Determinants of farmers’ adoption of adaptation measures in carbon-intensive agricultural areas: A case study in An Giang province, Vietnam

Abstract

Globally, agriculture is both a victim and contributor to anthropogenic global warming. While farmers’ climate change perception generally increases, a low-carbon agricultural transition is not always an easy choice. There are numerous studies looking at the constraints hampering farmers’ adoption of adaptation strategies in climate-prone areas worldwide. The extent to which their assertion applies to farmers in carbon-intensive agricultural areas with less experience of climate change effects, however, is not clear and cannot be assumed given the shared social and cultural specificities of the farming population. This paper seeks to address this gap by scrutinizing critical determinants of farmers’ adaptation action in agriculturally rich An Giang province, where climate change impacts are generally less evident. Intense crop cultivation in the province involves the liberal use of fertilizers, crop-residue burning, frequent tilling, and other harmful farming practices that release carbon. Primary data were collected through household surveys (n = 133), field observation, and in-depth interviews (n = 24). A chi-square (χ2) test and a binary logistic regression model was used to analyze the factors influencing farmers’ adaptation decisions. The results indicated that farmers’ adaptation intent and decisions in the research area were significantly determined by market accessibility, uncertainty/instability of existing crops, and extreme weather conditions. These findings shed new light on approaches that are likely to motivate or hamper farmers’ climate-friendly transition in carbon-intensive agricultural hubs. We suggest that adaptive farming initiatives that have the potential to improve marketability and sustainability should be a starting point for mobilizing farmers for a low-carbon farming transition.

Keywords:

• adaptation strategies
• GHG mitigation
• climate change
• Mekong Delta
• low-carbon farming

1. Introduction

Greenhouse gases (GHG) emitted from a human-induced increase of fossil fuels burned, aerosol releases, and land alteration from agriculture and deforestation are causing rapid global warming in the last century (Allen et al., 2019; Aryal et al., 2020). Although GHG emissions vary across countries and economic sectors, recent reports confirm that agriculture is one of the leading contributors to anthropogenic climate change (USEPA, 2020). In Vietnam, while the country’s contribution to global warming is rather low, the annual increase of GHG emission has continued to grow rapidly with a sustained average of more than 12% per year in the last two decades, emitting CO2 at rates three times higher than the world average (Boden et al., 2017; USEPA, 2020). Despite all its successes, agriculture is responsible for more than 20% of Vietnam’s GHG emissions, and is second only after the energy industry which has contributed almost 66% (MONRE, 2020). According to USAID Climate Links (2016), Vieweg et al. (2017), and Trung et al. (2020), primary sources of emissions in agriculture in Vietnam are rice production (≈28%), livestock (≈10%), manure management (≈10%), synthetic fertilizers (≈12,5%), and direct and indirect emissions from agricultural soils (≈25%). Intense crop cultivation involves the liberal use of fertilizers, crop-residue burning, frequent tilling, and other harmful farming practices that release carbon. Agricultural emission is expected to increase because methane emissions from intensive paddy fields are on the rapid rise.

It is important to note that Vietnam is considered one of the countries that are most vulnerable to climate change. The geographic features in low-lying regions such as the Mekong Delta are exposed to unpredictable drought and precipitation, heat waves, sea level rise, and rising temperatures. As highlighted in the latest Sea Level Rise Scenarios Report by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MONRE), Vietnam would experience a 2–3°C increase in average temperatures and a 78–100 cm rise in sea levels by the end of the century. In its worst-case scenario, the report estimates that if the sea level rises 1 meter, the low-lying Mekong Delta would probably face a 39-percent loss in land area, putting agriculture and food security at extreme risk. Coastal provinces appear to be most in danger (MONRE, 2020).

In the context of environmental changes, farmers are at the forefront with a limited capacity to adapt. Globally, farmers are experiencing the adverse impacts of climate change differently and disproportionately due to their different geographical and livelihood contexts. In the Mekong Delta, around 1,1 million people have migrated out of their villages to industrial hotspots and big cities, equivalent to the last ten years’ average population growth. Climate change is perceived as one of the major drivers accelerating this outward migration (Chapman & Tri, 2018; Koubi et al., 2016). While some farmers have no other choice but to migrate, many in rural villages rely on their limited livelihood capitals to switch to more expensive farming practices to sustain their livelihoods and meet their daily needs. Some studies argue that farmers are more prone to overusing fertilizers and chemical inputs to ensure high productivity (Boulard et al., 2011; Quang et al., 2021). After all, their carbon-intensive farming practices are adding further pressures on the local environment and public health. In other words, farmers are the first to feel the effects of climate change while at the same time contributing significantly to GHG emissions through agricultural livelihood activities such as cultivation, intensive rice farming and deforestation. Indeed, farmers are contributing 17–30% of GHG (Israel et al., 2020).

