When it comes to sustainability, information is often seen as the solution. If farmers and foresters know the environmental benefits of certain practices, the logic goes, they will adopt them. If policies are clearly explained, compliance will follow. If climate risks are communicated effectively, preventive action will increase.
But reality is more complex.
Across agriculture and forestry, information alone rarely leads to consistent behavioural change. Farmers may understand the environmental value of crop rotation, cover crops, or wetland management. They may be aware of eco-schemes and available financial support. Yet adoption rates can remain lower than expected.
Why?
Because decisions are not made in a vacuum. They are shaped by uncertainty, time pressure, economic constraints, habits, and social norms. A farmer managing hundreds of hectares during a busy season does not make choices based only on information about environmental benefits. They consider workload, risk, administrative complexity, market prices, and what neighbouring farms are doing. A forester thinking about long-term forest management must weigh climate projections against immediate economic realities.
Information increases awareness, but awareness does not automatically translate into action.
One reason is cognitive overload. Policy documents, guidelines, and regulations are often complex and lengthy. Even motivated land managers may struggle to navigate dense texts, multiple conditions, and overlapping deadlines. When the cost of understanding the rules becomes too high, inaction can feel safer than change.
Another factor is risk perception. Sustainable practices sometimes require upfront investment or involve uncertainty about outcomes. Even when long-term benefits are clear, short-term risks can discourage adoption. Behavioural research shows that people tend to weigh potential losses more heavily than potential gains. In farming, where margins can be tight, this tendency becomes especially important.
Social context also matters. Farmers and foresters operate within communities. They observe peers, exchange advice, and learn through shared experience. If a practice is not widely adopted locally, individuals may hesitate, even if they recognise its value. Behaviour is influenced not only by what we know, but by what we see others doing.
This is where behavioural insights become essential. Rather than assuming that more information will solve the problem, behavioural approaches examine how decisions are actually made in real-life contexts. They explore how choice architecture, timing, framing, and simplification can support better outcomes.
For example, simplifying eco-scheme information into clear, visual formats can reduce cognitive burden. Providing timely reminders can help farmers act before deadlines. Offering feedback that compares performance with similar farms can make environmental improvements more tangible. None of these tools replace information; they make it easier to use.
The PRUDENT project focuses precisely on this gap between knowledge and action. By studying how farmers and foresters respond to policy instruments, risk, and incentives, PRUDENT seeks to design green nudges that complement traditional approaches. The goal is not to manipulate behaviour, but to create conditions in which sustainable choices are easier, clearer, and more aligned with everyday realities.
Sustainability transitions depend on thousands of individual decisions. Information is necessary, but it is not sufficient. To accelerate change in agriculture and forestry, policies must recognise the human dimension of decision-making. When we understand how behaviour works in practice, we can design systems that support meaningful and lasting transformation.
