Adapting Finnish dairy production to a warmer climate: Insights from producers and buyers

Adapting Finnish dairy production to a warmer climate: Insights from producers and buyers | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Adapting Finnish dairy production to a warmer climate: Insights from producers and buyers Karoliina Rimhanen, Nina Pirttioja, Timothy R. Carter, Stefan Fronzek, and 2 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6922846/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract To promote adaptation of the dairy sector to climate change, researchers and agricultural extensionists need to better understand how dairy system operators perceive climate-related risks and what drives their adaptation responses. This study addresses that need by examining the experiences and priorities of two key actor groups, dairy farmers and milk buyers, in northern Europe. We hypothesized that these groups perceive climate-related risks and adaptation needs differently, based on their positions in the value chain. Using semi-structured interviews, we explored stakeholder views on climate impacts, future challenges and adaptation strategies, supported by an analysis of temperature effects on regional milk production. Interviews were conducted with dairy farmers and milk buyers in Finland, providing qualitative insights and contextual data. Here we show that farmers and buyers emphasize different aspects of climate resilience: farmers focused on field-level adaptations and technical solutions to cope with increasing weather extremes, while buyers emphasized systemic risks, economic stability, hygiene and milk quality. Both groups observed more frequent extreme events such as heatwaves and droughts, with farmers reporting declines in forage yields during hot summers, and buyers noting increased variability in milk quality. This is the first study to jointly investigate the climate change perceptions and adaptation priorities of both farmers and buyers in a northern European context. The findings highlight the need for mutual understanding, coordinated strategies, and strengthened collaboration to build resilience across the dairy value chain. Supporting skill development, encouraging farm-specific practices, and ensuring economic and infrastructural buffers are essential for sustaining dairy production in a changing climate. climate change impact climate change adaptation dairy farming farmer perceptions milk buyer perceptions Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Introduction Agricultural systems are highly susceptible to changes in climate conditions because the practices and systems that have evolved are adapted to, and dependent on, local conditions. How key agricultural stakeholders, such as farmers, perceive current and future climate conditions will play a crucial role in how agriculture adapts to future changes (Arbuckle et al. 2013 ). For promoting adaptation in the dairy sector, researchers and agricultural extensionists need to better understand the perceptions and experiences of dairy system operators regarding climate change and the factors that lead to adaptation (Maas et al., 2020). However, the viewpoints of relevant actors directly affected by climate change are often underrepresented in climate change discussions, which may hinder the wider adoption of adaptation practices (Rojas-Downing et al. 2017 ). While livestock production generates a significant proportion of global greenhouse gas emissions (Smith et al. 2007 ) it is also affected by the impacts of climate change, with the main impacts directly affecting animal physiology, health, welfare and reproduction through increased frequency, length and intensity of heat waves and changes in other extreme weather events such as floods, droughts and hail (Tamminen et al. 2024 ). Dairy production chains are also indirectly affected through feed production and fluctuations in input and output prices (Rojas-Downing et al. 2017 ). For example, heat waves have been shown to reduce milk yield and milk quality, which ultimately affects the quantity and quality of dairy products (Cowley et al. 2015 ; Ahmed et al. 2022 ) and hence potentially resulting in economic impacts for the entire dairy sector. On the other hand, the lengthening of growing seasons in cooler regions may present new opportunities for increased fodder production with improved quality (Peltonen-Sainio et al. 2018 ; Peltonen-Sainio and Jauhiainen 2020 ), outdoor grazing, and consequent benefits for animal health and welfare (Rojas-Downing et al. 2017 ). From the point of view of making dairy production more resilient to such challenges, there is a strong need to improve adaptation to both the positive and negative impacts of climate change, as well as to implement policies aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Northern Europe is experiencing some of the fastest climate warming in the world (EEA 2024 ). The rapidly changing conditions pose both risks and potential opportunities for farmers, and as they make decisions about agricultural practices on their farms, they play a key role in implementing climate change adaptation measures. At the same time, dairy farmers in northern Europe are struggling with profitability and the increasingly high production costs of farming (Himanen et al. 2016 ). Therefore, it is essential to understand their perceptions of the potential impacts of climate change and the need to adapt (Sorvali et al. 2021 ). Milk buyers, for their part, are a critical link in the dairy supply chain between production and consumption. Understanding their perceptions helps to assess how climate change affects the dairy supply chain dynamics, from farm to markets. In addition, their perspectives can help dairy producers to meet evolving consumer demands for sustainable and climate-friendly dairy products. Although there has been considerable research on awareness and perceptions of climate change among the general public (Knight 2016 ; Druckman and McGrath 2019 ; Kulin et al. 2021), much less is known about how farmers and milk buyers perceive the impacts of and adaptation to climate change (Soubry et al. 2020 ; Sorvali et al. 2021 ; Tamminen et al. 2024 ). Even within the same supply chain, different actors can have unique perspectives and experiences of climate change (Paloviita and Järvelä 2015 ). The aim of this study is to examine in detail the experienced and anticipated impacts of climate change, especially temperature-related, on the dairy sector in the North Karelia region of eastern Finland (Fig. 1). Any insights gained from this study are expected to be relevant across many other similar northern European dairy systems. We explored the perceptions of dairy producers and milk buyers through in-depth interviews. As a background to the interviews, the impact of heat on historical milk production in the region was analyzed using production data provided by the dairy company Valio, representatives of which were among the interviewees. To design the interviews, we reviewed key climate change impacts on milk production from academic literature and consulted experts. Understanding the challenges, needs and concerns of both dairy producers and milk buyers is necessary to develop comprehensive, equitable and viable adaptation practices across the dairy value chain that can ensure the sustainability and continuity of dairy production in the region. Figure 1. Materials and Methods Study region Dairy production is Finland's most significant agricultural sector, contributing about half of the annual agricultural gross product (Virkajärvi et al. 2015). North Karelia ranks as the sixth largest dairy production area in Finland, with 224 dairy farms and 11,705 cows in 2024 (OSF 2025) and it has profound impact on the economy, culture, environment and communities of the region. The region's focus on dairy is due to its suitability for fodder production and less favorable conditions for arable cropping compared to southwestern Finland. Dairy farms in North Karelia are typically family-owned, with an average farm size of 48 hectares and 44 cows per farm in 2023 (OSF 2025). Cows are pastured from May to September and kept indoors during winter. Feeding is high in roughage, and about 20% of farms use free-range stables, producing 50% of the milk. Milk is stored in cooled tanks and collected by dairy companies every other day. Despite the sharp decline in the number of farms and cows, milk production has remained relatively stable in the region (OSF 2025) (Fig. 2). This results from expanded average herd size, from 19.5 to 56.3 between 2014 and 2022, combined with increased milk productivity over the same period, from 8 886 to 10 030 kg per cow in the registered herds (Hellberg 2022). The Finnish dairy cooperative Valio Ltd. operates a dairy factory in Joensuu. The factory employs nearly 2 800 people in North Karelia and the surrounding area (Valio 2024). The average annual precipitation in North Karelia is 550–650 mm. The climate has already warmed, with the period 1991–2020 being about 0.6°C warmer than the period 1981–2010. Depending on global greenhouse gas emissions, the average temperature is expected to increase by 1.8-3.0°C by the middle of the 21st century in the region. Similarly, annual precipitation is projected to increase by 6–8% (Gregow et al. 2021). Figure 2 Analysis of climate and milk production data The impact of heat on milk production was investigated by analyzing daily observational data on milk yield and temperature from 2010 to 2021. The aim was to provide an indicative impression of the observed local impacts to support discussions with milk producers and buyers. Milk production data The milk data were provided by Valio Ltd. The dataset contains anonymized data on the daily milk quantity and quality collected from individual farms, including milk volume (liters), cell and bacteria counts per liter, and fat and protein content (%). Each record indicates the date the milk was collected and the municipality in which the farm is located. No other information about the farms, the cows or the milking process was provided for the analysis. Prior to analysis, farms with largely incomplete data were excluded. The data were reviewed for anomalous values and variations in the quantities of milk delivered by individual farms, and outliers were removed. Municipalities with fewer than five farms were also excluded from the analysis to ensure anonymity and to benefit the analysis of municipal averages. The use of municipal averages in the analysis was chosen to minimize the impact of variability in farm-level daily milk production, which is largely unrelated to weather conditions. Due to the sporadic nature of the reporting of milk quality indicators, the analysis focused on the reported quantities of milk. As a result, the analyzed data consist of milk volumes from 122 farms across nine municipalities in North Karelia (Fig. 3). Figure 3 Milk is usually collected from farms every other day, on days that alternate between farms in the region. This results in a systematic sawtooth variation of the municipal milk yield (liters) on alternate days, caused by the time of collection in relation to higher and lower producing farms. This mismatch was taken into account by pooling all values reported for a given municipality on two consecutive days and calculating two-day municipal averages of milk yields. Finally, data on milk amounts were expressed as percentage anomalies of each pair of days to the long-term mean of those days in the respective municipality. Weather data In the analysis of the relationship between heat and milk amount we used different temperature variables (minimum, maximum and mean) and a version of the widely used temperature-humidity index ( THI ; Hill and Wall, 2015) defined as: $$\:\begin{array}{c}THI=\left(1.8\:{T}_{db}+32\right)-\left(\left(0.55-0.0055\:RH\right).\left(1.8\:{T}_{db}-26\right)\right)\#\left(1\right)\end{array}$$ where T db is the dry bulb temperature (°C; represented by mean temperature in our analysis), and RH is daily mean relative humidity. Observations of daily minimum, maximum and mean temperature from seven weather stations located in North Karelia, covering the period from 2010 to 2021, were downloaded from the open data service of the Finnish Meteorological Institute (FMI 2025). Analysis revealed that only the Tohmajärvi station (62.24° N, 30.35° E, 91 m) provided a continuous data series for the entire period. Comparison of data from all seven stations showed minor differences in daily temperatures, with Tohmajärvi's summer (June to August) temperatures highly correlated with those at the other stations (Pearson’s correlation coefficients for the maximum temperature ranged from 0.93 to 0.98). Therefore, Tohmajärvi's temperature data were chosen as representative of North Karelia. Daily relative humidity was retrieved from a 10 km x 10 km gridded data set for the grid cell in which the Tohmajärvi weather station is located (updated from (Aalto et al. 2016). In order to match the milk observations, data were analysed as anomalies of each pair of days from the long-term mean for those days. Relating weather to milk production Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to measure the linear relationship between the milk yield indicator and different weather indicators (THI; minimum, maximum and mean temperature). The effect of using rolling averages of different durations (4, 6, 8 and 10 days) on the results was also investigated. Visual representations were produced to support stakeholder interviews. Interviews and their analysis Eight semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with producers from North-Karelian dairy farms (4) and dairy buyers (4). Among the four farms, one was committed to organic crop and animal production, another combined organic crop production with conventional livestock production, and the remaining two operated under conventional production systems. Cattle housing varied, with one farm using a stanchion-tied stable and three employing free-range stables. The number of dairy cows per farm ranged from 25 to 80 animals. Interviews were conducted remotely via Microsoft Teams in April and May 2023 by two researchers. Each interview lasted approximately one and a half hours and was recorded for analysis. At the start of each interview, the researchers outlined the research objectives and shared background information on the observed effects of the heat on milk production in the study region (described under Results). The interview questions were designed to gather qualitative insights into the impacts of climate change on milk production, animal welfare, and farm operations, as well as stakeholder perspectives on adaptation strategies. The questions were tailored to address practical experiences of producers and buyers and their perceptions of climate impacts, additionally informed by the analysis of Valio data (see Results). This ensured that the questions were relevant and context specific. Semi-structured interviews were chosen to allow for open-ended responses, giving interviewees the freedom to share their experiences and observations in detail while enabling the researchers to probe deeper when needed (Adams 2015). The interview material was analyzed using qualitative relational content analysis with an inductive approach (Elo et al. 2014; Krippendorff 2018). The unit of analysis was defined as any thought or observation from the interviewees deemed meaningful by the researchers, rather than individual words or sentences. The transcribed interviews were first coded and condensed by one researcher using NVivo Qualitative Data Analysis Software (version 1.3). The coding process followed an open coding strategy, where data segments were labelled with descriptive, data-derived codes (Creswell and Creswell 2017) see Table 1. These “initial codes” represent interpretations of participants' statements and were not based on predefined categories or classifications. Following this, the initial codes were grouped into broader, more abstract themes (“condensed codes”) to identify patterns across the interviews. This coding and condensation process was entirely data-driven and focus on interpreting meaning rather than quantifying the frequency of specific words or expressions. Relational content analysis was then applied to examine connections between different climate-related drivers, impacts and responses, such as the relationship between heat, reduced yield, and the need for irrigation. To enhance the reliability of the findings, the coding outcomes were cross-checked by two researchers. Table 1 Examples of raw data (quotes from interviews translated from Finnish), initial codes, and the final condensed themes Raw data Initial codes Condensed themes “On average, you can probably start spring work a little earlier, and in the autumn the weather will be good for longer.” Spring has come early, extended growing season Improved cultivation conditions “First of all, it shows in fertility. When the summer was over and autumn began; of course we inseminate all year round, but the autumn heat was really weak.” Fertility issues, seasonal variation Reproductive challenges “Well, then, at some point it will start to affect the quality of the milk, that’s when the cells start to rise and inflammation starts to occur.” Bacterial growth, inflammation, hygiene Decreased milk quality "Well, that's it, so more electric fans have been put in there to get the air moving. Especially from the bottom up; and then also in the longitudinal direction of the barn, by opening the doors, to get the air circulating, so that the air can move. It doesn't have to move a lot, but when there is a little movement, it already achieves it, makes it easier for the animals. And then another factor that comes in – it also keeps the flies away. That again reduces the animal stress; though on the other hand, they always carry their own risk of disease, even flies." Fans, air circulation, heat stress, disease risk Barn ventilation Table 1 Results Observed impacts of temperature on milk amounts in North Karelia The milk yield and different heat-related weather indicators (minimum, maximum and mean temperature and THI ) are negatively correlated at all municipalities in July, the warmest month of the year, and largely also in August, whereas other months of the year do not show consistently significant negative correlations. The negative correlation is the strongest for all weather indicators in July, and the effect is emphasized with longer rolling averages. Table 2 presents an example of the analysis for the eight-day rolling average for THI and mean daily temperature at the nine municipalities included in the analysis. Table 2 Pearson correlation coefficients (r) of monthly relationships (for May to September) between two weather variables (predictors) and milk amounts (predictand) at nine municipalities. Predictors and predictand are expressed as anomalies from long-term (2010–2021) means, calculated on a two-daily basis for an eight-day rolling average. Asterisks indicate the statistical significance of r using two-sided P-values; * P < 0.1, ** P < 0.05, *** P < 0.01. Cases with r ≤ -0.5 are in bold. May June July August September Temperature-humidity index Joensuu 0.12 -0.21*** -0.37*** -0.05 0.09 Juuka -0.06 -0.11 -0.38*** -0.03 -0.11 Kitee 0.04 -0.06 -0.51*** -0.04 0.01 Lieksa -0.21*** 0.1 -0.59*** -0.22*** 0.27*** Liperi -0.21*** 0.08 -0.41*** -0.15** -0.04 Nurmes -0.12* 0.09 -0.39*** -0.1 0.2*** Polvijärvi 0.03 0.11 -0.48*** -0.15** 0.01 Rääkkylä 0.02 0.15** -0.39*** -0.41*** 0.18** Tohmajärvi -0.16** 0.1 -0.69*** -0.38*** -0.18** Mean daily temperature Joensuu 0.17** -0.2*** -0.39*** -0.09 0.13* Juuka -0.07 -0.12 -0.36*** -0.02 -0.04 Kitee 0.04 -0.07 -0.51*** -0.08 0.02 Lieksa -0.17** 0.09 -0.59*** -0.29*** 0.33*** Liperi -0.22*** 0.08 -0.38*** -0.13* -0.07 Nurmes -0.11 0.08 -0.39*** -0.14* 0.21*** Polvijärvi 0.02 0.1 -0.46*** -0.13* -0.04 Rääkkylä 0.06 0.14** -0.37*** -0.33*** 0.15** Tohmajärvi -0.15** 0.1 -0.67*** -0.38*** -0.13* Table 2 The eight-day rolling average was selected for closer scrutiny as it offers a better impression of the effects of heatwaves than shorter time periods (results for the 10-day average are very similar). Correlations were strongest in July with negative correlation coefficients varying between − 0.32 (mean daily temperature anomaly at Nurmes) and − 0.69 ( THI anomaly at Tohmajärvi). During a warmer than average July, as in 2010, the curve for the milk anomaly largely mirrors the temperature curves (Fig. 4). This is a typical example of how in particularly warm periods the milk amount declines from the municipal long-term average. As temperature falls, the milk amounts start increasing again. Similar analysis of time-series plots in a particularly cold summer such as 2015 shows the curves reversed; temperature curves below the zero line and the milk curve above indicating higher milk