Locally, farmers’ awareness of environmental problems is increasing, and they have the desire and ability to be innovative in their farming practices (Lynch et al., 2021; Quang & de Wit, 2020; World Bank, 2021). However, among many households, adaptive practices are still limited. Ironically, some are not willing to switch to more resilient and zero-carbon farming practices due to a number of constraints widely documented in existing literature. Constraints include limited landholdings and access to market, religions, age, gender, farm income, farm size, access to information and social capital, etc. (Adimassu & Kessler, 2016; Dasmani et al., 2020; Marie et al., 2020). Another crucial issue is that farmers’ perception and the adoption of adaptive farming practices are not only determined by the personal attributes, but also by external factors such as market demands, government initiatives, financial and technical support from donors and non-state actors, and farmers’ past experiences of past climate extremes (Aryal et al., 2019; Yiridomoh et al., 2021).

Better understanding of area-specific factors hampering farmers’ low-carbon transition is crucial for identifying proper adaptive farming practices in particular contexts and avoiding one-size-fit-all adaptation policies. Drivers, adaptive capacity and desire for adaptation vary greatly between different communities and individuals, depending on levels of vulnerability, resilience, and available resources (Hansen & Bi, 2017). Current studies dealing with this topic look primarily at climate-sensitive regions and are likely to neglect these differences (Dube et al., 2016; Kusakari et al., 2014; Lázár et al., 2015; Marie et al., 2020). Most of research studies dealing with this topic have repeatedly reported the significant positive and negative impacts of diverse determinants on farmers’ adaptation intent and decisions (Atube et al., 2021; Haden et al., 2012; Jiang et al., 2022; Paudel et al., 2020; Vo et al., 2021). However, the extent to which their findings apply to farmers with less experience and understanding of the effects of climate change is under-researched and cannot be assumed given the shared social and cultural specificities of the farming population (Wheeler & Lobley, 2021).

In this study, we investigated the critical determinants of farmers’ willingness to adopt adaptive farming practices in carbon-intensive agricultural hubs by examining a typical case in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam. A better understanding of the factors determining farmers’ decision to adopt adaptive farming practices is critical for policy-makers, practitioners and donors to identify areas in need of action and to target resources to progress GHG mitigation efforts in this country. An agriculturally rich commune in An Giang province, where climate change effects are less felt by local farmers, was selected as a case study. The paper is structured in four sections. The next section presents research methodology and briefly introduces the research site. An analytical framework for investigating the research problem is included in this section. The third section presents and discusses the research results. The concluding section summarizes the research findings and draws some policy implications.

2. Methodology

2.1. Research site

Hoa Binh commune, a major agricultural hub in An Giang province (Figure 1), was selected as a case study in view of the research goals. The commune’s population patterns, farming practices, and rural socio-economic contexts best represent rural areas in Long Xuyen Quadrangle, a floodplain centered in the delta and less affected by climate change effects such as sea level rise and drought. The commune covers an area of 22.25 square kilometers, bordering Hau River (one of the two mighty estuaries of the Mekong river in Vietnam). Nearly 1,543 hectares in Hoa Binh commune are arable land. The commune has a population of 19,606 people (as of 2020), with 11,481 people of working ages, almost 66% of whom work in agricultural sector (An Giang Provincial Statistics Office, 2022). Intensive rice cultivation, fruit orchards, and animal husbandry dominate the commune (An Giang Provincial Statistics Office, 2022). To mitigate the impacts of annual floods, an intricate network of high dikes was built which made it possible to harvest two or even three rice crops annually in An Giang wetlands. Not only have additional crops contributed to GHG emissions, as climate change intensifies, these crops are vulnerable to extreme weather events and environmental changes, as well as a major contributor to GHG emissions in agriculture (Aryal et al., 2020; An Giang Provincial People’s Committee, 2022). Researchers estimated that over half of 24–29 Mt of rice straw produced each year in the leading rice producing provinces such as An Giang, Kien Giang, Dong Thap and Can Tho City are burned in order to prepare fields for a new crop (Arai et al., 2015; Ngan & Tran, 2015; Van et al., 2014). Like their peers worldwide, farmers in Hoa Binh commune consider crop-residue burning the most effective and cost-efficient way to clear land, facilitate timely cultivating, and control pests and weeds. However, these pervasive blazes, releasing some 32–34 thousand tons of GHGs (primarily carbon dioxide (CO₂), carbon monoxide (CO), methane (CH₄), nitrous oxide (N₂O) and non-methane volatile organic carbon emissions), are the major source of black carbon (a component of PM2.5), a threat both to human and environmental health (Ngan & Tran, 2015; UNEP, 2021; Zhang et al., 2015). GHG emission from agriculture is more likely to increase in the province as the adverse impacts of dyke systems, e.g. environmental degradation and soil pollution, have led farmers to the overuse of nitrogen-containing fertilizers and pesticides, and higher mechanization to sustain high agricultural yields (Brown, 2016; Triet et al., 2017). The increased agricultural GHG emission has been widely reported in other Asian agricultural economies such as Bangladesh, India and China (Aryal et al., 2020; Nayak et al., 2015; Vetter et al., 2017).

Figure 1. Political map of Cho Moi district. Credit: Hieu/MEF.

