The agri-food sector must adapt to changes in climate variability, while also helping to mitigate climate change. Measures termed 'triple-win' mitigate and adapt to climate change, while also improving soil health, thereby increasing yields. These measures might appear to be the easiest to implement, but in practice, barriers prevent full realisation. This study aims to move beyond previous research efforts that identify and categorise barriers by (i) revealing hidden barriers, (ii) understanding the interactions between barriers and (iii) exploring ways to address barriers. A case study focusing on crop rotation as a triple-win strategy in Ukraine demonstrates how a participant-driven iterative research approach can achieve these objectives. During semi-structured interviews with farmers and stakeholders, crop rotation emerged as an area of considerable dissensus with stakeholders commonly citing the greedy behaviour of producers as the problem. Further discussion indicated that the political economy of Ukraine caused financial constraints for producers and Q methodology allowed for additional clarity on the opposing views of crop rotation. Three factors emerged: producer insecurity, national insecurity and business insecurity. These three perspectives reveal contrasting priorities with producer insecurity and business insecurity concerned with the conditions under which producers must operate, while national insecurity has a focus on improving agricultural production to benefit the nation. Consensus statements across all factors could provide first steps to addressing barriers and an opportunity to open discussions amongst stakeholders. Finally, barriers arising from political processes demonstrate that climate policy needs to be integrated with other sector-specific policy decisions.
Kopytko, N; Pruneddu, A
Triple-win strategy? Why is not everyone doing it? A participant-driven research method to reveal barriers to crop rotation in Ukraine
Climatic Change