yield than during the same time-period on average (not shown). The effect is consistent across municipalities and the pattern of higher temperatures corresponding with lower milk amounts reflected across the years. Figure 4 Perceptions of key climatic impact-drivers affecting dairy production The interviewees highlighted several key climate impact drivers affecting dairy production in North Karelia. They reported that unstable and extreme weather events have become more frequent, increasing uncertainty in farming conditions. Shifts in precipitation patterns, including irregular rainfall and drought periods, have made water resource management and fodder production more challenging. A gradual shift in climate, particularly rising temperatures, have altered seasonal patterns and growing conditions. Additionally, changes in winter conditions, such as fluctuating temperatures and variable snow cover, have influenced crop growth. Perceptions of climate change impacts on dairy production The potential impacts of climate change as perceived by interviewees are summarized in Table 3 . Perceived impacts are attributed to farmers, buyers or both groups, are identified as being either beneficial, adverse or mixed and are further separated into impacts on forage production, livestock and livelihoods. Table 3 Adverse (−) and beneficial (+) impacts of weather and climate on forage production, livestock, and livelihoods perceived by North Karelia farmers and commercial milk buyers based on interviews Actor Perceived impacts of weather & climate (+/−) Description Forage production at farms All Reduced yields (−) Long droughts limit silage growth All Reduced silage quality (−) Heat reduces nutritional value & digestibility All Extended growing season (+) Enables new crop varieties and longer cultivation windows All Reduced soil productivity (−) Wet fieldwork & reduced frost weaken soil & cultivation practices Farmers Increased weeds (−) Spring drought favours weeds over crops in organic farming Buyers Shortage of fodder (−) Weather extremes limit local feed, increasing transport costs Buyers Improved grass yield (+) Grass production benefits slightly from changing conditions Buyers Declined silage quality (−) Excessive wetness hampers harvesting & ensiling Livestock All Heat stress on animals (−) Lowers fertility, increases insemination needs, & reduces milk yield All Increased water & reduced feed intake (−) Heatwaves cause cows to drink more but eat less, impacting health & milk production All Lengthened calving interval (−) Heat disrupts fertility, reducing conception rates All Reduced milk yield (−) Heatwaves reduce milk production, with slow or incomplete recovery Farmers Animal health challenges (−) Heat & humidity increase mastitis & bacterial infections Farmers Decreased milk quality (−) Heat stress raises somatic cells, infections, & bacterial risks Farmers Changes in cow behaviour (+/−) Cows seek shade, stabilizing milk production but reducing activity Buyers Lengthening grazing season (+) Extends outdoor time, improving animal welfare Livelihoods All Increased uncertainty related to extreme weather (−) Unpredictable rain, drought, & cold complicate planning & feed production Farmers Increased workload for farmers (−) Extreme heat increases stress & farm labour Farmers Diminishing profitability (−) Milk production fluctuations reduce income Farmers Shift in global food production (+) Finland may benefit as other regions struggle with climate challenges Buyers Higher fodder transportation costs (−) Poor yields force costly long-distance feed purchases Buyers Time management problems (−) Sick animals increase farm workloads Buyers Milk production uncertainty (−) Climate fluctuations complicate dairy planning Buyers Geographical advantage (+) Finland fares better than drought-prone Southern Europe Buyers Cost-saving challenges (−) Rising feed prices force compromises in milk quality & investments Buyers Management of production variation (−) Large farms must stabilize milk output to maintain system efficiency Table 3 Forage production at farms Dairy farmer interviewees reported that climate change has altered the timing of agricultural work, bringing both challenges and benefits. Spring tasks now begin earlier, while the harvest season extends later into the fall. These changes demand greater knowledge and skills, as farmers must rely more on monitoring plant growth and accumulated heat sums. Negative effects from shorter winters include delayed snowfall and increased rainfall after snow accumulation, causing water to collect underneath. Farmers described these seasonal shifts as requiring constant adaptation, with one stating: “ If the climate keeps getting drier and hotter — like if it starts raining less already in spring and that keeps up through late summer — it’s gonna clearly hit our crop yields. Even hay won’t grow the way it should. That kind of thing really changes how we have to work ”. Milk buyers emphasized that early summer is critical for heat and drought, affecting the yield and nutritional quality of the first silage crop. Such weather has affected plant species composition of grass leys, with clover failing to mature in time for the first harvest but dominating the second. Excessive rainfall and prolonged humidity have lowered the hygienic quality of feed and complicate fieldwork. Prolonged rainfall in mid-June has shortened the optimal harvesting window, reducing forage quality. Farmers in North Karelia expressed concerns about inter-annual variability, including cold, wet summers. Despite these challenges, some farmers remain cautiously optimistic about improved agricultural conditions associated with a longer growing season. Livestock Farmers and milk buyers noted that increased heat had immediate effects on livestock well-being, behavior, and productivity. Heat stress was perceived as a major concern for dairy cows, as it led to higher incidences of mastitis and reduced milk yield. The problem was considered particularly severe in tied stalls, where cows were observed to become phlegmatic, eat less, drink more, and breathe more rapidly. Reduced feed intake was reported to have lowered milk production, and recovery from prolonged heat stress was said to take several weeks. High temperatures were also noted to increase the risk of feed spoilage, thereby reducing palatability. According to interviewees, dairy cows were particularly vulnerable to heat stress due to their high metabolic rate. As one interviewee summarized: ” Milk and cows both like the same temperature — fridge temperature”. High temperatures combined with high humidity was described as a factor accelerating the spread of bacterial infections. Mastitis outbreaks had resulted in antibiotic treatments, which prevented milk from being sold and caused economic losses. Prolonged heat stress was reported to weaken conception rates, leading to longer calving intervals and economic losses. Despite these challenges, some interviewees acknowledged a positive impact of climate change: an extended grazing season, which was viewed as beneficial for animal welfare. Livelihoods Interviewees reported that fluctuations in milk production had led to irregular income streams, complicating financial planning and the management of dairy operations. Milk buyers noted that while larger farms tended to be more cost-efficient, they also faced greater risks due to their scale. Farmers explained that fluctuations, especially sharp increases in the process of production inputs had limited their ability to invest in essential farming and animal feeding practices. Rising costs of protein feed were said to have forced some farmers to rely on cheaper, less nutritious alternatives, which reduced milk production and lowered fat and protein concentrations. Extreme weather events were reported to further undermine agricultural profitability by decreasing fodder yields. Additionally, weather variability was said to increase workloads, making already physically demanding tasks even more exhausting during periods of high temperatures. According to milk buyers, many farmers experienced mental fatigue, exhaustion, and financial difficulties as a result of these pressures. One milk buyer described the situation as follows: ”For us too, problems on the farm usually show up last in the milk quality. … But when it starts messing with both the quality and the amount of milk, that’s when it’s a real red flag for us too”. Interviewees also indicated that climate unpredictability and feelings of guilt over its impacts contributed to psychological strain, which was further intensified by public discussions that often portrayed agriculture in a negative light. Opinions on adaptation Interviewees’ viewpoints on adaptation options are summarized in Table 4 , using the same categories as Table 3 . Here perceived challenges are shown on the left and potential adaptation solutions on the right. Table 4 Challenges and potential solutions for adaptation of dairying to climate change as perceived by farmers and commercial milk buyers based on interviews Actor Perceived challenge Potential adaptation solutions Forage production at farms All Drought Enhance field water management to address the growing impact of extreme weather events, including droughts & heavy rainfall. All Changing conditions Introduce new crop species, such as alfalfa, & new plant varieties that adapt to local conditions & withstand extreme weather caused by climate change. Farmers Shortage of grass silage Utilize cereal & protein crops for silage, with the option to harvest annual crops when sufficient silage is available. Farmers Drought Expand grass cultivation, which withstands heat and, unlike annual crops intended for human consumption, recovers from drought & continues growth. Farmers Drought Enhance soil fertility management through investments in sustainable agricultural practices. Farmers Drought Irrigation enhances plant growth conditions & resilience. Farmers Drought Use subsurface drainage to raise groundwater levels & support plant growth. Farmers Drought Continue peatland cultivation for its drought tolerance, balancing food security needs with greenhouse gas emissions concerns. Farmers Enhancing crop production Increase productivity, for example, by cultivating for higher yields on smaller plots of land. Farmers Heatwaves Plant breeding focuses on developing deeper-rooted, heat-tolerant species for improved cultivation. Farmers Thriving in unique conditions Local breeding stations allow for the testing of plant material across Finland’s diverse climate conditions. Farmers Increase in uncertainty Buffer stocks of grain & grass, if maintained would help secure feed availability Buyers Changing production conditions Diversifying cultivation practices, such as growing various crop types on the farm, to ensure consistent yield capacity. Buyers Changing production conditions Ensure winter hardiness of new plant species & varieties, which is a crucial trait for successful cultivation in Finland. Buyers Drought Include drought tolerant plants in grass mixtures, for example perennial ryegrass, which is deep rooted. Livestock All Heat stress Cool animals using sprinklers, which reduce heat stress. Farmers Heat stress Construct free-range stables, which offer better control of barn conditions compared to a stanchion-tied stable, helping to manage heat stress. Farmers Heat stress Promote grazing to help reduce stress in animals housed in stanchion-tied stables. Farmers Heat stress Design pastures with natural shade to enhance animals' comfort. Farmers Heat stress Facilitate effective ventilation, which improves animal comfort by helping regulate barn temperatures. Farmers Heat stress Ensure adequate water intake for animals through drinking devices & feed moisture. Farmers Heat stress Install sand beds, which help maintain cool conditions for cows. Farmers Heat stress Use curtain walls to enhance ventilation & help keep the cows' environment cool & comfortable. Farmers Heat stress Fit roof vents, which assist in regulating barn temperature & improve airflow. Farmers Heat stress Consider barn placement, as the orientation of buildings in relation to the sun & wind can be used to enhance natural air circulation. Farmers Increasing costs & bureaucracy Transition from organic to conventional production, as the latter allows for a wider range of chemical & technological solutions, offering more flexibility. Farmers Thriving in unique conditions Promote domestic animal research to supports the development of solutions specifically tailored to local conditions. Farmers Heatwaves Seek solutions from abroad, for example, from regions already familiar with heatwave impacts on milk production, such as southern Europe, Israel & Canada. Buyers Heatwaves Ensure feed quality, by offering practical advice to prevent feed spoilage, such as increasing distribution intervals to maintain quality. Buyers Heat & increased bacteria Maintain hygiene on farms & during milk transport to ensure high quality milk. Livelihoods All Increase in uncertainty Utilize forecasts, by using automation and data to anticipate changes & help facilitate long-term investments by improving decision-making & efficiency. All Changing production conditions Develop competence, as raised skill levels, active information gathering, & entrepreneurial spirit are key to improving productivity. Farmers Global changes in production areas Exploit opportunities to expand dairy production, due to North Karelia´s favourable land structure, ideal conditions for growing grass, reliable water availability, potential for clearing fields & moderate land prices. Farmers Financial instability Expanding dairy farms can lead to improved productivity & greater economic efficiency. Buyers Shortage of roughage Harness the virtual marketplace, where information is provided regarding the availability of feed batches on the market Buyers Investment costs Deploy financial incentives to help alleviate the financial burden of investments, encouraging farms to take necessary actions. Buyers Changing production conditions Enhance advisory services & education, to disseminate information on measures to secure milk production, including crop cultivation, feed preservation, & animal cooling techniques. Buyers Changing production conditions Introduce benchmarking, so that farms can compare their productivity & practices to those of other farms for encouraging good practices and to enhance production efficiency & sustainability. Buyers Changing production conditions Diversify the product range to enhance economic sustainability in the food industry, reduce risks & boost adaptability to climate change challenges. Buyers Decreasing biodiversity Promote biodiversity, for example by grazing cattle to create & maintain habitats that foster the growth of diverse plants, animals, & microbial communities. Buyers Lack of successors Encourage continuity in milk production, by promoting greater commitment from young people through improved profitability, enhanced working conditions and positive imaging of the sector. Table 4 Forage production at farms Dairy farmers and buyers agreed that improving soil quality and managing field water were key strategies for climate adaptation. Both groups supported the development of resilient cultivars better suited to local conditions and extreme weather (Table 4 ). Dairy farmers emphasized the importance of silage production and grass-based feeding. To counter the effects of heat and drought, they reported adjusting cutting heights and, in some cases, converting grain crops into silage. Grass-based feeding was favored because grass was said to recover more effectively from drought than cereals. Milk buyers noted a preference for deep-rooted plants, such as reeds, due to their drought resistance, despite their lower digestibility. Diversifying farming practices at the species and variety level was seen as essential for adaptation, with perceived benefits including improved crop success, increased biodiversity, and enhanced soil carbon sequestration. Dairy farmers also reported designing pastures with natural shade to support cattle welfare under extreme heat conditions. Maintaining sufficient feed reserves was considered essential. Farmers described buffer stock targets of 2–6 months for grass and 16–18 months for grain. However, smaller farms were reported to face challenges in securing reserves due to limited land availability, making strategic planning especially important during extreme weather. Annual crops like peas were used to supplement feeding during silage shortages. Farmers expressed interest in adopting technologies such as automated systems and real-time soil moisture monitoring to improve farm management. They also considered drainage improvements and new irrigation systems as potential responses to increased climate variability. Despite concerns about reduced rainfall, some farmers acknowledged potential benefits of a longer growing season, which could allow for multiple annual fodder harvests. One interviewee reflected: “ There can actually be quite a few upsides for Finnish farmers too if the temperature shifts a bit. ” Farmers were experimenting with new crops, such as alfalfa, although policy constraints were said to influence cultivation decisions. Grass-based feeding was emphasized as an environmentally sustainable approach, particularly suited to the favorable growing conditions in North Karelia. However, concerns remained about the impacts of heavy rainfall and prolonged cold periods. Farmers also discussed the management of organic soils, which were productive but associated with greenhouse gas emissions. They emphasized the need for a more balanced public discussion on these issues. Livestock Interviews with dairy farmers and milk buyers revealed a range of strategies aimed at mitigating the impacts of climate change on dairy farming. Farmers with stanchion-tied stables reported using grazing as a means to alleviate heat stress, while those with modern free-range stables relied on on effective ventilation systems to maintain cooler indoor temperatures compared to the outside environment. One producer explained, ”Well, today’s cow, if it gets to choose, it’s chilling in the well-air-conditioned barn during the heat and then heads outside when it cools off in the evening.” Farmers emphasized the importance of barn design, particularly building height and adjustable curtain walls, as crucial for maintaining adequate air circulation. Transitioning to free-range stables equipped with milking robots was identified as a key investment goal; however, such transitions were often delayed due to existing debt and depended on the interest of the next generation in continuing the farm. Milk buyers noted that both climate change and animal welfare considerations were increasingly influencing barn planning decisions. According to farmers, orienting barns with ends facing north-south enhanced ventilation, and the use of electric fans and water misting systems helped cool animals during periods of extreme heat. Maintaining dry sleeping areas was considered essential for preventing mastitis. Some farmers reported using deep sand beds and high curtain walls to help regulate barn temperature. Hygiene was a major concern, particularly during heatwaves, due to the increased risk of bacterial growth in milk. Misting systems and drip pipes installed over feeding areas were also being trialled to lower barn temperatures. Farmers believed that practical solutions for coping with heat stress could be adapted from regions with hotter climate, such as central and southern Europe or the Middle East. Ensuring sufficient water availability for livestock, both through drinking systems and moisture content in feed, was considered increasingly critical as temperatures rise. Livelihoods Milk producers and buyers agreed that climate change had increased the skill requirements for farmers, necessitating a deeper understanding of plant biology due to increasingly variable weather conditions. One farmer reflected, ” Back in the day, we didn’t start harvesting silage before Midsummer because even Dad didn’t start then. But now, it’s got to be done based on what the plant needs .” The expansion and growing efficiency demand of dairy farming were also reported to require more precise and proactive planning. Milk buyers emphasized the importance of providing farmers with advice and training to support adaptation to changing conditions while maintaining best practices. They reported sharing information through in-person meetings, farm counselling services, webinars, and newsletters. According to buyers, the need for advisory services varied across farms, some farmers were highly informed and independent, while others relied heavily on external guidance. With the advancement of agricultural technology, training for milk buyers had increasingly focused on equipment management, particularly milking robots, and farm management