agriculture is a major cause of diffuse pollution.
Intentions to Change
Two-thirds (67%) of the land managers attending ESF events held in February to
April 2005 were planning to instigate measures to tackle diffuse pollution or make
further improvements and changes to their farm practices as a result of attending the
ESF event. Fifty-eight per cent of land managers said that as a result of attending
the ESF event they were planning to make further changes and/or improvements to
their farm practices with regard to tackling diffuse pollution. A further 9% of land
managers are planning to start tackling diffuse pollution as a result of attending an
ESF event. Twenty-five per cent of the land managers attending ESF events held in
February to April 2005 felt that they had had been reassured by the event that they
were already fully addressing all of the diffuse pollution issues and have no need to
make further changes.
Motivators and Barriers to Change
Sixty-seven per cent (94) of land managers attending an ESF event, indicated
that concern for the environment, a greater understanding of diffuse pollution and
legislation were the most frequently mentioned motivators behind the intention to
change. Sixty per cent thought that financial considerations would motivate their
change but only 22% thought peer pressure would change their practice. Analysis of
weighted data shows that concern for the environment is by far the most important
motivating factor for intention to change farming practice in order to tackle diffuse
pollution (seven times more so than for peer pressure). The four most common barriers
to change perceived by both land managers and advisors/influencers attending the
ESF events in February to April 2005 were cost, insufficient time or labour, likely
impact on profitability and too many other things to do. One in three advisors also
saw lack of knowledge to be a barrier to change and 44% of advisors believed that
land managers’ lack of conviction about the problem or the effectiveness of any
actions taken could be a barrier to change. However, 38% of land managers asked
this question said that they could not think of any barriers to implementing changes
regarding the management of diffuse pollution on farm.
Other Organisations and Initiatives Influencing Change of Farming
Practice
ESF has an important signposting role to other advice initiatives and farm advisors
in particular, acknowledge the influence of the Single Payment Scheme (SPS), ES
schemes and the Environment Agency in persuading land managers to change their
140