2.2. Theoretical gaps and analytical framework

The objective of this study is to identify the major factors that affect farmers’ adoption of adaptive, sustainable farming practices in carbon-intensive agricultural realms. A better understanding of factors driving their resistance to or acceptance of sustainable farming practices matters for policy makers, implementers, donors and relevant stakeholders who are dealing with adaptation and mitigation in agriculture (Adimassu & Kessler, 2016). The literature examining factors that influence the adaptive responses of farmers has gained ground in the last decade. While numerous factors, ranging from demographic, socio-economic, technological, cultural and psychological categories, have been reported in the literature, the major factors widely listed include gender, dependency ratio, education, farm size, age, experience, and financial capital (Belay et al., 2017; Gbetibouo, 2009; Marie et al., 2020; Mersha & Van Laerhoven, 2016). However, there is little research effort has been paid to those factors determining farmers’ climate-friendly transition in carbon-intensive agricultural areas. On the one hand, this gap appears to challenge one-size-fits-all approach to climate change adaptation in centralized climate governance regimes in developing countries. On the other hands, it highlights a need for understanding whether or not the factors affecting farmers’ adoption of sustainable farming practices in vulnerable climate change areas are similar to those in areas that are less vulnerable to climate change.

Global climate is changing rapidly, yet its impacts are different and disproportionate across communities and countries. While farming communities in areas of high vulnerability are struggling to keep up with the unprecedented impact of climate change, it is not clear if farmers in carbon-intensive agricultural regions will be able and willing to adapt fast enough in order to mitigate climate change. This is particularly relevant for the Mekong Delta, which is highly vulnerable to climate change while contributing significantly to GHG emission as carbon-intensive farming practices expand.

Drawing on the literature, we identified thirteen factors that are likely to affect farmers’ adoption of adaptation strategies in Table 1. Previous studies suggest that farmer’s choice of adaptive farming practices are likely influenced by a wide range of factors, including gender (Aryal et al., 2022; Dang et al., 2019; Mersha & Van Laerhoven, 2016), dependency ratio (Belay et al., 2017; Gbetibouo, 2009), age and farming experience (Dang et al., 2019; Tuan & Dung, 2015), farm size and perception about climate change (Belay et al., 2017; Marie et al., 2020), farm income (Marie et al., 2020; Pour et al., 2018), and education level (Belay et al., 2017; Dasmani et al., 2020). A few studies argue that better collaboration with processing companies and research institutes, sound agricultural extension policies, and access to credit and subsidies are likely to facilitate and increase farmers’ willingness to choose adaptive farming practices (Marie et al., 2020; Ndamani & Watanabe, 2016; Yang et al., 2021). Extreme events, the uncertainty or instability of existing farming practices, and market accessibility are other factors that have positive and significant impacts on farmer’s willingness to choose adaptive measures in disaster-prone areas (Marie et al., 2020; Trinh et al., 2018; Tucker et al., 2010; Ullah et al., 2016). These thirteen factors serve as a starting point for us to investigate farmers’ willingness to choose adaptive farming practices in the research site.

Table 1. Variables hypothesized to affect farmers’ decision of adaptation

Variable	Description	Value	Expected impact	Relevant literature
Gender (GEN)	Male-headed households probably have better opportunities to employ climate-adaptive measures than female-headed households do.	Male and female	+ or −	Lovell et al. (2021), Aryal et al. (2022), Mersha and Van Laerhoven (2016), Dang et al. (2019)
Age (AGE)	Farmers with longer farm experience are more inclined to adopt climate-adaptive farming solutions.	Years	+	Adimassu and Kessler (2016), Marie et al. (2020), Dasmani et al. (2020)
Household income (INC)	Increases in farm income are likely to increase the probability of farming innovation.	Annual income from farming	+	Marie et al. (2020), Pour et al. (2018)
Education level (EDU)	Educational level of household head is likely to have a positive influence on adaptation decisions	Educational level of the household head	+	Fadina and Barjolle (2018), Dasmani et al. (2020), Belay et al. (2017)
Dependency ratio (DEP)	Low dependency ratio is likely to increase a household’s adaptation decisions.	Number of working-age family laborers	+	Anik et al. (2021), Belay et al. (2017), Gbetibouo (2009)
Extreme weather conditions (WEA)	Increasingly experiencing extreme events is likely to induce farmers to adjust and innovate their farming practices to adapt.		+	van Tilburg and Hudson (2022), Trinh et al. (2018)
Uncertainty/instability of existing crops (STAB)	Farmers uncertain about their crops or facing the ebb-and-flow crop productivity are likely to take up adaptive farming strategies.		+ or −	Tucker et al. (2010), Trinh et al. (2018), Ullah et al. (2016)
Farm size (LAND)	Large-scale farm owners are more likely to take up adaptation strategies than small-scale farmers.	hectare	+ or −	Marie et al. (2020), Adimassu and Kessler (2016), Trinh et al. (2018)
Incentive policies (POL)	Policy incentives facilitate the adoption of climate-resilient solutions by farmers.	Number of policies	+	Conner et al. (2016)
Market accessibility (MAR)	Better access to markets probably increases farmers’ adoption of adaptation strategy		+ or −	Adimassu and Kessler (2016), Marie et al. (2020)
Farmer’s perception about climate change (AWAR)	Farmers’ beliefs and concerns about climate change are willing to support adaptation and mitigation actions.		+	Arbuckle et al. (2013), Haden et al. (2012), Jiri et al. (2015)
Farmers’ connection/collaboration with businesses and research institutes (COLL)	Connection and collaboration with private and public actors, e.g. businesses and research institutes, enable and facilitate farmers’ adoption of innovative farming practices.		+	Gannon et al. (2021)
Access to credit and subsidies (FUND)	Availability of credit services and subsidies is likely to improve smallholder farmers’ ability to adopt and expand adaptation measures.		+	Marie et al. (2020), Jaworski (2016)