strategies such as adjusting feeding practices during heatwaves. Recent crises, including the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine, were reported to have underscored the importance of financial resilience within the sector. Milk buyers described helping farmers manage supply chain challenges and emphasized the value of financial buffers. New digital tools, such as web-based notice boards, had helped farmers source spare parts or livestock more efficiently. Financial incentives, including responsibility bonuses, were used to encourage the adoption of sustainable practices. Milk buyers reported that dairy processors had begun diversifying their product portfolios to include plant-based options, aligning with evolving consumer preferences and sustainability goals. However, dairy farmers noted that ongoing uncertainty related to climate change and agricultural policy had made long-term planning difficult. Despite these challenges, roughage feeding remained a cornerstone of milk production. One buyer stated: " Even though the food system is changing, we're still so far up north that grass is the most reliable thing. And then when you think about cattle as the ones making use of that grass, they can turn it into high-quality protein ." The weak economic situation was reported to have reduced interest among young people in pursuing careers in farming, complicating the search for successors. Investments in new technology were also said to depend on banks' confidence in the future of the sector. Nevertheless, milk buyers expressed optimism about the next generation of farmers, describing them as well-educated and entrepreneurial. The COVID-19 pandemic and geopolitical crises were seen to have increased public awareness of the importance of domestic agriculture. Buyers emphasized the potential of agriculture to develop climate-smart solutions and viewed farmers as problem solvers in this transition. Discussion This study provides insights into the impacts of climate change and potential adaptive responses in the context of dairy production in North Karelia, Finland. We have summarized some of the main findings in Fig. 5. Figure 5 Figure 5. Propagation of climate change impacts on the dairy sector in North Karelia and some potential adaptation measures, as perceived by farmers and milk buyers based on semi-structured interviews. Dashed boxes on the left illustrate key climatic impacts drivers, their direct and indirect impacts and some adaptation challenges these pose. Boxes on the right list potential adaptation measures classified by response types. Photo in the background: Tero Sivula / Rodeo. The detrimental effects of summer heat on milk production in the region was established, in line with results for other parts of Europe (e.g. Vroege et al. 2023 ) and with the perceptions of dairy farmers and milk buyers interviewed for this study. The study explores current and anticipated challenges, opportunities, and adaptive strategies, drawing on the views of both dairy farmers and milk buyers. While most of the anticipated impacts of climate change were negative, stakeholders also identified several opportunities to enhance dairy production. Ensuring adequate fodder production under extreme weather conditions emerged as a crucial aspect of farm-level adaptation. More frequent extreme weather events, particularly earlier and more intense occurrences of heat and drought, have been observed in recent years in North Karelia. Changes in rainfall patterns have also been noted. Such events weaken the yields of cereals and grasses, as well as the quality and hygiene of feed (Peltonen-Sainio et al. 2016 ). The negative effects of weather on dairy cow production can extend into the following autumns through feeding impacts. Additionally, prolonged rains can lead to soil compaction due to the use of heavy machinery on wet fields, reducing the soil´s capacity to store and supply water for crops and diminishing fodder production over time (Liu et al. 2022 ). As experienced by dairy producers and buyers, even short-lived but frequent extreme weather events can cause long-term impacts. While our study is rooted in North Karelia, similar patterns have been observed elsewhere in Finland and northern Scandinavia. While farmers recognize the immediate impacts of heat and drought, they may underestimate the long-term biological and economic consequences, such as reduced fertility or herd health. For instance, a study from Sweden found that despite rising somatic cell counts and seasonal fertility declines, most farmers responded reactively to extreme weather, with limited anticipation of its cumulative effects on farm dynamics and profitability (Tamminen et al. 2024 ). These findings align with our results, suggesting that more targeted support and awareness-raising could promote proactive adaptation. Dairy farmers who make daily and seasonal observations of the surrounding nature, reported an extension of the growing season. They considered that the lengthening of the growing season might offer opportunities for increased and more diverse agricultural production and an extended grazing season. However, changes in grazing conditions may also lead to more increased farmwork (e.g. the need to build more shade-providing shelters), which can adversely impact farmers’ workload and wellbeing, potentially causing stress (Brennan et al. 2022) or even burn-out (Kallioniemi et al. 2022 ). This challenge necessitates careful planning and may require additional labor and resources to manage the extended grazing period effectively. Farmers reported that under current conditions, heat is already causing stress for animals, weakening animal well-being and conception, decreasing milk production, and increasing the risk of bacterial growth and mastitis in North Karelia. The negative impact of heat on milk quantity was also observed in the analysis of time-series data across a larger sample of farms across the region and is supported by findings from literature (Gisbert-Queral et al. 2021 ; Vroege et al. 2023 ). A decrease in fodder yields and subsequent increase in feed prices often results in the use of cheaper and less nutritious substitutes, leading to a decline in milk yield and nutritional content. When a farm's own feed production fails, purchasing substitute feed can lower agricultural productivity. As a consequence, both actor groups perceived that the consistency and predictability of milk deliveries to dairies decrease due to climate change. Different perspectives of actors Dairy farmers focus on observing natural cycles and the practical implications of extreme weather phenomena on their farming activities. They emphasized the effects of climate change on production conditions, and animal behavior. Notably, farmers expressed greater concern about exceptionally cold and rainy summers, which can hinder the growth of fodder crops and directly affect dairy cattle health and productivity (Kovalainen et al. 2024 ). In contrast, milk buyers were more concerned about the effects of climate change on the quantity and quality of plant and milk production. They highlighted the regional significance of extreme weather events in terms of roughage adequacy. Buyers emphasized the effects of heat stress on animal welfare and production, as well as on bacterial growth and milk quality, underscoring the importance of the hygiene on farms and during milk transport. These factors directly impact the quality, safety, and reliability of the milk supply, which are critical to the dairy business. Ensuring high standards is crucial for preventing contamination, complying with food safety regulations, maintaining consumer trust (Malik et al. 2024 ), minimizing economic losses, and ensuring efficient processing operations (Azooz et al. 2020 ). Milk buyers also discussed the economic impacts of climate change more extensively than farmers. They reflected on how changes in farm size and recent market conditions affect risks, investments, farming activities, livestock feeding, and milk delivery volumes. This broader perspective likely stems from milk buyers´ larger operational scale and their comprehensive view of the entire dairy supply chain. Dairy farmers highlighted the physical demands of farm work, particularly during heatwaves. Milk buyers, however, noted the mental fatigue, guilt related to climate change, and financial difficulties experienced by farmers. These issues were not mentioned by farmers themselves, possibly due to a focus on tangible concerns over emotional ones, or a lack of awareness regarding the emotional impact of climate change (Howard et al. 2020 ; Rust et al. 2022 ). Cultural norms and stigma may also discourage open discussions about emotional or mental health issues (Hagen et al. 2022 ). Potential adaptation measures Adaptation measures applied and planned on farms primarily aim to cool animals, improve field growth conditions, diversify fodder production, and secure input stocks. Dairy farmers emphasized the need to adapt feed production and highlighted the importance of technical practices (e.g. adjusting grass cutting height, cultivating deep-rooted plants, harvesting grain for silage) for improving crop production flexibility. These strategies are essential for enhancing crop resilience to changing environmental conditions and ensuring a consistent supply of high-quality feed for livestock despite extreme weather events (Gauly and Ammer 2020 ). They also contribute to the economic viability of farms by reducing the need to purchase additional costly feed during times of scarcity. An emphasis on certain technical practices, such as those that enhance resource efficiency or reduce vulnerability to climate risks, can reflect farmers´ commitment to sustainability and long-term planning. By adopting practices that improve the resilience of crop production, these farmers are actively investing in the future of their land and farming systems. Milk buyers emphasized the importance of biodiversity and its benefits for ecosystem services, such as soil carbon storage. This perspective may stem from their role in reflecting consumer needs and suggests that milk buyers understand the importance of healthy ecosystems for sustaining long-term feed production, which is vital for maintaining a reliable milk supply (Sizemore 2015 ). They also appear increasingly aware of agriculture´s environmental impact and view the promotion of biodiversity as a means to support sustainable development goals, reduce the carbon footprint, and meet consumer demand for environmentally friendly products (Alamsyah et al. 2020 ). Additionally, by emphasizing barn-building solutions like curtain walls, fans, and water jets, buyers are advocating measures that can help maintain optimal living conditions for livestock. Having sufficient land and storage acts as a buffer against unexpected events, such as poor harvests due to extreme weather, or supply chain disruptions. Without adequate feed, milk production can decline, affecting farm income and milk supply to buyers. Adequate feed areas and storage help mitigate these risks by ensuring a consistent feed supply (Kässi et al. 2015 ). On smaller farms, available land is often used intensively for immediate production needs, leaving little room for buffer areas. This makes small farms more vulnerable to feed availability fluctuations, potentially leading to shortages during challenging times. Intensive land use can also lead to soil degradation, reduced crop yields, and increased reliance on external feed sources, which can be more expensive and less reliable (Hossain et al. 2020 ). These factors may explain milk buyers´ concerns, as they may view small farm sizes as a threat to feed sufficiency, especially amid climate variability or economic pressures. Financial buffers are important for farms to survive difficult times, such as poor harvests, unexpected expenses, or market downturns (Cradock-Henry 2021 ). These buffers enable farms to invest in feed when their own production is insufficient, maintain operations during periods of low income, and make necessary improvements to land, storages, or infrastructure. From the perspective of milk buyers, farms lacking adequate financial buffers are more vulnerable to economic shocks, potentially leading to disruptions in milk production. By emphasizing financial resilience, milk buyers advocate for a stable and reliable supply chain, where farms are better equipped to handle crises without compromising milk quality or quantity. Implementing adaptation measures requires farmers to develop new skills. Introducing new crops or cultivars, changing feeding practices, or using advanced technologies necessitates knowledge of their benefits and potential challenges, as well as careful planning and risk assessment. Farmers need to develop technical skills to effectively apply these adaptations to their unique farm environments (Beecher et al. 2024 ). Dairy farmers and advisers monitor developments in different parts of the world, but solutions are always considered on a farm-by-farm basis. In the future, the combined effects of various changes and disruptions and the need for anticipation will challenge all operators in the dairy industry (Gauly and Ammer 2020 ). Skill development is essential for understanding and implementing new practices, customizing solutions to specific farm conditions, anticipating future challenges, and collaborating within the entire dairy system. Practical implications The findings of the study can help actors in the dairy system understand the challenges posed by climate change to dairy farmers and buyers. We emphasize the importance of developing new skills and knowledge to implement adaptation effectively. The results are useful for agricultural advisors, who can use them to provide tailored advice to farmers based on the identified challenges and opportunities. The study can foster collaboration between different actors in the dairy system by providing an understanding of challenges and potential solutions. In the future, this collaboration can lead to more coordinated efforts to address climate change impacts and support adaptation in dairy production. Novelty To our knowledge, this study is the first to combine the perspectives of both dairy farmers and milk buyers to explore climate change impacts, challenges, and adaptation strategies within the northern dairy sector. By integrating semi-structured interviews with regional milk production data, the study offers a unique view of climate adaptation that captures both practical, farm-level responses and broader supply chain considerations. This dual perspective provides new insights into how different roles within the dairy system influence climate risk perception, priorities for adaptation, and the identification of opportunities. Limitations It should be noted that the results of this study rely on a relatively small sample size, which may not fully capture the diversity of experiences and perspectives among all dairy farmers and buyers in the region, and that important issues may have been overlooked. The findings are also context-specific and may not be directly applicable to other regions with different climatic and socio-economic conditions. The qualitative approach provides valuable information for understanding perceptions and experiences, but the lack of the quantitative data prevents broader generalization of the findings. Conclusions The study reveals challenges and opportunities related to climate change faced by dairy farmers and milk buyers in North Karelia, Finland. Analysis of regional data confirms that heat stress negatively affects milk production. The findings underline that while both actor groups recognize the impacts of climate change, they prioritize different aspects according to their roles within the dairy system. Dairy farmers focus on immediate, practical challenges, particularly those related to weather conditions and the need for technical solutions in both plant and animal production. They increasingly acknowledge the necessity of developing new skills and farming practices to adapt to a changing climate and to seize emerging opportunities. In contrast, milk buyers emphasize the broader economic implications of climate change for the dairy industry, with a particular focus on maintaining high standards of milk quality and hygiene. The results underscore the importance of continuous learning and innovation for successful adaptation. Economic incentives and sustained collaboration among farmers, buyers, advisors, and policymakers will be essential to strengthen the resilience and sustainability of dairy farming. Equally important is listening to local actors, whose everyday experiences and contextual knowledge offer critical insights into practical adaptation needs and opportunities. Engaging with these voices helps ensure that policies and support measures are grounded in real-world conditions and address the most pressing challenges on the ground. This study makes a novel contribution by being the first to systematically examine and compare the climate change perceptions and adaptation priorities of both dairy farmers and milk buyers in a northern European context. By combining qualitative insights with regional production data, it offers an integrated perspective on climate resilience across the dairy value chain. These findings provide a valuable basis for developing more targeted, collaborative, and regionally adapted strategies to secure the long-term viability of the dairy industry as climate risks intensify. Declarations Acknowledgements We would like to thank to all the dairy farmers and milk buyers who generously shared their time and insights. Special thanks to Valio Ltd for their collaboration and support throughout the research process. We also thank our colleagues at Luke for their helpful suggestions in identifying suitable participants during the data collection phase. Funding This study was funded by the Academy of Finland (FINSCAPES project: Grant Numbers 341977 and 342560). Conflicts of interest/Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests. Ethics approval The study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki. Consent to participate Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. Consent for publication All participants to the study gave informed consent to the anonymous publication of the information collected during the project. Availability of data and material The data and material generated and/or analyzed in this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Code availability Not applicable Authors' contributions (include appropriate statements) CRediT roles Conceptualization, K.R., N.P., N.K., S.F., T.R.C. and T.P.; Methodology, K.R., N.P., N.K., S.F., T.R.C. and T.P.; Investigation, K.R., N.P. and S.F.; Writing – Original Draft, K.R., N.P., N.K., S.F., T.R.C. and T.P.; Writing –Review & Editing, K.R., N.P., N.K., S.F., T.R.C. and T.P; Funding Acquisition, T.R.C. and T.P.; Resources, T.R.C. and T.P.; Supervision, T.R.C. and T.P. References Aalto J, Pirinen P, Jylhä K (2016) New gridded daily climatology of Finland: Permutation-based uncertainty estimates and temporal trends in climate. J Geophys Res Atmos 121:3807–3823. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024651 Adams WC (2015) Conducting Semi-Structured Interviews. Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation. Wiley, Ltd, pp 492–505 Ahmed H, Tamminen L-M, Emanuelson U (2022) Temperature, productivity, and heat tolerance: Evidence from Swedish dairy production. Clim Change 175:10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-022-03461-5 Alamsyah DP, Othman NA, Mohammed HAA (2020) The awareness of environmentally friendly products: The impact of green advertising and green brand image. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2020.2.017 . Manag Sci Lett 1961–1968 Arbuckle JG, Morton LW, Hobbs J (2013) Farmer beliefs and concerns about climate change and attitudes toward adaptation and mitigation: Evidence from Iowa. Clim Change 118:551–563. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0700-0 Azooz MF, El-Wakeel SA, Yousef HM (2020) Financial and economic analyses of the impact of cattle mastitis on the profitability of Egyptian dairy farms. Vet World 13:1750–1759. https://doi.org/10.14202/vetworld.2020.1750-1759 Beecher M, Lawton,Thomas, Gorman M (2024) Irish dairy farmers’ assessment of their training needs. J Agric Educ Ext 30:553–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2023.2249442 Brennan M, Hennessy,Thia, Meredith, David, and, Dillon E (2022) Weather, Workload and Money: Determining and Evaluating Sources of Stress for Farmers in Ireland. J Agromedicine 27:132–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2021.1988020 Cowley FC, Barber DG, Houlihan AV, Poppi DP (2015) Immediate and residual effects of heat stress and restricted intake on milk protein and casein composition and energy metabolism. J Dairy Sci 98:2356–2368. