Factors that influence dairy farmers' decisions to implement Johne's Disease control practices: A systematic review.

Johne's Disease (JD) is an infectious ruminant disease that can cause economic loss for famers through reduced milk yields and infertility and has negative implications for animal welfare. JD is endemic in the dairy populations of many countries and there has been significant effort by governments and industry to try and control it. However, these efforts have had limited success. Many studies look at individual control programmes or the adoption of Johne's control measures; however a wider perspective on what drives farmer participation Johne's control does not currently exist. This study seeks to fill this gap by conducting a systematic review informed by the PRISMA statement. The results suggest that psychological factors such as participation fatigue, cognitive dissidence over animal welfare and not having first-hand experience of the disease act as barriers to Johne's control. To better promote Johne's control, this review emphasises that control programmes need to engage farmers, advisers, and supply chain actors in their design and delivery of control programmes to account for differing attitudes and levels of knowledge.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Farmers' Mental Health: A Case Study of the UK.

OBJECTIVES: In this paper, we use a UK case study to explore how the COVID-19 pandemic affected the mental health (emotional, psychological, social wellbeing) of farmers. We outline the drivers of poor farming mental health, the manifold impacts of the pandemic at a time of policy and environmental change, and identify lessons that can be learned to develop resilience in farming communities against future shocks. METHODS: We undertook a survey answered by 207 farmers across the UK, focusing on drivers of poor mental health and the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic. We also conducted 22 in-depth interviews with individuals in England, Scotland and Wales who provide mental health support to farmers. These explored how and why the COVID-19 pandemic affected the mental health of farmers. These interviews were supplemented by 93 survey responses from a similar group of support providers (UK-wide). RESULTS: We found that the pandemic exacerbated underlying drivers of poor mental health and wellbeing in farming communities. 67% of farmers surveyed reported feeling more stressed, 63% felt more anxious, 38% felt more depressed, and 12% felt more suicidal. The primary drivers of poor mental health identified by farmers during the pandemic included decreased social contact and loneliness, issues with the general public on private land, and moving online for social events. Support providers also highlighted relationship and financial issues, illness, and government inspections as drivers of poor mental health. Some farmers, conversely, outlined positive impacts of the pandemic. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic is just one of many potential stressors associated with poor farming mental health and its impacts are likely to be long-lasting and delayed. Multiple stressors affecting farmers at the same time can create a tipping point. Therefore, there is a need for long-term support and ongoing evaluation of the drivers of poor mental health in farming families.

The old, the new, or the old made new? Everyday counter-narratives of the so-called fourth agricultural revolution.

Prevalent narratives of agricultural innovation predict that we are once again on the cusp of a global agricultural revolution. According to these narratives, this so-called fourth agricultural revolution, or agriculture 4.0, is set to transform current agricultural practices around the world at a quick pace, making use of new sophisticated precision technologies. Often used as a rhetorical device, this narrative has a material effect on the trajectories of an inherently political and normative agricultural transition; with funding, other policy instruments, and research attention focusing on the design and development of new precision technologies. A growing critical social science literature interrogates the promises of revolution. Engagement with new technology is likely to be uneven, with benefits potentially favouring the already powerful and the costs falling hardest on the least powerful. If grand narratives of change remain unchallenged, we risk pursuing innovation trajectories that are exclusionary, failing to achieve responsible innovation. This study utilises a range of methodologies to explore everyday encounters between farmers and technology, with the aim of inspiring further work to compile the microhistories that can help to challenge robust grand narratives of change. We explore how farmers are engaging with technology in practice and show how these interactions problematise a simple, linear notion of innovation adoption and use. In doing so, we reflect upon the contribution that the study of everyday encounters can make in setting more inclusionary, responsible pathways towards sustainable agriculture.