2.3. Data collection and analysis

With the support of the An Giang Agricultural Extension Center and commune officers, household surveys and in-depth interviews were conducted in Hoa Binh commune in March and May 2022. A hundred and thirty-three (133) family heads were randomly selected for household surveys in Hoa Binh commune. Table 2 outlines the participant demographics. To address data gap, in-depth interviews were conducted with 13 farmers, 3 district officials in charge of agriculture and environment, 5 commune officials, and 3 senior researchers at An Giang University and Can Tho University who are specializing in topics related to the research and are well aware of the research area. Our expert examination and in-depth discussion covered key problems that this study deals with, including the sustainability of existing livelihoods in Hoa Binh commune, impacts of climate change, possible factors hampering local farmers’ transition to adaptive farming practices, and feedback on the research findings. These activities were undertaken as part of our community workshop co-hosted by An Giang Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Development on 28 July 2022.

Table 2. Major characteristics of the sample households

Household characteristics	Frequency	Percent
Male-headed households	101	75.9
Aged 30–60	94	70.7
Farmers with two or more sources of income	104	78.2
Average household income (farming and non-farming sources)	199.38 million VND/year
Average income from farming	167.29 million VND/year

Source: household survey in March 2022, n = 133.

In this study, binary logistic regression was used to analyze the relationship between the proposed factors and farmers’ choices of adaptive farming practices. We also tested for multicollinearity special effects among the independent variables using a Spearman nonparametric correlation. The majority of the variables were correlated with a correlation coefficient of r < ±0.35, with one up to 0.40, in accordance with Bhandari et al. (2018) and Tesfahunegn et al. (2016). The dependent variables (“adoption of adaptation strategies” in this study) were binary, and their values (1 and 0) were used to distinguish between farmers who have adopted a certain adaptation strategies, such as polyculture and innovative irrigation, and those who have not innovated in research site.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Farmers’ perception on climate change

Table 3 highlights the indicators and experience of climate change perceived by farmers in Hoa Binh commune, including heat events (77.4%), negative precipitation variation (49.3%), drought frequency (12.8%), damaging frosts (12%), and on-the-rise spread of crop diseases and pests due to a changing climate (4.5%). A modest proportion of respondents (less than 4%) noticed emerging extreme weather conditions, including unseasonable heavy downpours and drastic decline of flood pulse in floodplains. The changing climate records observed across hydrology and meteorology monitoring stations in An Giang province point out that the province’s average temperature has risen by about 0.021°C or about 0.21°C per decade since 2010 compared to the national average of 0.11°C (An Giang Provincial People’s Committee, 2022). The last decade has also witnessed a strong fluctuation of the province’s annual precipitation, averaged at 1,255–1,460 mm/year. While El Niño has brought devastating droughts in 2015 and 2019, the wettest years with days―long heavy downpours in An Giang province were always associated with La Niña (An Giang Provincial Statistics Office, 2022; Quang, 2017). However, local floodplains and attendant ecosystems and livelihoods have been increasingly at risk caused by the triple challenge of the problematic Mekong upstream dam operations, climate change, and high dyke systems across the province (Pokhrel et al., 2018; Quang & Borton, 2020; Triet et al., 2017). Accordingly, the results signify that farmers’ perception of climate change is consistent with data and province’s observed climate records (Figures 2 and 3).

Figure 2. Annual average temperature and rainfall trends in an Giang in the last decade (2010–2021).

Source: Adapted from An Giang Provincial People’s Committee (2022) and An Giang Provincial Statistics Office (2022).

Figure 3. Variation of mean water levels at critical gauging stations in an Giang province’s floodplains in flood seasons (2010–2021). Red curve: water levels over time in Cho Moi district.

Source: Adapted from An Giang Provincial People’s Committee (2022) and An Giang Provincial Statistics Office (2022).

Table 3. Indicators of climate change

Climate change indicators	Number of respondents	Percentage
Heat waves	103	77.44%
Precipitation change (unpredictable rains)	71	49.31%
Drought frequency	17	12.78%
Damaging frosts	16	12.03%
Climate-induced diseases and pests	6	4.51%
Other climate change effects	5	3.76%

Source: Household survey in March 2022, n = 133.