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2014-8442 Cradock-Henry NA (2021) Linking the social, economic, and agroecological: a resilience framework for dairy farming. Ecol Soc 26:art3. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12122-260103 Creswell JW, Creswell JD (2017) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. SAGE Druckman JN, McGrath MC (2019) The evidence for motivated reasoning in climate change preference formation. Nat Clim Change 9:111–119. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0360-1 EEA (2024) European Climate Risk Assessment. EEA Report 01/2024, European Environment Agency (EEA), Copenhagen, 486 pp. doi:10.2800/204249 Accessed 2 Apr 2025 Elo S, Kääriäinen M, Kanste O et al (2014) Qualitative Content Analysis: A Focus on Trustworthiness. SAGE Open 4:2158244014522633. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014522633 FMI (2025) Download observations. Finnish Meteorological Institute. https://en.ilmatieteenlaitos.fi/download-observations Accessed 16 Jun 2025 Gauly M, Ammer S (2020) Review: Challenges for dairy cow production systems arising from climate changes. animal 14:s196–s203. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731119003239 Gisbert-Queral M, Henningsen A, Markussen B et al (2021) Climate impacts and adaptation in US dairy systems 1981–2018. Nat Food 2:894–901. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00372-z Gregow H, Mäkelä A, Tuomenvirta H, Juhola S, Käyhkö J, Perrels A, Kuntsi-Reunanen E, Mettiäinen I, Näkkäläjärvi K, Sorvali J, Lehtonen H, Hildén M, Veijalainen N, Kuosa H, Sihvonen M, Johansson M, Leijala U, Ahonen S, Haapala J, Korhonen H, Ollikainen M, Lilja S, Ruuhela R, Särkkä J, Siiriä S-M (2021) Policy instruments, costs and regional dimensions of climate change adaptation. Report of the Finnish Climate Panel 2/2021. https://doi.org/10.31885/9789527457047 Accessed 2 Apr 2025 Hagen BNM, Sawatzky,Alex H, ,Sherilee L et al (2022) Farmers Aren’t into the Emotions and Things, Right? A Qualitative Exploration of Motivations and Barriers for Mental Health Help-Seeking among Canadian Farmers. J Agromedicine 27:113–123. https://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2021.1893884 Hellberg (2022) Dairy Herd Recording Results 2022. https://www.proagria.fi/uploads/lypsykarjan-tuotosseurannan-tulokset-2022_hellberg.pdf Accessed 10 Jan 2025 Himanen SJ, Mäkinen H, Rimhanen K, Savikko R (2016) Engaging Farmers in Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Assessing Intercropping as a Means to Support Farm Adaptive Capacity. Agriculture 6:34. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture6030034 Hossain A, Krupnik TJ, Timsina J et al (2020) Agricultural Land Degradation: Processes and Problems Undermining Future Food Security. In: Fahad S, Hasanuzzaman M, Alam M et al (eds) Environment, Climate, Plant and Vegetation Growth. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 17–61 Howard M, Ahmed S, Lachapelle P, Schure MB (2020) Farmer and rancher perceptions of climate change and their relationships with mental health. J Rural Ment Health 44:87–95. https://doi.org/10.1037/rmh0000131 Kallioniemi MK, Kaseva J, Kymäläinen H-R, Hakanen JJ (2022) Well-being at work and Finnish dairy farmersfrom job demands and loneliness towards burnout. Front Psychol 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.976456 Kässi P, Känkänen H, Niskanen O et al (2015) Farm level approach to manage grass yield variation under climate change in Finland and north-western Russia. Biosyst Eng 140:11–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2015.08.006 Knight KW (2016) Public awareness and perception of climate change: a quantitative cross-national study. Environ Sociol 2:101–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2015.1128055 Kovalainen N, Niemi J, Huan-Niemi E (2024) Review of food security in Finland from the 17th to 21st century. Luonnonvarakeskus Krippendorff K (2018) Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. SAGE Kulin J, Johansson Sevä,Ingemar, and, Dunlap RE (2021) Nationalist ideology, rightwing populism, and public views about climate change in Europe. Environ Polit 30:1111–1134. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2021.1898879 Liu H, Colombi T, Jäck O et al (2022) Effects of soil compaction on grain yield of wheat depend on weather conditions. Sci Total Environ 807:150763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150763 Malik M, Gahlawat VK, Mor RS, Kharub M (2024) Consumer Perception Towards Traceable Dairy Products: an Empirical Study. LogForum Sci J Logist 20:191–207. https://doi.org/10.17270/j.log.001018 OECD (2021) Making Better Policies for Food Systems / . Accessed 2 Apr 2025 OSF (2025) Milk and milk products statistics https://www.luke.fi/en/statistics/milk-and-milkproducts-statistics Accessed 22 May 2024 Paloviita A, Järvelä M (2015) Climate Change Adaptation and Food Supply Chain Management: An overview. In: Climate Change Adaptation and Food Supply Chain Management. Routledge Advances in Climate Change Research. Routledge. ISBN: 978-1-138-79666-9 (pp. 1–14) Peltonen-Sainio P, Jauhiainen L (2020) Large zonal and temporal shifts in crops and cultivars coincide with warmer growing seasons in Finland. Reg Environ Change 20:89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-020-01682-x Peltonen-Sainio P, Palosuo T, Ruosteenoja K et al (2018) Warming autumns at high latitudes of Europe: an opportunity to lose or gain in cereal production? Reg Environ Change 18:1453–1465. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-017-1275-5 Peltonen-Sainio P, Venäläinen A, Mäkelä HM et al (2016) Harmfulness of weather events and the adaptive capacity of farmers at high latitudes of Europe. Clim Res 67:221–240. https://doi.org/10.3354/cr01378 Rojas-Downing MM, Nejadhashemi AP, Harrigan T, Woznicki SA (2017) Climate change and livestock: Impacts, adaptation, and mitigation. Clim Risk Manag 16:145–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2017.02.001 Rust NA, Stankovics P, Jarvis RM et al (2022) Have farmers had enough of experts? Environ Manage 69:31–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-021-01546-y Sizemore GC (2015) Accounting for biodiversity in the dairy industry. J Environ Manage 155:145–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.03.015 Smith P, Martino D, Cai Z et al (2007) Greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 363:789–813. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2184 Sorvali J, Kaseva J, Peltonen-Sainio P (2021) Farmer views on climate change—a longitudinal study of threats, opportunities and action. Clim Change 164:50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-03020-4 Soubry B, Sherren K, Thornton TF (2020) Are we taking farmers seriously? A review of the literature on farmer perceptions and climate change, 2007–2018. J Rural Stud 74:210–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.09.005 Tamminen L-M, Båge R, Åkerlind M, Olmos Antillón G (2024) Farmers´ sense of the biological impact of extreme heat and seasonality on Swedish high-yielding dairy cows – A mixed methods approach. Prev Vet Med 224:106131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2024.106131 Valio (2024) Valio’s Joensuu cheese dairy creates flavour and wellbeing. https://www.valio.fi/yritys/valion-tehtaat-suomessa/joensuu/ Accessed 22 May 2024 Virkajärvi P, Rinne M, Mononen J et al (2015) Dairy production systems in Finland. In: Grassland and forages in high output dairy farming systems, vol 20. Proceedings of the 18th Symposium of the European grassland federation. Wageningen, the Netherlands Vroege W, Dalhaus T, Wauters E, Finger R (2023) Effects of extreme heat on milk quantity and quality. Agric Syst 210:103731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2023.103731 Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6922846","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":484966029,"identity":"ce1fb816-55fb-42e3-94c5-4e74bcb9f8c1","order_by":0,"name":"Karoliina Rimhanen","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2018-5703","institution":"Natural Resources Institute Finland","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Karoliina","middleName":"","lastName":"Rimhanen","suffix":""},{"id":484966030,"identity":"f35a0701-f4cb-4eb2-86bc-1fd084ee316f","order_by":1,"name":"Nina Pirttioja","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2054-2902","institution":"","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Nina","middleName":"","lastName":"Pirttioja","suffix":""},{"id":484966031,"identity":"e40e0c84-b21e-4faf-99d1-6ac680333600","order_by":2,"name":"Timothy R. Carter","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4026-8859","institution":"","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Timothy","middleName":"R.","lastName":"Carter","suffix":""},{"id":484966032,"identity":"406531df-86da-4125-a783-8391a0dd1b8e","order_by":3,"name":"Stefan Fronzek","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2478-8050","institution":"","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Stefan","middleName":"","lastName":"Fronzek","suffix":""},{"id":484966033,"identity":"ebbec647-7051-4e18-8a7b-1f1ebfa116a9","order_by":4,"name":"Niina Kautto","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4895-1094","institution":"","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Niina","middleName":"","lastName":"Kautto","suffix":""},{"id":484966034,"identity":"3aee67ca-043f-4ad8-b210-7f8d42c4dcd5","order_by":5,"name":"Taru Palosuo","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4322-3450","institution":"","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Taru","middleName":"","lastName":"Palosuo","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-06-18 12:07:30","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6922846/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6922846/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":87067799,"identity":"26abd728-087f-467b-98aa-4ad0ebdc12d6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-18 18:56:10","extension":"jpg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":11161628,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eA dairy cow and a woman on a Finnish pasture in summer. As the climate warms, both dairy producers and buyers seek ways to adapt to increasing weather variability and long-term changes in temperature. Photo: Olli Leino / Luke.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure1.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6922846/v1/a767ba9051cf071750970003.jpg"},{"id":87067208,"identity":"37241e47-9fb9-4157-9180-1492117ceede","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-18 18:48:10","extension":"jpg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":142070,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMilk production volumes (bars) and number of dairy farms (line) in North Karelia in 2014-2024 (OSF 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure2.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6922846/v1/147755823a86806663f3f5d3.jpg"},{"id":87067212,"identity":"1eca62c5-6fab-4991-a383-0f67e8029a8c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-18 18:48:10","extension":"jpeg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":140602,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMunicipalities of North Karelia and the number of farms per municipality included in the analysis of milk production data.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure3.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6922846/v1/6ba610329a16cfada3e446b9.jpeg"},{"id":87067802,"identity":"f4d14504-1b5f-46c4-807a-59bec9b31d3b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-18 18:56:10","extension":"jpg","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":722335,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eDaily maximum and minimum temperature anomalies (°C) and milk amount anomalies (%) from the long-term mean during July 2010 in nine North Karelia municipalities. Coloured lines connect indicator values for rolling eight-day averages (bold) and two-daily means (narrow).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure4.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6922846/v1/1a312b69d2c0451e764fd8aa.jpg"},{"id":87067213,"identity":"9f5caad0-4565-458b-a23a-d8b6bf39a0ab","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-18 18:48:10","extension":"jpg","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":295756,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePropagation of climate change impacts on the dairy sector in North Karelia and some potential adaptation measures, as perceived by farmers and milk buyers based on semi-structured interviews. Dashed boxes on the left illustrate key climatic impacts drivers, their direct and indirect impacts and some adaptation challenges these pose. Boxes on the right list potential adaptation measures classified by response types. Photo in the background: Tero Sivula / Rodeo.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure5.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6922846/v1/0c777755b53c3e3e98526fae.jpg"},{"id":91008789,"identity":"6964c20c-deb1-4518-adfe-d77626b4c823","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-10 15:10:22","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":13666937,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6922846/v1/4855896b-8145-4bcb-9a4f-74981888f419.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"","formattedTitle":"Adapting Finnish dairy production to a warmer climate: Insights from producers and buyers","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003e Agricultural systems are highly susceptible to changes in climate conditions because the practices and systems that have evolved are adapted to, and dependent on, local conditions. How key agricultural stakeholders, such as farmers, perceive current and future climate conditions will play a crucial role in how agriculture adapts to future changes (Arbuckle et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). For promoting adaptation in the dairy sector, researchers and agricultural extensionists need to better understand the perceptions and experiences of dairy system operators regarding climate change and the factors that lead to adaptation (Maas et al., 2020). However, the viewpoints of relevant actors directly affected by climate change are often underrepresented in climate change discussions, which may hinder the wider adoption of adaptation practices (Rojas-Downing et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhile livestock production generates a significant proportion of global greenhouse gas emissions (Smith et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e) it is also affected by the impacts of climate change, with the main impacts directly affecting animal physiology, health, welfare and reproduction through increased frequency, length and intensity of heat waves and changes in other extreme weather events such as floods, droughts and hail (Tamminen et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Dairy production chains are also indirectly affected through feed production and fluctuations in input and output prices (Rojas-Downing et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). For example, heat waves have been shown to reduce milk yield and milk quality, which ultimately affects the quantity and quality of dairy products (Cowley et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Ahmed et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) and hence potentially resulting in economic impacts for the entire dairy sector. On the other hand, the lengthening of growing seasons in cooler regions may present new opportunities for increased fodder production with improved quality (Peltonen-Sainio et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Peltonen-Sainio and Jauhiainen \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), outdoor grazing, and consequent benefits for animal health and welfare (Rojas-Downing et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). From the point of view of making dairy production more resilient to such challenges, there is a strong need to improve adaptation to both the positive and negative impacts of climate change, as well as to implement policies aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eNorthern Europe is experiencing some of the fastest climate warming in the world (EEA \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). The rapidly changing conditions pose both risks and potential opportunities for farmers, and as they make decisions about agricultural practices on their farms, they play a key role in implementing climate change adaptation measures. At the same time, dairy farmers in northern Europe are struggling with profitability and the increasingly high production costs of farming (Himanen et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, it is essential to understand their perceptions of the potential impacts of climate change and the need to adapt (Sorvali et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Milk buyers, for their part, are a critical link in the dairy supply chain between production and consumption. Understanding their perceptions helps to assess how climate change affects the dairy supply chain dynamics, from farm to markets. In addition, their perspectives can help dairy producers to meet evolving consumer demands for sustainable and climate-friendly dairy products. Although there has been considerable research on awareness and perceptions of climate change among the general public (Knight \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Druckman and McGrath \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Kulin et al. 2021), much less is known about how farmers and milk buyers perceive the impacts of and adaptation to climate change (Soubry et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Sorvali et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Tamminen et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Even within the same supply chain, different actors can have unique perspectives and experiences of climate change (Paloviita and J\u0026auml;rvel\u0026auml; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe aim of this study is to examine in detail the experienced and anticipated impacts of climate change, especially temperature-related, on the dairy sector in the North Karelia region of eastern Finland (Fig.\u0026nbsp;1). Any insights gained from this study are expected to be relevant across many other similar northern European dairy systems. We explored the perceptions of dairy producers and milk buyers through in-depth interviews. As a background to the interviews, the impact of heat on historical milk production in the region was analyzed using production data provided by the dairy company Valio, representatives of which were among the interviewees. To design the interviews, we reviewed key climate change impacts on milk production from academic literature and consulted experts. Understanding the challenges, needs and concerns of both dairy producers and milk buyers is necessary to develop comprehensive, equitable and viable adaptation practices across the dairy value chain that can ensure the sustainability and continuity of dairy production in the region.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFigure 1.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Materials and Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eStudy region\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDairy production is Finland\u0026apos;s most significant agricultural sector, contributing about half of the annual agricultural gross product (Virkaj\u0026auml;rvi et al. 2015). North Karelia ranks as the sixth largest dairy production area in Finland, with 224 dairy farms and 11,705 cows in 2024 (OSF 2025) and it has profound impact on the economy, culture, environment and communities of the region. The region\u0026apos;s focus on dairy is due to its suitability for fodder production and less favorable conditions for arable cropping compared to southwestern Finland. Dairy farms in North Karelia are typically family-owned, with an average farm size of 48 hectares and 44 cows per farm in 2023 (OSF 2025). Cows are pastured from May to September and kept indoors during winter. Feeding is high in roughage, and about 20% of farms use free-range stables, producing 50% of the milk. Milk is stored in cooled tanks and collected by dairy companies every other day.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDespite the sharp decline in the number of farms and cows, milk production has remained relatively stable in the region (OSF 2025) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;2). This results from expanded average herd size, from 19.5 to 56.3 between 2014 and 2022, combined with increased milk productivity over the same period, from 8 886 to 10 030 kg per cow in the registered herds (Hellberg 2022). The Finnish dairy cooperative Valio Ltd. operates a dairy factory in Joensuu. The factory employs nearly 2 800 people in North Karelia and the surrounding area (Valio 2024).