| dc.description.abstract | In 2019 the agricultural organizations in Norway signed a letter of intent with the Norwegian government, with the goal of cutting 5 million tons of CO2-equvalents from the agricultural sector by 2030, both through direct emission cuts and through soil carbon sequestration. In 2020 the Norwegian Agrarian Association launched “the agricultural sector´s climate plan”, a plan that through a focus on eight specific measures was aimed at reaching the desired amount of emission cuts. The first of these measures was the “climate calculator”, a tool that would give individual farmers the ability to reduce their farm´s emissions based, among other things, on their unique geographical context. At the time of writing, there are eight growing seasons left until the goal in the letter of intent from 2019 is supposed to have been reached. This study uses theories of diffusion and of sustainable intensification to research how the climate calculator spreads and in what way it can contribute to emission cuts. In the study I have interviewed ten farmers in Nordland about their motivations for and reservations against using the climate calculator to reduce the emissions from their productions. I have then used their responses to research what may stand in the way of a more widespread implementation of this tool. In addition, I have interviewed a key informant on the climate calculator in order to understand more about how this tool arose, and the processes that lead to its initial launch. My study shows that the name of the “climate calculator” carries negative connotations for almost all my interviewees. The study also shows that another critique of the tool that unites my interviewees is the fear that the climate calculator will be time-consuming to learn and to use. In addition to this, my results show that the farmers I have interviewed often don’t know about the economic support and compensation they can apply for if they use the calculator. Another of my findings is that the beforementioned letter of intent is weakly anchored among the farmers in my sample and that they therefore know little about why the climate calculator exists. All of this in combination is strengthening the already existing feeling among the farmers that the calculator is “yet another mandatory measure implemented against their will”. My study also shows that there are several factors delaying a more widespread implementation of the tool. One of these is the fact that the diffusion and use of the climate calculator in Nordland seems to be influenced strongly by whether or not there are dedicated climate- and agricultural advisors in the area. | |