Heat waves were the most common indicator of climate change in the research site, which were confirmed by more than three-fourths of those surveyed. Hot days are a farmer’s greatest concern in the Hoa Binh commune reported in the survey. Local farmers are experiencing more hot days, even in the wet season, and are in danger of such health problems caused by extreme temperatures including heat stress, heat exhaustion, and heatstroke. This extreme weather is more dangerous in dry and crop-burning seasons when farmers resort to crop residue burning to prepare for the next cultivation (Arai et al., 2015). Heat waves are intensified by high humidity and increasing urbanization across Vietnam’s rural communes, exposing outdoor workers and farmers to the increased risk of suffering heat illness (Opitz-Stapleton et al., 2016).

People in Hoa Binh commune were mostly resettled in riparian high-dyke systems as a result of years-long dyke policy in An Giang in the 1990s. For many farmers, this policy has successfully helped discipline Mekong annual floods, making it possible for intensive 3-crop rice farming. The intricate networks of high dykes serve as pervasive inter- and intra-commune transport lines, allowing for moving rice and other agricultural commodities to cities. While this increasing flexible mobility is often seen as a major factor in the dynamism of Vietnam’s rural economy, the dyke systems have soon had destructive impacts, including water pollution, soil degradation and biodiversity loss (Brown, 2016; Duc et al., 2018; Pham, 2012). Without water and sediment replenishment, the dykes have further worsened drought seasons and facilitated the likelihood of floral pathogens as noted by over 17% of respondents whose rice farms are behind the dykes and were experienced more drought events and climate-induced diseases and pests. This is consistent with Pham (2011) and Tong (2017) who provided evidence on the negative impacts of dykes in An Giang province.

According to our survey, while knowledge of climate change is pervasive elsewhere, climate change was poorly known by farmers in the Hoa Binh commune. About 15% of respondents, mostly aged over 45, “had never heard of” climate change or have been immune to its impacts, while 30% believed climate change is happening―they still consider the topic personally irrelevant. More than half of respondents (55%) misunderstood climate change and its causes, or could not distinguish between climate change effects from environmental issues such as riverbank erosion, water and air pollution, land subsidence and soil degradation. Despite the country’s large investments in climate resilience to protect its agriculturally rich Mekong Delta, these findings reveal that farmers’ attitudes and beliefs about climate change, and environmental literacy at large, are generally low in carbon-intensive agricultural areas. Some studies claim that the limited understanding of climate change of farmers in developing societies are largely attributed to insufficient access to information about climate change and inadequate number of well-trained extension officers in rural areas (Dang et al., 2014; Hundera et al., 2019; Ozor et al., 2015). The findings of our survey allow us to argue that farmers’ low awareness of climate change was also attributed to the limited impact of climate change on their crops. Subsistence farmers with limited climate change perception are likely to neglect risks and opportunities emerging from climate variability, and thus fail to timely adopt proper mitigation and adaptation measures in a timely manner (Mitter et al., 2019). This is reflected in lack of diversified crops adopted by farmers the commune as presented in the following section.

3.2. Adaptation measures in Hoa Binh commune

Table 4 particularly reveals three adaptive farming practices commonly used by smallholder farmers that together form emerging land-use changes in Hoa Binh commune: (i) transition from rice monoculture to fruit orchards, (ii) water-saving irrigation systems, and (iii) crop diversification, or polyculture. Hoa Binh commune leads Cho Moi district in rice production with over 1,500 hectares of farmland. But recent years have witnessed a notable decline of rice farming area as more farmers have decided to reclaim their rice fields to switch to fruit orchards. Chief of Cho Moi district’s Office of Agriculture and Rural Development and deputy president of Hoa Binh commune People’s Committee confirmed in our in-depth interviews in March 2022 that local farmers are resorting to fruit orchards due to sustained free-fall in rice prices. Both the district and commune governments tilt strongly in favor of adjusting their 5-year and 10-year land use plans in the commune and giving priority to high-value-added fruit farming. Nearly 31% of those surveyed reported that they stopped rice farming several years ago and are making huge investments in their fruit orchards. For these farmers, the key driver of their change is the high demand of fruits for export, as Pham Quoc Tuan, a 63-year-old farmer in Hoa Binh commune, argued “we stopped rice farming around 10 years ago because we learnt from media that fruits were in high demand for exports while mono rice farming was no longer lucrative due to rising prices of agricultural inputs.” Tuan is among thousands of rice farmers in the Mekong Delta who have en mass switched to fruit farming over the last 10 years or so.

Table 4. The most widely practiced adaptation strategies in Hoa Binh commune

Adaptation measures	Number of respondents	Percentage
Transition from mono rice crop to fruit orchards	41	3.8
Water-saving irrigation systems	13	9.7
Crop diversification	15	11.3
“Doing nothing” (sustaining mono rice crops without changes)	77	57.9

Source: Household survey in March 2022, n = 133.