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe average annual precipitation in North Karelia is 550\u0026ndash;650 mm. The climate has already warmed, with the period 1991\u0026ndash;2020 being about 0.6\u0026deg;C warmer than the period 1981\u0026ndash;2010. Depending on global greenhouse gas emissions, the average temperature is expected to increase by 1.8-3.0\u0026deg;C by the middle of the 21st century in the region. Similarly, annual precipitation is projected to increase by 6\u0026ndash;8% (Gregow et al. 2021).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFigure 2\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eAnalysis of climate and milk production data\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe impact of heat on milk production was investigated by analyzing daily observational data on milk yield and temperature from 2010 to 2021. The aim was to provide an indicative impression of the observed local impacts to support discussions with milk producers and buyers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eMilk production data\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe milk data were provided by Valio Ltd. The dataset contains anonymized data on the daily milk quantity and quality collected from individual farms, including milk volume (liters), cell and bacteria counts per liter, and fat and protein content (%). Each record indicates the date the milk was collected and the municipality in which the farm is located. No other information about the farms, the cows or the milking process was provided for the analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to analysis, farms with largely incomplete data were excluded. The data were reviewed for anomalous values and variations in the quantities of milk delivered by individual farms, and outliers were removed. Municipalities with fewer than five farms were also excluded from the analysis to ensure anonymity and to benefit the analysis of municipal averages. The use of municipal averages in the analysis was chosen to minimize the impact of variability in farm-level daily milk production, which is largely unrelated to weather conditions. Due to the sporadic nature of the reporting of milk quality indicators, the analysis focused on the reported quantities of milk. As a result, the analyzed data consist of milk volumes from 122 farms across nine municipalities in North Karelia (Fig.\u0026nbsp;3).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure 3\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMilk is usually collected from farms every other day, on days that alternate between farms in the region. This results in a systematic sawtooth variation of the municipal milk yield (liters) on alternate days, caused by the time of collection in relation to higher and lower producing farms. This mismatch was taken into account by pooling all values reported for a given municipality on two consecutive days and calculating two-day municipal averages of milk yields. Finally, data on milk amounts were expressed as percentage anomalies of each pair of days to the long-term mean of those days in the respective municipality.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eWeather data\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the analysis of the relationship between heat and milk amount we used different temperature variables (minimum, maximum and mean) and a version of the widely used temperature-humidity index (\u003cem\u003eTHI\u003c/em\u003e; Hill and Wall, 2015) defined as:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Equa\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"FileID_Equa\" name=\"EquationSource\"\u003e$$\\:\\begin{array}{c}THI=\\left(1.8\\:{T}_{db}+32\\right)-\\left(\\left(0.55-0.0055\\:RH\\right).\\left(1.8\\:{T}_{db}-26\\right)\\right)\\#\\left(1\\right)\\end{array}$$\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ewhere \u003cem\u003eT\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003edb\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e is the dry bulb temperature (\u0026deg;C; represented by mean temperature in our analysis), and \u003cem\u003eRH\u003c/em\u003e is daily mean relative humidity. Observations of daily minimum, maximum and mean temperature from seven weather stations located in North Karelia, covering the period from 2010 to 2021, were downloaded from the open data service of the Finnish Meteorological Institute (FMI 2025). Analysis revealed that only the Tohmaj\u0026auml;rvi station (62.24\u0026deg; N, 30.35\u0026deg; E, 91 m) provided a continuous data series for the entire period. Comparison of data from all seven stations showed minor differences in daily temperatures, with Tohmaj\u0026auml;rvi\u0026apos;s summer (June to August) temperatures highly correlated with those at the other stations (Pearson\u0026rsquo;s correlation coefficients for the maximum temperature ranged from 0.93 to 0.98). Therefore, Tohmaj\u0026auml;rvi\u0026apos;s temperature data were chosen as representative of North Karelia. Daily relative humidity was retrieved from a 10 km x 10 km gridded data set for the grid cell in which the Tohmaj\u0026auml;rvi weather station is located (updated from (Aalto et al. 2016). In order to match the milk observations, data were analysed as anomalies of each pair of days from the long-term mean for those days.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eRelating weather to milk production\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePearson\u0026apos;s correlation coefficient was used to measure the linear relationship between the milk yield indicator and different weather indicators (THI; minimum, maximum and mean temperature). The effect of using rolling averages of different durations (4, 6, 8 and 10 days) on the results was also investigated. Visual representations were produced to support stakeholder interviews.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eInterviews and their analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEight semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with producers from North-Karelian dairy farms (4) and dairy buyers (4). Among the four farms, one was committed to organic crop and animal production, another combined organic crop production with conventional livestock production, and the remaining two operated under conventional production systems. Cattle housing varied, with one farm using a stanchion-tied stable and three employing free-range stables. The number of dairy cows per farm ranged from 25 to 80 animals.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInterviews were conducted remotely via Microsoft Teams in April and May 2023 by two researchers. Each interview lasted approximately one and a half hours and was recorded for analysis. At the start of each interview, the researchers outlined the research objectives and shared background information on the observed effects of the heat on milk production in the study region (described under Results).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe interview questions were designed to gather qualitative insights into the impacts of climate change on milk production, animal welfare, and farm operations, as well as stakeholder perspectives on adaptation strategies. The questions were tailored to address practical experiences of producers and buyers and their perceptions of climate impacts, additionally informed by the analysis of Valio data (see Results). This ensured that the questions were relevant and context specific. Semi-structured interviews were chosen to allow for open-ended responses, giving interviewees the freedom to share their experiences and observations in detail while enabling the researchers to probe deeper when needed (Adams 2015).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe interview material was analyzed using qualitative relational content analysis with an inductive approach (Elo et al. 2014; Krippendorff 2018). The unit of analysis was defined as any thought or observation from the interviewees deemed meaningful by the researchers, rather than individual words or sentences.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe transcribed interviews were first coded and condensed by one researcher using NVivo Qualitative Data Analysis Software (version 1.3). The coding process followed an open coding strategy, where data segments were labelled with descriptive, data-derived codes (Creswell and Creswell 2017) see Table\u0026nbsp;1. These \u0026ldquo;initial codes\u0026rdquo; represent interpretations of participants\u0026apos; statements and were not based on predefined categories or classifications. Following this, the initial codes were grouped into broader, more abstract themes (\u0026ldquo;condensed codes\u0026rdquo;) to identify patterns across the interviews. This coding and condensation process was entirely data-driven and focus on interpreting meaning rather than quantifying the frequency of specific words or expressions. Relational content analysis was then applied to examine connections between different climate-related drivers, impacts and responses, such as the relationship between heat, reduced yield, and the need for irrigation. To enhance the reliability of the findings, the coding outcomes were cross-checked by two researchers.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\" class=\"fr-table-selection-hover\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExamples of raw data (quotes from interviews translated from Finnish), initial codes, and the final condensed themes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRaw data\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInitial codes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCondensed themes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;On average, you can probably start spring work a little earlier, and in the autumn the weather will be good for longer.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSpring has come early, extended growing season\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eImproved cultivation conditions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;First of all, it shows in fertility. When the summer was over and autumn began; of course we inseminate all year round, but the autumn heat was really weak.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFertility issues, seasonal variation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReproductive challenges\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;Well, then, at some point it will start to affect the quality of the milk, that\u0026rsquo;s when the cells start to rise and inflammation starts to occur.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBacterial growth, inflammation, hygiene\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDecreased milk quality\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;Well, that\u0026apos;s it, so more electric fans have been put in there to get the air moving. Especially from the bottom up; and then also in the longitudinal direction of the barn, by opening the doors, to get the air circulating, so that the air can move. It doesn\u0026apos;t have to move a lot, but when there is a little movement, it already achieves it, makes it easier for the animals. And then another factor that comes in \u0026ndash; it also keeps the flies away. That again reduces the animal stress; though on the other hand, they always carry their own risk of disease, even flies.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFans, air circulation, heat stress, disease risk\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBarn ventilation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTable 1\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eObserved impacts of temperature on milk amounts in North Karelia\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe milk yield and different heat-related weather indicators (minimum, maximum and mean temperature and \u003cem\u003eTHI\u003c/em\u003e) are negatively correlated at all municipalities in July, the warmest month of the year, and largely also in August, whereas other months of the year do not show consistently significant negative correlations. The negative correlation is the strongest for all weather indicators in July, and the effect is emphasized with longer rolling averages. Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e presents an example of the analysis for the eight-day rolling average for THI and mean daily temperature at the nine municipalities included in the analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePearson correlation coefficients (r) of monthly relationships (for May to September) between two weather variables (predictors) and milk amounts (predictand) at nine municipalities. Predictors and predictand are expressed as anomalies from long-term (2010\u0026ndash;2021) means, calculated on a two-daily basis for an eight-day rolling average. Asterisks indicate the statistical significance of r using two-sided P-values; * P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.1, ** P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05, *** P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01. Cases with r \u0026le; -0.5 are in bold.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMay\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJune\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJuly\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAugust\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSeptember\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTemperature-humidity index\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJoensuu\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.21***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.37***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJuuka\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.38***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKitee\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.51***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLieksa\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.21***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.59***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.22***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.27***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLiperi\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.21***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.41***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.15**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNurmes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.12*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.39***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.2***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePolvij\u0026auml;rvi\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.48***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.15**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eR\u0026auml;\u0026auml;kkyl\u0026auml;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.15**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.39***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.41***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.18**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTohmaj\u0026auml;rvi\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.16**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.69***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.38***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.18**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean daily temperature\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJoensuu\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.17**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.2***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.39***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.13*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJuuka\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.36***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKitee\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.51***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLieksa\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.17**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.59***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.29***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.33***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLiperi\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.22***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.38***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.13*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNurmes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.39***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.14*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.21***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePolvij\u0026auml;rvi\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.46***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.13*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eR\u0026auml;\u0026auml;kkyl\u0026auml;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.14**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.37***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.33***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.15**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTohmaj\u0026auml;rvi\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.15**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.67***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.38***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.13*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTable \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe eight-day rolling average was selected for closer scrutiny as it offers a better impression of the effects of heatwaves than shorter time periods (results for the 10-day average are very similar). Correlations were strongest in July with negative correlation coefficients varying between \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.32 (mean daily temperature anomaly at Nurmes) and \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.69 (\u003cem\u003eTHI\u003c/em\u003e anomaly at Tohmaj\u0026auml;rvi).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDuring a warmer than average July, as in 2010, the curve for the milk anomaly largely mirrors the temperature curves (Fig.\u0026nbsp;4). This is a typical example of how in particularly warm periods the milk amount declines from the municipal long-term average. As temperature falls, the milk amounts start increasing again. Similar analysis of time-series plots in a particularly cold summer such as 2015 shows the curves reversed; temperature curves below the zero line and the milk curve above indicating higher milk yield than during the same time-period on average (not shown). The effect is consistent across municipalities and the pattern of higher temperatures corresponding with lower milk amounts reflected across the years.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFigure 4\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003ePerceptions of key climatic impact-drivers affecting dairy production\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe interviewees highlighted several key climate impact drivers affecting dairy production in North Karelia. They reported that unstable and extreme weather events have become more frequent, increasing uncertainty in farming conditions. Shifts in precipitation patterns, including irregular rainfall and drought periods, have made water resource management and fodder production more challenging. A gradual shift in climate, particularly rising temperatures, have altered seasonal patterns and growing conditions. Additionally, changes in winter conditions, such as fluctuating temperatures and variable snow cover, have influenced crop growth.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003ePerceptions of climate change impacts on dairy production\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe potential impacts of climate change as perceived by interviewees are summarized in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e. Perceived impacts are attributed to farmers, buyers or both groups, are identified as being either beneficial, adverse or mixed and are further separated into impacts on forage production, livestock and livelihoods.