Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems

, Volume 105, Issue 2, pp 103–116 | Cite as

Farmers’ attitudes towards common farming practices in northern Greece: implications for environmental pollution

  • Charalambos S. Lithourgidis
  • Katerina Stamatelatou
  • Christos A. Damalas
Original Article


Common farming practices in intensive agriculture can be serious causes of water quality degradation, depending on the interaction between physical vulnerability of the farmland and farmers’ behaviors in practicing farming. However, relevant information is highly limited in Greece. Farmers’ attitudes and practices in the use of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and irrigation water were explored in Serres region in northern Greece to understand behavior in practicing farming. The majority of the farmers considered that chemical fertilizers are harmful substances particularly to surface and groundwater and pesticides are highly harmful to human health. Most farmers showed high levels of awareness of the potential impact of farming practices on the environment, probably due to a combination of high experience in farming, adequate formal education, and valid sources of information. Farmers’ compliance with most recommended practices showed high understanding of most components of conservation practices in fertilization, except from a void in the use of soil tests for better adjustment of the fertilization and in the use of organic fertilizers. Only a small fraction of farmers (4.4 %) were found to overuse fertilization, more often in sandy soils, but this practice was not accompanied by excessive use of irrigation water. As for pesticide use, farmers’ compliance with most recommended practices showed high levels of rational use, except from the management of empty pesticide containers. None of the farmers overused soil pesticides with reference to application rates and frequency. Data provide key information for natural resource managers, relevant stakeholders, and local authorities to understand how farmers view their relationship to farming as well as how farmers practice farming. The collected evidence can serve as a valuable benchmark for future comparisons in Greece and possibly for comparisons with other areas of southern Europe. Tailored education programs that improve farmers’ knowledge in fertilizing, pesticide use, and their impact on the environment can be a major step towards promoting sustainable farming and reducing potential environmental contamination.


Environmental awareness Fertilization Pesticide use Survey 



The authors gratefully acknowledge farmers of Serres for their voluntary participation, patience, and overall assistance in the survey.


