High bar for change: uncertainty source preferences in the choice of adapting agricultural practices

Changing livelihood practices entails multiple uncertainties, but there is conflicting evidence of the direction in which uncertainty influences adaptation choices. We suggest that this is partly due to non-differentiating between the sources of uncertainty relevant to decision-makers. In a discreet choice experiment (DCE) conducted in Mexico, smallholders choose between entering an improved program of (1) agroforestry, (2) the traditional system (milpa), or (3) the status quo. The alternatives provided varying degrees of certainty about benefits. We elicited risk and time preferences and developed a scale of source-dependent uncertainty preferences. Results were triangulated between multiple data sources. We observe a strong reluctance for change despite highly valuing some program attributes. Reasons include low self-efficacy, reduced work autonomy, and trade-offs in income diversification. Further, people are more sensitive to the uncertainty source than to the degree of uncertainty. In fact, uncertainty about climate trends strongly increased the attractiveness of the program alternatives for the group otherwise most reluctant. Risk-taking had a smaller effect in the same direction consistent across groups. We conclude that bundled benefits, even if provided with certainty, are not enough to foster change in this context unless they complement current practices and cater to people's uncertainty and risk preferences.