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAdverse (\u0026minus;) and beneficial (+) impacts of weather and climate on forage production, livestock, and livelihoods perceived by North Karelia farmers and commercial milk buyers based on interviews\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eActor\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePerceived impacts of weather \u0026amp; climate (+/\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDescription\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eForage production at farms\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAll\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReduced yields (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLong droughts limit silage growth\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAll\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReduced silage quality (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeat reduces nutritional value \u0026amp; digestibility\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAll\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExtended growing season (+)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEnables new crop varieties and longer cultivation windows\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAll\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReduced soil productivity (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWet fieldwork \u0026amp; reduced frost weaken soil \u0026amp; cultivation practices\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIncreased weeds (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSpring drought favours weeds over crops in organic farming\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eShortage of fodder (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWeather extremes limit local feed, increasing transport costs\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eImproved grass yield (+)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGrass production benefits slightly from changing conditions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDeclined silage quality (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExcessive wetness hampers harvesting \u0026amp; ensiling\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLivestock\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAll\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeat stress on animals (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLowers fertility, increases insemination needs, \u0026amp; reduces milk yield\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAll\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIncreased water \u0026amp; reduced feed intake (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeatwaves cause cows to drink more but eat less, impacting health \u0026amp; milk production\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAll\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLengthened calving interval (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeat disrupts fertility, reducing conception rates\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAll\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReduced milk yield (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeatwaves reduce milk production, with slow or incomplete recovery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnimal health challenges (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeat \u0026amp; humidity increase mastitis \u0026amp; bacterial infections\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDecreased milk quality (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeat stress raises somatic cells, infections, \u0026amp; bacterial risks\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChanges in cow behaviour (+/\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCows seek shade, stabilizing milk production but reducing activity\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLengthening grazing season (+)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExtends outdoor time, improving animal welfare\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLivelihoods\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAll\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIncreased uncertainty related to extreme weather (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnpredictable rain, drought, \u0026amp; cold complicate planning \u0026amp; feed production\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIncreased workload for farmers (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExtreme heat increases stress \u0026amp; farm labour\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDiminishing profitability (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMilk production fluctuations reduce income\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eShift in global food production (+)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFinland may benefit as other regions struggle with climate challenges\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigher fodder transportation costs (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePoor yields force costly long-distance feed purchases\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTime management problems (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSick animals increase farm workloads\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMilk production uncertainty (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eClimate fluctuations complicate dairy planning\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGeographical advantage (+)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFinland fares better than drought-prone Southern Europe\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCost-saving challenges (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRising feed prices force compromises in milk quality \u0026amp; investments\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eManagement of production variation (\u0026minus;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLarge farms must stabilize milk output to maintain system efficiency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTable \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eForage production at farms\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDairy farmer interviewees reported that climate change has altered the timing of agricultural work, bringing both challenges and benefits. Spring tasks now begin earlier, while the harvest season extends later into the fall. These changes demand greater knowledge and skills, as farmers must rely more on monitoring plant growth and accumulated heat sums. Negative effects from shorter winters include delayed snowfall and increased rainfall after snow accumulation, causing water to collect underneath. Farmers described these seasonal shifts as requiring constant adaptation, with one stating: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eIf the climate keeps getting drier and hotter \u0026mdash; like if it starts raining less already in spring and that keeps up through late summer \u0026mdash; it\u0026rsquo;s gonna clearly hit our crop yields. Even hay won\u0026rsquo;t grow the way it should. That kind of thing really changes how we have to work\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;. Milk buyers emphasized that early summer is critical for heat and drought, affecting the yield and nutritional quality of the first silage crop. Such weather has affected plant species composition of grass leys, with clover failing to mature in time for the first harvest but dominating the second. Excessive rainfall and prolonged humidity have lowered the hygienic quality of feed and complicate fieldwork. Prolonged rainfall in mid-June has shortened the optimal harvesting window, reducing forage quality. Farmers in North Karelia expressed concerns about inter-annual variability, including cold, wet summers. Despite these challenges, some farmers remain cautiously optimistic about improved agricultural conditions associated with a longer growing season.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eLivestock\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers and milk buyers noted that increased heat had immediate effects on livestock well-being, behavior, and productivity. Heat stress was perceived as a major concern for dairy cows, as it led to higher incidences of mastitis and reduced milk yield. The problem was considered particularly severe in tied stalls, where cows were observed to become phlegmatic, eat less, drink more, and breathe more rapidly. Reduced feed intake was reported to have lowered milk production, and recovery from prolonged heat stress was said to take several weeks. High temperatures were also noted to increase the risk of feed spoilage, thereby reducing palatability. According to interviewees, dairy cows were particularly vulnerable to heat stress due to their high metabolic rate. As one interviewee summarized: \u0026rdquo;\u003cem\u003eMilk and cows both like the same temperature \u0026mdash; fridge temperature\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/em\u003e High temperatures combined with high humidity was described as a factor accelerating the spread of bacterial infections. Mastitis outbreaks had resulted in antibiotic treatments, which prevented milk from being sold and caused economic losses. Prolonged heat stress was reported to weaken conception rates, leading to longer calving intervals and economic losses. Despite these challenges, some interviewees acknowledged a positive impact of climate change: an extended grazing season, which was viewed as beneficial for animal welfare.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eLivelihoods\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInterviewees reported that fluctuations in milk production had led to irregular income streams, complicating financial planning and the management of dairy operations. Milk buyers noted that while larger farms tended to be more cost-efficient, they also faced greater risks due to their scale. Farmers explained that fluctuations, especially sharp increases in the process of production inputs had limited their ability to invest in essential farming and animal feeding practices. Rising costs of protein feed were said to have forced some farmers to rely on cheaper, less nutritious alternatives, which reduced milk production and lowered fat and protein concentrations. Extreme weather events were reported to further undermine agricultural profitability by decreasing fodder yields. Additionally, weather variability was said to increase workloads, making already physically demanding tasks even more exhausting during periods of high temperatures.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAccording to milk buyers, many farmers experienced mental fatigue, exhaustion, and financial difficulties as a result of these pressures. One milk buyer described the situation as follows: \u003cem\u003e\u0026rdquo;For us too, problems on the farm usually show up last in the milk quality. \u0026hellip; But when it starts messing with both the quality and the amount of milk, that\u0026rsquo;s when it\u0026rsquo;s a real red flag for us too\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/em\u003e Interviewees also indicated that climate unpredictability and feelings of guilt over its impacts contributed to psychological strain, which was further intensified by public discussions that often portrayed agriculture in a negative light.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eOpinions on adaptation\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInterviewees\u0026rsquo; viewpoints on adaptation options are summarized in Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, using the same categories as Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e. Here perceived challenges are shown on the left and potential adaptation solutions on the right.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChallenges and potential solutions for adaptation of dairying to climate change as perceived by farmers and commercial milk buyers based on interviews\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eActor\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePerceived challenge\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePotential adaptation\u0026nbsp;solutions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eForage production at farms\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAll\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDrought\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEnhance field water management to address the growing impact of extreme weather events, including droughts \u0026amp; heavy rainfall.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAll\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChanging conditions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIntroduce new crop species, such as alfalfa, \u0026amp; new plant varieties that adapt to local conditions \u0026amp; withstand extreme weather caused by climate change.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eShortage of grass silage\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUtilize cereal \u0026amp; protein crops for silage, with the option to harvest annual crops when sufficient silage is available.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDrought\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExpand grass cultivation, which withstands heat and, unlike annual crops intended for human consumption, recovers from drought \u0026amp; continues growth.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDrought\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEnhance soil fertility management through investments in sustainable agricultural practices.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDrought\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIrrigation enhances plant growth conditions \u0026amp; resilience.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDrought\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUse subsurface drainage to raise groundwater levels \u0026amp; support plant growth.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDrought\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eContinue peatland cultivation for its drought tolerance, balancing food security needs with greenhouse gas emissions concerns.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEnhancing crop production\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIncrease productivity, for example, by cultivating for higher yields on smaller plots of land.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeatwaves\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePlant breeding focuses on developing deeper-rooted, heat-tolerant species for improved cultivation.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThriving in unique conditions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLocal breeding stations allow for the testing of plant material across Finland\u0026rsquo;s diverse climate conditions.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIncrease in uncertainty\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuffer stocks of grain \u0026amp; grass, if maintained would help secure feed availability\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChanging production conditions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDiversifying cultivation practices, such as growing various crop types on the farm, to ensure consistent yield capacity.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChanging production conditions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEnsure winter hardiness of new plant species \u0026amp; varieties, which is a crucial trait for successful cultivation in Finland.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDrought\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInclude drought tolerant plants in grass mixtures, for example perennial ryegrass, which is deep rooted.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLivestock\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAll\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeat stress\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCool animals using sprinklers, which reduce heat stress.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeat stress\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConstruct free-range stables, which offer better control of barn conditions compared to a stanchion-tied stable, helping to manage heat stress.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeat stress\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePromote grazing to help reduce stress in animals housed in stanchion-tied stables.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeat stress\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDesign pastures with natural shade to enhance animals\u0026apos; comfort.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeat stress\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFacilitate effective ventilation, which improves animal comfort by helping regulate barn temperatures.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeat stress\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEnsure adequate water intake for animals through drinking devices \u0026amp; feed moisture.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeat stress\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInstall sand beds, which help maintain cool conditions for cows.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeat stress\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUse curtain walls to enhance ventilation \u0026amp; help keep the cows\u0026apos; environment cool \u0026amp; comfortable.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeat stress\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFit roof vents, which assist in regulating barn temperature \u0026amp; improve airflow.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeat stress\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConsider barn placement, as the orientation of buildings in relation to the sun \u0026amp; wind can be used to enhance natural air circulation.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIncreasing costs \u0026amp; bureaucracy\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTransition from organic to conventional production, as the latter allows for a wider range of chemical \u0026amp; technological solutions, offering more flexibility.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThriving in unique conditions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePromote domestic animal research to supports the development of solutions specifically tailored to local conditions.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeatwaves\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSeek solutions from abroad, for example, from regions already familiar with heatwave impacts on milk production, such as southern Europe, Israel \u0026amp; Canada.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeatwaves\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEnsure feed quality, by offering practical advice to prevent feed spoilage, such as increasing distribution intervals to maintain quality.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeat \u0026amp; increased bacteria\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMaintain hygiene on farms \u0026amp; during milk transport to ensure high quality milk.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLivelihoods\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAll\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIncrease in uncertainty\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUtilize forecasts, by using automation and data to anticipate changes \u0026amp; help facilitate long-term investments by improving decision-making \u0026amp; efficiency.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAll\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChanging production conditions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDevelop competence, as raised skill levels, active information gathering, \u0026amp; entrepreneurial spirit are key to improving productivity.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGlobal changes in production areas\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExploit opportunities to expand dairy production, due to North Karelia\u0026acute;s favourable land structure, ideal conditions for growing grass, reliable water availability, potential for clearing fields \u0026amp; moderate land prices.