About three-fourths of fruit farmers believed that fruit farming is less vulnerable to climate variability. But, fruit crops are not always sustainable at all. “Longan crops were so profitable back then, but I had to cut down my 2-hectare longan orchard and replaced with mango trees as the longan prices plummeted 6 years ago. The prices of mango, in turn, declined due to oversupply, and last year my husband decided to start over again with durian trees,” said Nguyen Thi Cam Hong, 49, a female officer currently working at Hoa Binh commune’s Agricultural Extension Division. Whether it is longan, mango, or durian, their current fruit crops rely on traditional farming techniques, including liberal use of fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and other chemical inputs to improve productivity. “Longan and mango require high amounts of chemical fertilizers and pesticides to control pests and increase crop yields. This practice has caused irreparable damage to the soil which is no longer possible for any other crops but durian trees,” she added. This evidence suggests that some adaptation measures may exacerbate negative trade-offs with mitigation as they require increased use of energy and chemical inputs.

To reduce energy costs and increase resilience to longer droughts, 9.7% of farmers have invested in water-saving irrigation systems. Among the most common water-saving irrigation systems are alternate wetting and drying irrigation (AWD) and orchard drip irrigation systems (overhead sprinklers, under-tree sprinklers, and precision irrigation). Over 11% of farmer respondents in the research site chose to diversify their farms by combining rice, vegetables, corn and fish farming to maximize revenues. The water-saving irrigation technologies and crop diversity are widely recognized as the reliable and preferable household-level adaptive measures, and their positive impact on resilience, economic self-reliance, and GHG reduction was well documented in the literature (Labeyrie et al., 2021; Quang & de Wit, 2020; Setyanto et al., 2018). However, some of the surveyed farmers claimed that they were not able to invest in these measures primarily due to financial constraints and limited availability of modern farming techniques in the province. This fact supports the existing argument that financial and technical constraints hamper small-scale farmers’ adoption of sustainable farming practices in developing countries (Lybbert & Sumner, 2012; Vignola et al., 2015).

Nearly 58% of respondents chose to “do nothing” because they “did not experience any forces of climate change,” as argued by farmer Nguyen Van Bay, 44, in our in-depth interview in May 2022. This fact agrees with the binary logistic regression results in Table 5 which suggest that farmers’ adoption of adaptation strategies is probably influenced by their limited experience of climate hazards. As mono rice crop continues, they remain highly natural resource-dependent and increasingly rely on chemical inputs to sustain yields. To make things worse, their adaptation measures, e.g. fruit farming and crop diversification which are highly carbon-intensive, appear to add further pressure on the environment, soils, water and energy as fruit crops expand. Such ill-conceived adaptation strategies threaten to worsen the situation and eventually lead to maladaptation in communities (Schipper, 2020).

Table 5. Binary logistic regression analysis results

Variables	Coefficient	Standard error	Wald	P-value	Odds ratio
GEN	−.350	.490	.510	.475	.705
AGE	.061	.264	.054	.817	1.063
INC	.000	.001	.114	.736	1.000
EDU	−.160	.182	.777	.378	.852
DEP	−.043	.162	.069	.792	.958
AWAR	.000	.284	.000	1.000	1.000
STAB	−1.106	.487	5.153	.023*	.331
LAND	.000	.000	.315	.575	1.000
POL	.917	.477	3.686	.055	2.501
MAR	−.914	.442	4.279	.039*	.401
WEA	−1.380	.433	10.173	.001	.252
CON	−.077	.474	.026	.872	.926
FUND	.367	.521	.496	.481	1.444
Constant	4.557	2.197	4.302	.038*	95.254

Notes: * Significant at p <0.05.

Over two-thirds of farmers surveyed (64%) said that they were well aware of the negative impacts stemmed from their non-sustainable farming practices on their health and the environment. Yet a major proportion of respondents, as noted above, is not willing to innovate their carbon-intensive farming practices. Educating farmers about climate change and mobilizing them to transition to low-carbon farming practices in an area where climate change effects have been minimal presents a huge challenge. The next section explains this by pinpointing and discussing the key factors hampering farmers’ transition to low-carbon farming practices in Hoa Binh commune.

3.3. Factors affecting farmers’ adoption of adaptation strategies

The binary logistic regression result was used to determine the influence of 13 independent variables on farmers’ adaptation strategy decisions (Table 5), including omnibus tests of model coefficients (χ2 = 26.670 and p = 0.010); Hosmer and Lemeshow Test (χ2 = 5.032, df = 8, p = 0.754); and Pseudo R² (Cox and Snell R² = 0.182; Nagelkerke R² = 0.247). These values indicate that there is a statistically significant relationship between the hypothesized independent variables and the dependent variable (farmers’ adoption of adaptation measures). The test results signify that multi-collinearity among the independent variables was not a problem, as consistent with previous studies (Bhandari et al., 2018; Tesfahunegn et al., 2016). Nagelkerke’s R² valued at 0.247 verifies that the binary logistic regression model was well fitting for use in this study.

Table 5 presents logistic estimates of major determinants of farmers’ adoption of an adaptation measure to climate change. Among the independent variables considered in the binary logistic regression model, three variables were found to have significant influence on farmers’ adaptation decision. These are market accessibility (MAR), uncertainty/instability of existing crops (STAB), and extreme weather conditions (WEA). The other determinants, including gender, age, education level of family head, farm size, incentive policies, access to credit and subsidies, and farmers’ social connections, etc., had no significant influence of adaptation to climate change as signified in the binary logistic regression results (p > 0.05).

As shown in Table 5, market accessibility had a negative impact on farmers’ choice of an adaptation solution (coefficient = −0.914, p = 0.039, odds ratio = 0.401). In this study, market accessibility refers to farmers’ convenient access to market and the marketability or competitiveness of crops. This means that farmers who have better access to market and crops that are still in high demand in the market were appeared to have 0.4 times lower probability to adopt adaptive farming strategy than their counterparts who face limited market accessibility. In other words, farmers might be less likely to make adaptation decision unless their existing crops are no longer marketable or in danger of oversupply. Our in-depth interviews in Hoa Binh commune reaffirm this. “Although the existing farming practices are not environmentally friendly, I do not want to change unless scientists can prove that the new crop or innovative farming solutions are sellable and stable,” said Ngo Tien Thanh, a 33-year-old farmer who is running a 2.5-hectare family rice farm in Hoa Binh commune. “Investing too much in modern techniques or solutions with less tangible evidence of cost-effectiveness is not a prudent choice,” he added, explaining why many farmers in the commune refused to transition to low-carbon farming systems. Thanh’s logic is economically reasonable and contributes to understanding as to how the rising demand for certain agricultural products in local and foreign markets is driving farmers’ choice of crops irrespective of long-term sustainability. These findings further imply that market drivers are the key determinant of farmers’ choice of adaptation measures in GHG emitting areas such as Hoa Binh commune.

These results of our survey, however, do not agree with recent studies that underscore the positive impact of market accessibility on farmers’ climate action (Adimassu & Kessler, 2016; Atube et al., 2021; Marie et al., 2020; Ndambiri et al., 2012). For these studies, farmers who reside closer to, or have better access to the markets have better access to credit and extension services, react in a timely fashion to favorable agricultural policies in place, and have greater opportunities for income diversification through non-farming jobs. Altogether, these factors reduce farmers’ financial and technical constraints for adopting innovative farming practices. This inconsistency may be because these studies covered regions that are accurately vulnerable to climate change, characterized by numerous climate-hazard experiences and corresponding adaptation measures explicitly defined by farmers. In contrast, our study looked at a typical carbon-intensive agricultural region wherein climate change effects are not a concern for local farmers.

Similarly, the second factor, certainty/stability of existing crops, had a negative impact on farmers’ adaptation choice (coefficient =-1.106, p = 0.023, odds ratio = 0.331). This result suggests that smallholder farmers uncertain about their crops or facing the ebb-and-flow crop productivity were 33.1% more likely to adopt adaptive farming practices than those with stable crops. Theoretically, stable and productive crops determine the growth of household incomes, which in turn enables farmers to take up climate-friendly farming practices (Atube et al., 2021; Belay et al., 2017; Marie et al., 2020; Ndambiri et al., 2012). Interestingly, our survey suggests that (better-off) farmers with stabilized and efficient cash crops might have no desire or incentive to initiate adaptive farming practices than farmers with instable crops. This is in agreement with Muzamhindo et al. (2015) who explained that high-yield crop owners probably see no reason to change as long as they are no longer comfortable with current farming practices.

The binary logistic regression result reveals another important determinant: extreme weather conditions (WEA) had a significantly negative impact on farmers’ willingness to initiate adaptive farming practices (coefficient = −1.138, p = 0.001, odds ratio = 0.252). Consistent with apriori expectation and empirical evidence, this result indicates that farmers with perceived risks of climate change impacts on crop yields are 25.2% less likely to take up adaptation measures as compared to those without experience of climate change effects. The correlation between extreme weather events and farmers’ adaptation intent is neglected in recent studies (e.g. Atube et al., 2021; Jiang et al., 2022; Marie et al., 2020; Ndamani & Watanabe, 2016; Paudel et al., 2020). Instead, some of them gave an emphasis on the significantly positive impact of farmers’ climate change perception, beliefs and attitudes (Haden et al., 2012; Hundera et al., 2019; Paudel et al., 2020; Vo et al., 2021). In this study, however, the latter had no significant influence on farmers’ adaptation decisions (coefficient = .000, p = 1.000, odds ratio = 1.000).

This is a fascinating finding because for most of studies dealing with this topic, increasing awareness and concern about climate risks probably motivate farmers to adopt adaptation initiatives (Deressa et al., 2011; Jiri et al., 2015; Paudel et al., 2020). Such an assertion, however, does not necessarily apply to farmers in Hoa Binh commune who reported less exposure to climate change. Indeed, the empirical evidence available suggests that farmers are generally increasingly aware of climate variability to some extent, particularly in terms of heat waves and on-the-rise climate-induced diseases and pests (Table 3). Ironically, however, farmers’ adaptation intent and adaptation decisions in the study area were largely explained by the experience of crop losses rather than cognitive factors (i.e. climate change perception, beliefs and attitudes). To be clear, 9.7% of farmers surveyed in Hoa Binh commune confirmed that they have adopted water-saving irrigation systems in attempts to adapt to increasing occurrence of droughts while sustaining their carbon-intensive fruit orchards. This further bolsters growing evidence that farmers’ climate change perception and action are not always tightly coupled (Petersen-Rockney, 2022). The modest or lack of adaptation actions among farmers who perceived climate change may be explained by a lack of meteorological data and climate information, and the persistence of status quo bias that involves farmers preferring current farming practices. As not all climate perceptions translate into adaptive action, it is reasonable to expect that some farmers do not make adaptive responses to the uncertainty and complexity of climate change (Waldman et al., 2020).

