Abstract Agricultural systems that enhance soil health are essential for conserving biodiversity and ensuring the sustainability of food, water, and energy resources. Practices such as reduced tillage and cover cropping are increasingly adopted by farmers seeking long‐term production efficiencies and conservation benefits. We conducted interviews with 100 maize and soybean farmers who had used conventional practices in the past but later (1) used reduced tillage but not cover crops or (2) used reduced tillage and cover crops. We assessed the comparative profitability of conventional farming versus reduced tillage with or without cover crops. A partial budget analysis revealed that reduced tillage with or without cover crops increased average net farm income by US132 ha − 1 for maize (Zea mays L. ) and 111 ha − 1 for soybean (Glycine max (L. ) Merr. ). Gains were from reduced production expenses—60 ha − 1 for maize and 41 ha − 1 for soybean—and increased yields of 475 kg ha − 1 for maize and 197 kg ha − 1 for soybean. Farm size was not related to changes in net income, but, for maize, longer adoption was. Net expense changes were not significant between farmers using and not using cover crops. Yields remained similar, resulting in no significant difference in net income. Farmers using cover crops reported significantly lower fertilizer and pesticide expenses, which may reduce environmental externalities. This research suggests that reduced tillage with cover crops may provide economic and environmental benefits, with farmers reporting increased net income while simultaneously reducing input costs and potential environmental impacts through lower fertilizer and pesticide use.
Flanders et al. (Thu,) studied this question.