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFinancial instability\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExpanding dairy farms can lead to improved productivity \u0026amp; greater economic efficiency.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eShortage of roughage\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHarness the virtual marketplace, where information is provided regarding the availability of feed batches on the market\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInvestment costs\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDeploy financial incentives to help alleviate the financial burden of investments, encouraging farms to take necessary actions.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChanging production conditions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEnhance advisory services \u0026amp; education, to disseminate information on measures to secure milk production, including crop cultivation, feed preservation, \u0026amp; animal cooling techniques.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChanging production conditions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIntroduce benchmarking, so that farms can compare their productivity \u0026amp; practices to those of other farms for encouraging good practices and to enhance production efficiency \u0026amp; sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChanging production conditions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDiversify the product range to enhance economic sustainability in the food industry, reduce risks \u0026amp; boost adaptability to climate change challenges.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDecreasing biodiversity\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePromote biodiversity, for example by grazing cattle to create \u0026amp; maintain habitats that foster the growth of diverse plants, animals, \u0026amp; microbial communities.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuyers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLack of successors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEncourage continuity in milk production, by promoting greater commitment from young people through improved profitability, enhanced working conditions and positive imaging of the sector.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTable \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eForage production at farms\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDairy farmers and buyers agreed that improving soil quality and managing field water were key strategies for climate adaptation. Both groups supported the development of resilient cultivars better suited to local conditions and extreme weather (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). Dairy farmers emphasized the importance of silage production and grass-based feeding. To counter the effects of heat and drought, they reported adjusting cutting heights and, in some cases, converting grain crops into silage. Grass-based feeding was favored because grass was said to recover more effectively from drought than cereals.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMilk buyers noted a preference for deep-rooted plants, such as reeds, due to their drought resistance, despite their lower digestibility. Diversifying farming practices at the species and variety level was seen as essential for adaptation, with perceived benefits including improved crop success, increased biodiversity, and enhanced soil carbon sequestration. Dairy farmers also reported designing pastures with natural shade to support cattle welfare under extreme heat conditions. Maintaining sufficient feed reserves was considered essential. Farmers described buffer stock targets of 2\u0026ndash;6 months for grass and 16\u0026ndash;18 months for grain. However, smaller farms were reported to face challenges in securing reserves due to limited land availability, making strategic planning especially important during extreme weather. Annual crops like peas were used to supplement feeding during silage shortages. Farmers expressed interest in adopting technologies such as automated systems and real-time soil moisture monitoring to improve farm management. They also considered drainage improvements and new irrigation systems as potential responses to increased climate variability.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDespite concerns about reduced rainfall, some farmers acknowledged potential benefits of a longer growing season, which could allow for multiple annual fodder harvests. One interviewee reflected: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eThere can actually be quite a few upsides for Finnish farmers too if the temperature shifts a bit.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; Farmers were experimenting with new crops, such as alfalfa, although policy constraints were said to influence cultivation decisions. Grass-based feeding was emphasized as an environmentally sustainable approach, particularly suited to the favorable growing conditions in North Karelia. However, concerns remained about the impacts of heavy rainfall and prolonged cold periods. Farmers also discussed the management of organic soils, which were productive but associated with greenhouse gas emissions. They emphasized the need for a more balanced public discussion on these issues.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eLivestock\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInterviews with dairy farmers and milk buyers revealed a range of strategies aimed at mitigating the impacts of climate change on dairy farming. Farmers with stanchion-tied stables reported using grazing as a means to alleviate heat stress, while those with modern free-range stables relied on on effective ventilation systems to maintain cooler indoor temperatures compared to the outside environment. One producer explained, \u003cem\u003e\u0026rdquo;Well, today\u0026rsquo;s cow, if it gets to choose, it\u0026rsquo;s chilling in the well-air-conditioned barn during the heat and then heads outside when it cools off in the evening.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e Farmers emphasized the importance of barn design, particularly building height and adjustable curtain walls, as crucial for maintaining adequate air circulation. Transitioning to free-range stables equipped with milking robots was identified as a key investment goal; however, such transitions were often delayed due to existing debt and depended on the interest of the next generation in continuing the farm. Milk buyers noted that both climate change and animal welfare considerations were increasingly influencing barn planning decisions.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAccording to farmers, orienting barns with ends facing north-south enhanced ventilation, and the use of electric fans and water misting systems helped cool animals during periods of extreme heat. Maintaining dry sleeping areas was considered essential for preventing mastitis. Some farmers reported using deep sand beds and high curtain walls to help regulate barn temperature. Hygiene was a major concern, particularly during heatwaves, due to the increased risk of bacterial growth in milk. Misting systems and drip pipes installed over feeding areas were also being trialled to lower barn temperatures.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers believed that practical solutions for coping with heat stress could be adapted from regions with hotter climate, such as central and southern Europe or the Middle East. Ensuring sufficient water availability for livestock, both through drinking systems and moisture content in feed, was considered increasingly critical as temperatures rise.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eLivelihoods\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMilk producers and buyers agreed that climate change had increased the skill requirements for farmers, necessitating a deeper understanding of plant biology due to increasingly variable weather conditions. One farmer reflected,\u003cem\u003e\u0026rdquo; Back in the day, we didn\u0026rsquo;t start harvesting silage before Midsummer because even Dad didn\u0026rsquo;t start then. But now, it\u0026rsquo;s got to be done based on what the plant needs\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo; The expansion and growing efficiency demand of dairy farming were also reported to require more precise and proactive planning.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMilk buyers emphasized the importance of providing farmers with advice and training to support adaptation to changing conditions while maintaining best practices. They reported sharing information through in-person meetings, farm counselling services, webinars, and newsletters. According to buyers, the need for advisory services varied across farms, some farmers were highly informed and independent, while others relied heavily on external guidance. With the advancement of agricultural technology, training for milk buyers had increasingly focused on equipment management, particularly milking robots, and farm management strategies such as adjusting feeding practices during heatwaves.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRecent crises, including the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine, were reported to have underscored the importance of financial resilience within the sector. Milk buyers described helping farmers manage supply chain challenges and emphasized the value of financial buffers. New digital tools, such as web-based notice boards, had helped farmers source spare parts or livestock more efficiently. Financial incentives, including responsibility bonuses, were used to encourage the adoption of sustainable practices.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMilk buyers reported that dairy processors had begun diversifying their product portfolios to include plant-based options, aligning with evolving consumer preferences and sustainability goals. However, dairy farmers noted that ongoing uncertainty related to climate change and agricultural policy had made long-term planning difficult. Despite these challenges, roughage feeding remained a cornerstone of milk production. One buyer stated: \u0026quot;\u003cem\u003eEven though the food system is changing, we\u0026apos;re still so far up north that grass is the most reliable thing. And then when you think about cattle as the ones making use of that grass, they can turn it into high-quality protein\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026quot;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe weak economic situation was reported to have reduced interest among young people in pursuing careers in farming, complicating the search for successors. Investments in new technology were also said to depend on banks\u0026apos; confidence in the future of the sector. Nevertheless, milk buyers expressed optimism about the next generation of farmers, describing them as well-educated and entrepreneurial. The COVID-19 pandemic and geopolitical crises were seen to have increased public awareness of the importance of domestic agriculture. Buyers emphasized the potential of agriculture to develop climate-smart solutions and viewed farmers as problem solvers in this transition.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study provides insights into the impacts of climate change and potential adaptive responses in the context of dairy production in North Karelia, Finland. We have summarized some of the main findings in Fig.\u0026nbsp;5.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFigure 5\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFigure 5. Propagation of climate change impacts on the dairy sector in North Karelia and some potential adaptation measures, as perceived by farmers and milk buyers based on semi-structured interviews. Dashed boxes on the left illustrate key climatic impacts drivers, their direct and indirect impacts and some adaptation challenges these pose. Boxes on the right list potential adaptation measures classified by response types. Photo in the background: Tero Sivula / Rodeo.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe detrimental effects of summer heat on milk production in the region was established, in line with results for other parts of Europe (e.g. Vroege et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) and with the perceptions of dairy farmers and milk buyers interviewed for this study. The study explores current and anticipated challenges, opportunities, and adaptive strategies, drawing on the views of both dairy farmers and milk buyers. While most of the anticipated impacts of climate change were negative, stakeholders also identified several opportunities to enhance dairy production. Ensuring adequate fodder production under extreme weather conditions emerged as a crucial aspect of farm-level adaptation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMore frequent extreme weather events, particularly earlier and more intense occurrences of heat and drought, have been observed in recent years in North Karelia. Changes in rainfall patterns have also been noted. Such events weaken the yields of cereals and grasses, as well as the quality and hygiene of feed (Peltonen-Sainio et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). The negative effects of weather on dairy cow production can extend into the following autumns through feeding impacts. Additionally, prolonged rains can lead to soil compaction due to the use of heavy machinery on wet fields, reducing the soil\u0026acute;s capacity to store and supply water for crops and diminishing fodder production over time (Liu et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). As experienced by dairy producers and buyers, even short-lived but frequent extreme weather events can cause long-term impacts.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhile our study is rooted in North Karelia, similar patterns have been observed elsewhere in Finland and northern Scandinavia. While farmers recognize the immediate impacts of heat and drought, they may underestimate the long-term biological and economic consequences, such as reduced fertility or herd health. For instance, a study from Sweden found that despite rising somatic cell counts and seasonal fertility declines, most farmers responded reactively to extreme weather, with limited anticipation of its cumulative effects on farm dynamics and profitability (Tamminen et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). These findings align with our results, suggesting that more targeted support and awareness-raising could promote proactive adaptation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDairy farmers who make daily and seasonal observations of the surrounding nature, reported an extension of the growing season. They considered that the lengthening of the growing season might offer opportunities for increased and more diverse agricultural production and an extended grazing season. However, changes in grazing conditions may also lead to more increased farmwork (e.g. the need to build more shade-providing shelters), which can adversely impact farmers\u0026rsquo; workload and wellbeing, potentially causing stress (Brennan et al. 2022) or even burn-out (Kallioniemi et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). This challenge necessitates careful planning and may require additional labor and resources to manage the extended grazing period effectively.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFarmers reported that under current conditions, heat is already causing stress for animals, weakening animal well-being and conception, decreasing milk production, and increasing the risk of bacterial growth and mastitis in North Karelia. The negative impact of heat on milk quantity was also observed in the analysis of time-series data across a larger sample of farms across the region and is supported by findings from literature (Gisbert-Queral et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Vroege et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). A decrease in fodder yields and subsequent increase in feed prices often results in the use of cheaper and less nutritious substitutes, leading to a decline in milk yield and nutritional content. When a farm's own feed production fails, purchasing substitute feed can lower agricultural productivity. As a consequence, both actor groups perceived that the consistency and predictability of milk deliveries to dairies decrease due to climate change.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eDifferent perspectives of actors\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDairy farmers focus on observing natural cycles and the practical implications of extreme weather phenomena on their farming activities. They emphasized the effects of climate change on production conditions, and animal behavior. Notably, farmers expressed greater concern about exceptionally cold and rainy summers, which can hinder the growth of fodder crops and directly affect dairy cattle health and productivity (Kovalainen et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn contrast, milk buyers were more concerned about the effects of climate change on the quantity and quality of plant and milk production. They highlighted the regional significance of extreme weather events in terms of roughage adequacy. Buyers emphasized the effects of heat stress on animal welfare and production, as well as on bacterial growth and milk quality, underscoring the importance of the hygiene on farms and during milk transport. These factors directly impact the quality, safety, and reliability of the milk supply, which are critical to the dairy business. Ensuring high standards is crucial for preventing contamination, complying with food safety regulations, maintaining consumer trust (Malik et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), minimizing economic losses, and ensuring efficient processing operations (Azooz et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMilk buyers also discussed the economic impacts of climate change more extensively than farmers. They reflected on how changes in farm size and recent market conditions affect risks, investments, farming activities, livestock feeding, and milk delivery volumes. This broader perspective likely stems from milk buyers\u0026acute; larger operational scale and their comprehensive view of the entire dairy supply chain.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDairy farmers highlighted the physical demands of farm work, particularly during heatwaves. Milk buyers, however, noted the mental fatigue, guilt related to climate change, and financial difficulties experienced by farmers. These issues were not mentioned by farmers themselves, possibly due to a focus on tangible concerns over emotional ones, or a lack of awareness regarding the emotional impact of climate change (Howard et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Rust et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Cultural norms and stigma may also discourage open discussions about emotional or mental health issues (Hagen et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec22\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003ePotential adaptation measures\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAdaptation measures applied and planned on farms primarily aim to cool animals, improve field growth conditions, diversify fodder production, and secure input stocks. Dairy farmers emphasized the need to adapt feed production and highlighted the importance of technical practices (e.g. adjusting grass cutting height, cultivating deep-rooted plants, harvesting grain for silage) for improving crop production flexibility. These strategies are essential for enhancing crop resilience to changing environmental conditions and ensuring a consistent supply of high-quality feed for livestock despite extreme weather events (Gauly and Ammer \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). They also contribute to the economic viability of farms by reducing the need to purchase additional costly feed during times of scarcity. An emphasis on certain technical practices, such as those that enhance resource efficiency or reduce vulnerability to climate risks, can reflect farmers\u0026acute; commitment to sustainability and long-term planning. By adopting practices that improve the resilience of crop production, these farmers are actively investing in the future of their land and farming systems.