4. Conclusion and recommendations

This study assessed the major determinants of farmers’ adaptation intent and action in a carbon-intensive agricultural hub in An Giang province, Vietnam. Drawing on household survey data and field observation in Hoa Binh commune, we found that climate change effects, as indicated by farmer respondents, are not serious as compared to its neighbouring coastal provinces in the Mekong Delta. Heat events, unpredictable rains, drought severity, frosts, increasing diseases and pests, and drastic decline of floods are the observable climate change-related hazards in the commune. The household survey results revealed that only one-thirds of the respondents believed climate change is happening while the others did not know or misunderstood the issue. Some even considered climate change personally irrelevant. As a result, among many households surveyed adaptation actions were modest and less diverse. The three adaptation strategies most widely practiced by subsistence farmers in Hoa Binh commune were innovation in irrigation strategies, transition from mono rice farming to fruit farming, and crop diversification. These solutions, except the former, eventually appear maladaptive as farmers continue to rely on the overuse of chemical inputs and energy to control pests and improve their crop productivity, exacerbating GHG emissions and posing further pressure on the environment.

By employing the binary logistic regression analysis, the study identified three key factors that are likely to determine the adoption of adaptation strategies by subsistence farmers in Hoa Binh commune. In particular, the study established that market accessibility, uncertainty/instability of existing crops, and extreme weather conditions had a significant influence on adaptation intent and decisions of the surveyed farmers. These findings shed new light on what are likely to motivate or hamper farmers’ low-carbon transition in leading GHG emitting agricultural hubs. In light of this, the study suggests that marketability and sustainability of crops should be a starting point for any attempts to mobilize farmers to take up adaptation measures. For farmers who are not at risk of climate hazards, terminating or adjusting a farming practice stabilized for years (e.g. recently established fruit orchards) or even for generations (e.g. rice farming) to start something new is truly a risky venture. They, as mentioned earlier in this study, probably see no desire or reason to change what they perceive economically profitable or at least stable for the time being. If farmers had to change, they would likely prefer to follow solutions that prove successful in neighbourhoods or are validated by their (trusted) peers. Future policy and non-state actors dealing with mitigation and adaptation, therefore, should focus on promoting farmers’ environmental literacy and awareness about trade-offs between short-term economic benefits and long-term sustainable gains.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was partly supported by the CGIAR/Asian Mega Deltas Initiative Project in Vietnam. We would like to thank all funders who support this research through their contributions to the CGIAR Trust Fund: https://www.cgiar.org/funders/. This paper draws on data from a research project co-supported by An Giang Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, Can Tho University (T2022-108), and the Mekong Environment Forum (MEF) in April–October 2022. Special thanks goes to local experts and government officials for their support in our field research activities. We are grateful to Assoc. Prof. Deby Cassill at University of South Florida for her help with copy-editing, and the reviewers for their constructive comments.

Notes on contributors

Nguyen Minh Quang

Nguyen Minh Quang is senior lecturer at Can Tho University and co-founder of Mekong Environment Forum (MEF). He has specialized in environmental and political geography for a decade. He is the author of numerous articles, book chapters, edited book, and commentaries covering climate change policy, geopolitics, conflict management and education for sustainability in Vietnam and Southeast Asia. He is also contributing to The Diplomat and East Asia Foru

Nguyen Pham Ngoc Thien

Nguyen Pham Ngoc Thien is a lecturer at School of Education, An Giang University. She is specializing in quantitative data analysis methodology.

Nguyen Hoai Thu

Nguyen Hoai Thu is a research specialist at the Mekong Environment Forum. Her research focus includes policy analysis and data analysis.

Huynh Thi Ngoc Thoa

Huynh Thi Ngoc Thoa is a research assistant at the Mekong Environment Forum. She is specializing in water management and farmer livelihoods.

Tran Minh Tho

Tran Thi Minh Tho is a research assistant at the Mekong Environment Forum. Tho is responsible for field research planning, data collection and field security. Her research interest includes climate change and gender studies.

Le Minh Hieu

Le Minh Hieu is a research specialist at the Mekong Environment Forum. Hieu’s research focus is about environmental geography and climate change adaptation in Vietnam’s Mekong Delta.

Dang Quang Thinh

Dr. Dang Quang Thinh is the Director of Climate Change Research Center, Viet Nam Institute of Meteorology, Hydrology and Climate Change. He has specialized in climate change and water management for more than a decade.