Survey reveals benefits of manure for crop yields and soil fertility in diverse agricultural stakeholders, highlighting barriers to use.
Using manure as a crop fertilizer promotes recycling of locally available organic nutrients and reduces needs for manufactured inorganic fertilizers. However, the factors that motivate and constrain manure use are unclear. To explore stakeholder perceptions, we designed a quantitative survey assessing potential benefits and barriers to manure use, knowledge of manure impacts, and preferred information resources. Using mailing lists and mass media, we distributed the online survey to a broad sample of crop farmers, animal feeding operation managers, and public and private sector advisors in the United States and Canada ( n = 709 responses). In addition to computing descriptive statistics, we examined associations between participant role and years of experience with response choices using cumulative logistic and log‐binomial models. Overall, respondents rated manure as highly beneficial to crop yields, soil fertility, soil physical properties, and soil biological properties, but shared mixed perceptions regarding the impacts of manure on environmental quality. The most frequently identified barriers to manure use were (1) the cost of manure transportation and land application, (2) odors and air quality impairment, and (3) the timeliness of manure application. Respondents reported they were likely to use scientific information sources and their professional networks in making manure nutrient management decisions. Additionally, we found that role and years of professional experience were often associated with response choices, illustrating distinct extension and education needs of different stakeholder segments. Our results indicated wide recognition of manure benefits to crop yields and soil properties and suggested that practical barriers may often limit manure use.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Erickson et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: