TRUST - A perception of external control
Relationships Matter
Trust - A perception of external control
Many people don’t like being told what to do.
Let’s take the introduction of agri-environmental policy as an example. Farmers and growers may support the policy’s purpose (e.g. improved water quality) but may not like how the policy was introduced (e.g. the consultation and/or policy implementation process used by the policy makers). The farmers and growers may feel like ‘they are being told what they can and can’t do’.
Let’s use the fifth component in our trust framework to explore this further - a perception of external control. Theory suggests that a perception of increasing external control over on-farm practices can reduce trust – in other words, governments telling farmers how to farm. Let’s develop a hypothetical scenario here. Imagine the farmers also perceive the government staff ‘don’t know farming’ (lack of competency), which might lead to a double distrust whammy: the organisation perceived as not understanding farming, yet still telling farmers how to farm! A key learning point here is the flow of information: people tend to believe, accept and use information from those they trust. Information can contribute to building understanding (what we need to do and why) and understanding can contribute to farm management practice change.
Let’s go back to our water quality policy example. If the target group (e.g. farmers/growers) perceive the new policy and processes are ‘telling me what I can and can’t do on my farm’, trust could decline between farmers/growers and policy makers. As a result, farmers/growers might not believe the scientific data that underpins the need for this water quality policy. If you don’t believe the data or trust the policy maker, why would you choose to engage with the organisation writing the policy? And, if you don’t believe the data, how is this contributing to your understanding of the issues? And possibly more importantly, why would you choose to change farm management practice?
Which, to be honest, is the point of the policy in the first place!
Let’s hear from Doug*, a dairy farmer, about how he felt when new water quality policy was introduced. Doug, the 3rd generation of his family on their farm, cares deeply about water quality on the farm and in the local community. He continues:
The culture of [regional council] was you'll do as you're told, we know what we're doing and if you don't do it right we'll nail you, seemed to be the way. How did the farmers feel about that? Very aggrieved, bugger [regional council], I don't want to be told what to do, they can't tell us we're going to have to do all of this, who do they think they are?
What was the result? Doug and other farmers challenged the council’s scientific information, interacted less with their regional council and learnt about the water quality policy from other sources. Often other farmers in their community. The key point of this story: mutual trust is key to building understanding (e.g. about an issue, the need for change) and positive change for environmental benefit.
Interested to learn more about Doug and other farmers’ responses to policy interventions? Interested to learn more about working with rural communities around consultation and policy implementation? Interested in rural social science research? I can help you.
Please get in touch with me at Heather Collins Consulting.
Connect with me on LinkedIn
* Doug was a dairy farmer participant in an in-depth social science study about farmers’ responses to environmental policy interventions. Doug is a pseudonym.
