Browsing by Author "Käyhkö, Janina"

Climate change causes climatic risks (hazard-exposure-vulnerability) that are experienced in agriculture as problems with increased precipitation, droughts, pest invasions and weather variability. Agriculture needs to adapt to these changing conditions to secure its continuation in future. It is the farmers, who in last hand take action for adaptation. Farmers are recognized as a stakeholder group in agricultural with plenty of skills to tackle varying weather conditions. In fact, farmers are already implementing adaptation measures, although it is not always driven by or aimed at climate change explicitly. Adaptation policies aimed at farm-scale are being planned and developed. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the leading scientific source of adaptation policy recommendations. Currently it is recommending risk management approach for managing the known and unknown climatic risks that societies and sectors like agriculture are facing. In agriculture, for example, crop loss insurances are part of climate risk management. Farmers are making adaptation decisions at farm-scale based on their own beliefs and experiences, on information from variable sources, and guided by policies and legislation. The primary driver for taking adaptive action at farm, according to protection motivation theory (PMT), however, is the perception of risk – if the risk is assessed high enough and the adaptation is assessed possible. In this thesis, PMT and the theory of risk perception are used to explain farm-scale adaptation. Adaptation is examined as climate or weather variation driven adaptation measures implemented by farmers autonomously or guided by policies. A case study approach and stakeholder interviews were used because of the novelty of the study topic. By examining the case of ‘adaptation in Uusimaa agriculture’ through the perceptions of interviewed farmers and extension officers, an overview on farm-scale adaptation with its variety of influencing factors, and better understanding of risk perceptions as adaptation drivers is reached. Findings of the study show that farmers in Uusimaa are taking adaptation measures, but adaptation policies are not yet guiding adaptation at farm level and that farmers are divided by the ways they respond to climatic risks. Further studies on adaptation policies and agricultural adaptation should recognize the varying risk responses, the need for better adaptation policy guidance and farmers’ adaptation experiences and skills.