Socio-psychological and management drivers explain farm level wheat yield gaps in Australia
Achieving sustainable global food security for a rapidly growing world population is one of the greatest challenges of our time. Producing more food efficiently by closing the yield gaps is regarded as a promising solution to address this challenge without further expanding farming land. However, there is limited understanding of the causes contributing to yield gaps. The present study aimed to comprehensively examine three dimensions of the causes for the wheat yield gaps in Australia: farm management practices, farm characteristics and grower characteristics. Computer-assisted telephone interviews of 232 wheat producers from 14 contrasting local areas were conducted. The data collected on these three dimensions were used to develop a comprehensive framework to understand causes of yield gaps. Results reveal significant differences between farms with smaller yield gaps and those with greater yield gaps in relation to farming management as well as farm and grower characteristics. Findings further underline that farms with smaller yield gaps are likely to be smaller holdings growing less wheat on more favourable soil types, are more likely to apply more N fertiliser, to have a greater crop diversity, to soil-test a greater proportion of their fields, to have fewer resistant weeds, to adopt new technologies, and are less likely to grow wheat following either cereal crops or a pasture. They are more likely to use and trust a fee-for-service agronomist, and have a university education. The dynamic relationships between grower characteristics and farm management practices in causing yield gaps are further highlighted through a path analysis. This study is the first to demonstrate that yield gaps are the result of the intertwined dynamics between biophysical factors, grower socio-psychological characteristics and farm management practices. Socio-psychological factors not only directly contribute to yield gaps, but they also influence farm management practices that in turn contribute to yield gaps. Our findings suggest that, to close wheat yield gaps, it is important to develop integrated strategies that address both socio-psychological and farm management dimensions.
KeywordsCrop management Nitrogen fertiliser Soil type Wheat Consulting services Crop rotation Technology adoption
This research was jointly funded by GRDC (Grains Research and Development Corporation) and CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Corporation). We gratefully acknowledge the expert advice provided by Jan Edwards and Alan Umbers of GRDC as well as by Pam Watson, CEO of Down To Earth Research, who conducted the interviews. Rick Llewellyn and Marta Monjardino of CSIRO made useful suggestions about the survey questions. We thank Lygia Romanach and Robert Garrard of CSIRO and three anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments on earlier versions of the manuscript.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Anderson W, Johansen C, Siddique KHM (2016) Addressing the yield gap in rainfed crops: a review. Agron Sustain Dev 36(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-015-0341-y
- Arbuckle JG, Moeton LW, Hobbs J (2015) Understanding farmer perspectives on climate change adaptation and mitigation: the roles of trust in sources of climate information, climate change beliefs, and perceived risk. Environ Behav 47(2):205–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916513503832 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Beeston G, Stephens D, Nunweek M, Walcott J, Ranatunga K (2005) GRDC strategic planning for investment based on agro-ecological zones. Final report to GRDC, June 2005. Commonwealth of Australia, CanberraGoogle Scholar
- Byrne BM (2001) Structural equation modeling with AMOS: basic concpets, applications, and programming. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, MahwahGoogle Scholar
- Carberry PS, Liang W, Twomlow S, Holzworth DP, Dimes JP, McClelland T, Huth NI, Chen F, Hochman Z, Keating BA (2013) Scope for improved eco-efficiency varies among diverse cropping systems. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110(8381–8386):8381–8386. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1208050110 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Cassman KG, Dobermann A, Walters DT, Yang H (2003) Meeting cereal demand while protecting natural resources and improving environmental quality. Annu Rev Environ Resour 28:315–358. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.28.040202.122858 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Field A (2009) Discovering statistics using SPSS, 3rd edn. SAGE Publications Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Holzworth DP, Huth NI, deVoil PG, Zurcher EJ, Herrmann NI, McLean G, Chenu K, van Oosterom EJ, Snow V, Murphy C, Moore AD, Brown H, Whish JPM, Verrall S, Fainges J, Bell LW, Peake AS, Poulton PL, Hochman Z, Thorburn PJ, Gaydon DS, Dalgliesh NP, Rodriguez D, Cox H, Chapman S, Doherty A, Teixeira E, Sharp J, Cichota R, Vogeler I, Li FY, Wang E, Hammer GL, Robertson MJ, Dimes JP, Whitbread AM, Hunt J, van Rees H, McClelland T, Carberry PS, Hargreaves JNG, MacLeod N, McDonald C, Harsdorf J, Wedgwood S, Keating BA (2014) APSIM—evolution towards a new generation of agricultural systems simulation. Environ Model Softw 62:327–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Isbell RF (1996) The Australian soil classification. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, VictoriaGoogle Scholar
- Isbell RF, McDonald WS, Ashton LJ (1997) Concepts and rationale of the Australian soil classification. CSIRO land and water, CanberraGoogle Scholar
- Quinn CE, Burbach ME (2008) Personal characteristics preceding pro-environmental behaviors that improve surface water quality. Great Plains Res 18:103–114Google Scholar
- van Gool D (2016) Identifying soil constraints that limit wheat yield in South-West Western Australia. Resource management technical report 399. Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia, PerthGoogle Scholar