  1. Ajayi OC (2007) User acceptability of sustainable soil fertility technologies: lessons from farmers’ knowledge, attitude and practice in southern Africa. J Sustain Agric 30:21–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atari DOA, Yiridoe EK, Smale S, Duinker PN (2009) What motivates farmers to participate in the Nova Scotia environmental farm plan program? Evidence and environmental policy implications. J Environ Manag 90:1269–1279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barreiro-Hurlé J, Espinosa-Goded M, Dupraz P (2010) Does intensity of change matter? Factors affecting adoption of agri-environmental schemes in Spain. J Environ Plan Manag 53:891–905CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Borsotto P, Henke R, Macrì MC, Salvioni C (2008) Participation in rural landscape conservation schemes in Italy. Landsc Res 33:347–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brouder SM, Gomez-Macpherson H (2014) The impact of conservation agriculture on smallholder agricultural yields: a scoping review of the evidence. Agric Ecosyst Environ 187:11–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bruin AJ, Ball Coelho BR, Beyaert RP, Reeleder RD, Roy RC, Capell B (2010) High value crops in coarse textured soil and nitrate leaching—How risky is it? Can J Plant Sci 90:515–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Damalas CA, Eleftherohorinos IG (2011) Pesticide exposure, safety issues, and risk assessment indicators. Int J Environ Res Public Health 8:1402–1419CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Damalas CA, Hashemi SM (2010) Pesticide risk perception and use of personal protective equipment among young and old cotton growers in northern Greece. Agrociencia 44:363–371Google Scholar
  9. Damalas CA, Theodorou MG, Georgiou EB (2006) Attitudes towards pesticide labelling among Greek tobacco farmers. Int J Pest Manag 52:269–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Darnhofer I, Schneeberger W, Freyer B (2005) Converting or not converting to organic farming in Austria: farmer types and their rationale. Agric Hum Values 22:39–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Defrancesco E, Gatto P, Runge F, Trestini S (2008) Factors affecting farmers’ participation in agri-environmental measures: a northern Italian perspective. J Agric Econ 59:114–131Google Scholar
  12. Fawole OP (2008) Pineapple farmers’ information sources and usage in Nigeria. Bulg J Agric Sci 14:381–389Google Scholar
  13. Gao B, Ju X, Meng Q, Cui Z, Christie P, Chen X, Zhang F (2015) The impact of alternative cropping systems on global warming potential, grain yield and groundwater use. Agric Ecosyst Environ 203:46–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Green JL, Camilli G, Elmore PB (2006) Handbook of complementary methods in education research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, MahwahGoogle Scholar
  15. Greiner R, Gregg D (2011) Farmers’ intrinsic motivations, barriers to the adoption of conservation practices and effectiveness of policy instruments: empirical evidence from northern Australia. Land Use Policy 28:257–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Greiner R, Patterson L, Miller O (2009) Motivations, risk perceptions and adoption of conservation practices by farmers. Agric Syst 99:86–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Guerra CA, Pinto-Correia T (2016) Linking farm management and ecosystem service provision: challenges and opportunities for soil erosion prevention in Mediterranean silvo-pastoral systems. Land Use Policy 51:54–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Guzzella L, Pozzoni F, Giuliano G (2006) Herbicide contamination of surficial groundwater in Northern Italy. Environ Pollut 142:344–353CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Hashemi SM, Damalas CA (2011) Farmers’ perceptions of pesticide efficacy: reflections on the importance of pest management practices adoption. J Sustain Agric 35:69–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hashemi SM, Hosseini SM, Damalas CA (2009) Farmers’ competence and training needs on pest management practices: participation in extension workshops. Crop Prot 28:934–939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hellenic Statistical Authority (2011) Agricultural Statistics of Greece. Hellenic Statistical Authority, PiraeusGoogle Scholar
  22. Ingram J, Gaskell P, Mills J, Short C (2013) Incorporating agri-environment schemes into farm development pathways: a temporal analysis of farmer motivations. Land Use Policy 31:267–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kizos T, Koulouri M, Vakoufaris H, Psarrou M (2010) Preserving characteristics of the agricultural landscape through agri-environmental policies: the case of cultivation terraces in Greece. Landscape Res 35:577–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kohler F, Thierry C, Marchand G (2014) Multifunctional agriculture and farmers’ attitudes: two case studies in rural France. Hum Ecol 42:929–949CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lastra-Bravo XB, Hubbard C, Garrod G, Tolón-Becerra A (2015) What drives farmers’ participation in EU agri-environmental schemes? Results from a qualitative meta-analysis. Environ Sci Policy 54:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mazur-Wierzbicka E (2015) The application of corporate social responsibility in European agriculture. J Chem Phys 19:19–23Google Scholar
  27. McGuire J, Morton LW, Cast AD (2013) Reconstructing the good farmer identity: shifts in farmer identities and farm management practices to improve water quality. Agric Hum Values 30:57–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. McKergow LA, Weaver DM, Prosser IP, Grayson RB, Reed AEG (2003) Before and after riparian management: sediment and nutrient exports from a small agricultural catchment, Western Australia. J Hydrol 270:253–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mielach C, Schinegger R, Schmutz S, Zeiringer B, Rechberger A, Gasparetto D, et al (2012) Assessment of common methodologies related to water quality and biological continuity, including river recovering. SEE HYDROPOWER Project, work package 4—Preserving water bodies ecosystems, p 120Google Scholar
  30. Norman GR, Streiner DL (2008) Biostatistics: the bare of essentials, 3rd edn. BC Decker Inc, HamiltonGoogle Scholar
  31. Page G, Bellotti B (2015) Farmers value on-farm ecosystem services as important, but what are the impediments to participation in PES schemes? Sci Total Environ 515–516:12–19CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Pannell DJ, Marshall GR, Barr N, Curtis A, Vanclay F, Wilkinson R (2006) Understanding and promoting adoption of conservation technologies by rural landholders. Aust J Exp Agric 46:1407–1424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pretty J, Brett C, Gee D, Hine R, Mason C, Morison J, Rayment M, Van der Bijl G, Dobbs T (2001) Policy challenges and priorities for internalizing the externalities of modern agriculture. J Environ Plan Manag 44:263–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Quemada M, Baranski M, Nobel-de Lange MNJ, Vallejo A, Cooper JM (2013) Meta-analysis of strategies to control nitrate leaching in irrigated agricultural systems and their effects on crop yield. Agric Ecosyst Environ 174:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Robertson GP, Vitousek PM (2009) Nitrogen in agriculture: balancing the cost of an essential resource. Ann Rev Environ Resour 34:97–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schneider ML, Francis CA (2006) Ethics of land use in Nebraska: farmer and consumer opinions in Washington County. J Sustain Agric 28:81–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sheeder RJ, Lynne GD (2011) Empathy-conditioned conservation: ‘‘Walking in the shoes of others’’ as a conservation farmer. Land Econ 87:433–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Smil V (1999) Nitrogen in crop production: an account of global flows. Global Biogeochem Cycles 13:647–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Smith HF, Sullivan CA (2014) Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes–Farmers’ perceptions. Ecol Econ 98:72–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Solano C, Herrero M, León H, Pérez E (2003) The role of personal information sources on the decision-making process of Costa Rican dairy farmers. Agric Syst 76:3–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stoate C, Boatman ND, Borralho RJ, Rio Carvalho C, de Snoo GR, Eden P (2001) Ecological impacts of arable intensification in Europe. J Environ Manag 63:337–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stofferahn CW (2009) Personal, farm and value orientations in conversion to organic farming. J Sustain Agric 33:862–884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tilman D, Cassman KG, Matson PA, Naylor R, Polasky S (2002) Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature 418:671–677CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Tosakana NSP, Van Tassell LW, Wulfhorst JD, Boll J, Mahler R, Brooks ES, Kane S (2010) Determinants of the adoption of conservation practices by farmers in the Northwest Wheat and Range Region. J Soil Water Conserv 65:404–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Uthes S, Matzdorf B (2013) Studies on agri-environmental measures: a survey of the literature. Environ Manag 51:251–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Vlahos G, Beopoulos N (2003) Environmentally friendly policy schemes as models for the introduction and use of agri-environmental indicators in Greece. Eur Environ 13:258–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Yang X, Fang S (2015) Practices, perceptions, and implications of fertilizer use in East-Central China. Ambio 44:647–652CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Young EO, Briggs RD (2005) Shallow ground water nitrate-N and ammonium-N in cropland and riparian buffers. Agric Ecosyst Environ 109:297–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charalambos S. Lithourgidis
    • 1
  • Katerina Stamatelatou
    • 1
    • 2
  • Christos A. Damalas
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Science and TechnologyHellenic Open UniversityPatraGreece
  2. 2.Department of Environmental EngineeringDemocritus University of ThraceXanthiGreece
  3. 3.Department of Agricultural DevelopmentDemocritus University of ThraceOrestiadaGreece

Personalised recommendations