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMilk buyers emphasized the importance of biodiversity and its benefits for ecosystem services, such as soil carbon storage. This perspective may stem from their role in reflecting consumer needs and suggests that milk buyers understand the importance of healthy ecosystems for sustaining long-term feed production, which is vital for maintaining a reliable milk supply (Sizemore \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). They also appear increasingly aware of agriculture\u0026acute;s environmental impact and view the promotion of biodiversity as a means to support sustainable development goals, reduce the carbon footprint, and meet consumer demand for environmentally friendly products (Alamsyah et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, by emphasizing barn-building solutions like curtain walls, fans, and water jets, buyers are advocating measures that can help maintain optimal living conditions for livestock.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHaving sufficient land and storage acts as a buffer against unexpected events, such as poor harvests due to extreme weather, or supply chain disruptions. Without adequate feed, milk production can decline, affecting farm income and milk supply to buyers. Adequate feed areas and storage help mitigate these risks by ensuring a consistent feed supply (K\u0026auml;ssi et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). On smaller farms, available land is often used intensively for immediate production needs, leaving little room for buffer areas. This makes small farms more vulnerable to feed availability fluctuations, potentially leading to shortages during challenging times. Intensive land use can also lead to soil degradation, reduced crop yields, and increased reliance on external feed sources, which can be more expensive and less reliable (Hossain et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). These factors may explain milk buyers\u0026acute; concerns, as they may view small farm sizes as a threat to feed sufficiency, especially amid climate variability or economic pressures.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFinancial buffers are important for farms to survive difficult times, such as poor harvests, unexpected expenses, or market downturns (Cradock-Henry \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). These buffers enable farms to invest in feed when their own production is insufficient, maintain operations during periods of low income, and make necessary improvements to land, storages, or infrastructure. From the perspective of milk buyers, farms lacking adequate financial buffers are more vulnerable to economic shocks, potentially leading to disruptions in milk production. By emphasizing financial resilience, milk buyers advocate for a stable and reliable supply chain, where farms are better equipped to handle crises without compromising milk quality or quantity.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eImplementing adaptation measures requires farmers to develop new skills. Introducing new crops or cultivars, changing feeding practices, or using advanced technologies necessitates knowledge of their benefits and potential challenges, as well as careful planning and risk assessment. Farmers need to develop technical skills to effectively apply these adaptations to their unique farm environments (Beecher et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Dairy farmers and advisers monitor developments in different parts of the world, but solutions are always considered on a farm-by-farm basis. In the future, the combined effects of various changes and disruptions and the need for anticipation will challenge all operators in the dairy industry (Gauly and Ammer \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Skill development is essential for understanding and implementing new practices, customizing solutions to specific farm conditions, anticipating future challenges, and collaborating within the entire dairy system.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec23\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003ePractical implications\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings of the study can help actors in the dairy system understand the challenges posed by climate change to dairy farmers and buyers. We emphasize the importance of developing new skills and knowledge to implement adaptation effectively. The results are useful for agricultural advisors, who can use them to provide tailored advice to farmers based on the identified challenges and opportunities. The study can foster collaboration between different actors in the dairy system by providing an understanding of challenges and potential solutions. In the future, this collaboration can lead to more coordinated efforts to address climate change impacts and support adaptation in dairy production.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec24\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eNovelty\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo our knowledge, this study is the first to combine the perspectives of both dairy farmers and milk buyers to explore climate change impacts, challenges, and adaptation strategies within the northern dairy sector. By integrating semi-structured interviews with regional milk production data, the study offers a unique view of climate adaptation that captures both practical, farm-level responses and broader supply chain considerations. This dual perspective provides new insights into how different roles within the dairy system influence climate risk perception, priorities for adaptation, and the identification of opportunities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec25\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eLimitations\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIt should be noted that the results of this study rely on a relatively small sample size, which may not fully capture the diversity of experiences and perspectives among all dairy farmers and buyers in the region, and that important issues may have been overlooked. The findings are also context-specific and may not be directly applicable to other regions with different climatic and socio-economic conditions. The qualitative approach provides valuable information for understanding perceptions and experiences, but the lack of the quantitative data prevents broader generalization of the findings.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe study reveals challenges and opportunities related to climate change faced by dairy farmers and milk buyers in North Karelia, Finland. Analysis of regional data confirms that heat stress negatively affects milk production. The findings underline that while both actor groups recognize the impacts of climate change, they prioritize different aspects according to their roles within the dairy system. Dairy farmers focus on immediate, practical challenges, particularly those related to weather conditions and the need for technical solutions in both plant and animal production. They increasingly acknowledge the necessity of developing new skills and farming practices to adapt to a changing climate and to seize emerging opportunities. In contrast, milk buyers emphasize the broader economic implications of climate change for the dairy industry, with a particular focus on maintaining high standards of milk quality and hygiene.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe results underscore the importance of continuous learning and innovation for successful adaptation. Economic incentives and sustained collaboration among farmers, buyers, advisors, and policymakers will be essential to strengthen the resilience and sustainability of dairy farming. Equally important is listening to local actors, whose everyday experiences and contextual knowledge offer critical insights into practical adaptation needs and opportunities. Engaging with these voices helps ensure that policies and support measures are grounded in real-world conditions and address the most pressing challenges on the ground. This study makes a novel contribution by being the first to systematically examine and compare the climate change perceptions and adaptation priorities of both dairy farmers and milk buyers in a northern European context. By combining qualitative insights with regional production data, it offers an integrated perspective on climate resilience across the dairy value chain. These findings provide a valuable basis for developing more targeted, collaborative, and regionally adapted strategies to secure the long-term viability of the dairy industry as climate risks intensify.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe would like to thank to all the dairy farmers and milk buyers who generously shared their time and insights. Special thanks to Valio Ltd for their collaboration and support throughout the research process. We also thank our colleagues at Luke for their helpful suggestions in identifying suitable participants during the data collection phase.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was funded by the Academy of Finland (FINSCAPES project: Grant Numbers 341977 and 342560).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConflicts of interest/Competing interests\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent to participate\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInformed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll participants to the study gave informed consent to the anonymous publication of the information collected during the project.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data and material\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data and material generated and/or analyzed in this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCode availability\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors\u0026apos; contributions (include appropriate statements)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCRediT roles\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConceptualization, K.R., N.P., N.K., S.F., T.R.C. and T.P.; Methodology, K.R., N.P., N.K., S.F., T.R.C. and T.P.; Investigation, K.R., N.P. and S.F.; Writing \u0026ndash; Original Draft, K.R., N.P., N.K., S.F., T.R.C. and T.P.; Writing \u0026ndash;Review \u0026amp; Editing, K.R., N.P., N.K., S.F., T.R.C. and T.P; Funding Acquisition, T.R.C. and T.P.; Resources, T.R.C. and T.P.; Supervision, T.R.C. and T.P.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAalto J, Pirinen P, Jylh\u0026auml; K (2016) New gridded daily climatology of Finland: Permutation-based uncertainty estimates and temporal trends in climate. J Geophys Res Atmos 121:3807\u0026ndash;3823. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024651\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/2015JD024651\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAdams WC (2015) Conducting Semi-Structured Interviews. Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation. Wiley, Ltd, pp 492\u0026ndash;505\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAhmed H, Tamminen L-M, Emanuelson U (2022) Temperature, productivity, and heat tolerance: Evidence from Swedish dairy production. Clim Change 175:10. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-022-03461-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10584-022-03461-5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlamsyah DP, Othman NA, Mohammed HAA (2020) The awareness of environmentally friendly products: The impact of green advertising and green brand image. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2020.2.017\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5267/j.msl.2020.2.017\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. Manag Sci Lett 1961\u0026ndash;1968\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eArbuckle JG, Morton LW, Hobbs J (2013) Farmer beliefs and concerns about climate change and attitudes toward adaptation and mitigation: Evidence from Iowa. Clim Change 118:551\u0026ndash;563. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0700-0\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10584-013-0700-0\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAzooz MF, El-Wakeel SA, Yousef HM (2020) Financial and economic analyses of the impact of cattle mastitis on the profitability of Egyptian dairy farms. Vet World 13:1750\u0026ndash;1759. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.14202/vetworld.2020.1750-1759\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.14202/vetworld.2020.1750-1759\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBeecher M, Lawton,Thomas, Gorman M (2024) Irish dairy farmers\u0026rsquo; assessment of their training needs. J Agric Educ Ext 30:553\u0026ndash;569. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2023.2249442\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/1389224X.2023.2249442\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBrennan M, Hennessy,Thia, Meredith, David, and, Dillon E (2022) Weather, Workload and Money: Determining and Evaluating Sources of Stress for Farmers in Ireland. J Agromedicine 27:132\u0026ndash;142. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2021.1988020\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/1059924X.2021.1988020\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCowley FC, Barber DG, Houlihan AV, Poppi DP (2015) Immediate and residual effects of heat stress and restricted intake on milk protein and casein composition and energy metabolism. J Dairy Sci 98:2356\u0026ndash;2368. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2014-8442\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3168/jds.2014-8442\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCradock-Henry NA (2021) Linking the social, economic, and agroecological: a resilience framework for dairy farming. Ecol Soc 26:art3. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12122-260103\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5751/ES-12122-260103\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCreswell JW, Creswell JD (2017) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. SAGE\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDruckman JN, McGrath MC (2019) The evidence for motivated reasoning in climate change preference formation. Nat Clim Change 9:111\u0026ndash;119. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0360-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s41558-018-0360-1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEEA (2024) European Climate Risk Assessment. EEA Report 01/2024, European Environment Agency (EEA), Copenhagen, 486 pp. doi:10.2800/204249 Accessed 2 Apr 2025\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eElo S, K\u0026auml;\u0026auml;ri\u0026auml;inen M, Kanste O et al (2014) Qualitative Content Analysis: A Focus on Trustworthiness. SAGE Open 4:2158244014522633. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014522633\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/2158244014522633\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFMI (2025) Download observations. Finnish Meteorological Institute. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://en.ilmatieteenlaitos.fi/download-observations\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://en.ilmatieteenlaitos.fi/download-observations\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e Accessed 16 Jun 2025\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGauly M, Ammer S (2020) Review: Challenges for dairy cow production systems arising from climate changes. animal 14:s196\u0026ndash;s203. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731119003239\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1017/S1751731119003239\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGisbert-Queral M, Henningsen A, Markussen B et al (2021) Climate impacts and adaptation in US dairy systems 1981\u0026ndash;2018. Nat Food 2:894\u0026ndash;901. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00372-z\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s43016-021-00372-z\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGregow H, M\u0026auml;kel\u0026auml; A, Tuomenvirta H, Juhola S, K\u0026auml;yhk\u0026ouml; J, Perrels A, Kuntsi-Reunanen E, Metti\u0026auml;inen I, N\u0026auml;kk\u0026auml;l\u0026auml;j\u0026auml;rvi K, Sorvali J, Lehtonen H, Hild\u0026eacute;n M, Veijalainen N, Kuosa H, Sihvonen M, Johansson M, Leijala U, Ahonen S, Haapala J, Korhonen H, Ollikainen M, Lilja S, Ruuhela R, S\u0026auml;rkk\u0026auml; J, Siiri\u0026auml; S-M (2021) Policy instruments, costs and regional dimensions of climate change adaptation. Report of the Finnish Climate Panel 2/2021. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.31885/9789527457047\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.31885/9789527457047\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e Accessed 2 Apr 2025\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHagen BNM, Sawatzky,Alex H, ,Sherilee L et al (2022) Farmers Aren\u0026rsquo;t into the Emotions and Things, Right? A Qualitative Exploration of Motivations and Barriers for Mental Health Help-Seeking among Canadian Farmers. J Agromedicine 27:113\u0026ndash;123. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2021.1893884\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/1059924X.2021.1893884\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHellberg (2022) Dairy Herd Recording Results 2022. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.proagria.fi/uploads/lypsykarjan-tuotosseurannan-tulokset-2022_hellberg.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.proagria.fi/uploads/lypsykarjan-tuotosseurannan-tulokset-2022_hellberg.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e Accessed 10 Jan 2025\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHimanen SJ, M\u0026auml;kinen H, Rimhanen K, Savikko R (2016) Engaging Farmers in Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Assessing Intercropping as a Means to Support Farm Adaptive Capacity. Agriculture 6:34. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture6030034\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/agriculture6030034\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHossain A, Krupnik TJ, Timsina J et al (2020) Agricultural Land Degradation: Processes and Problems Undermining Future Food Security. In: Fahad S, Hasanuzzaman M, Alam M et al (eds) Environment, Climate, Plant and Vegetation Growth. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 17\u0026ndash;61\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHoward M, Ahmed S, Lachapelle P, Schure MB (2020) Farmer and rancher perceptions of climate change and their relationships with mental health. J Rural Ment Health 44:87\u0026ndash;95. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/rmh0000131\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/rmh0000131\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKallioniemi MK, Kaseva J, Kym\u0026auml;l\u0026auml;inen H-R, Hakanen JJ (2022) Well-being at work and Finnish dairy farmersfrom job demands and loneliness towards burnout. Front Psychol 13. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.976456\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fpsyg.2022.976456\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eK\u0026auml;ssi P, K\u0026auml;nk\u0026auml;nen H, Niskanen O et al (2015) Farm level approach to manage grass yield variation under climate change in Finland and north-western Russia. Biosyst Eng 140:11\u0026ndash;22. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2015.08.006\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2015.08.006\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKnight KW (2016) Public awareness and perception of climate change: a quantitative cross-national study. Environ Sociol 2:101\u0026ndash;113. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2015.1128055\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/23251042.2015.1128055\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKovalainen N, Niemi J, Huan-Niemi E (2024) Review of food security in Finland from the 17th to 21st century. Luonnonvarakeskus\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKrippendorff K (2018) Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. SAGE\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKulin J, Johansson Sev\u0026auml;,Ingemar, and, Dunlap RE (2021) Nationalist ideology, rightwing populism, and public views about climate change in Europe. Environ Polit 30:1111\u0026ndash;1134. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2021.1898879\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/09644016.2021.1898879\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLiu H, Colombi T, J\u0026auml;ck O et al (2022) Effects of soil compaction on grain yield of wheat depend on weather conditions. Sci Total Environ 807:150763. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150763\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150763\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMalik M, Gahlawat VK, Mor RS, Kharub M (2024) Consumer Perception Towards Traceable Dairy Products: an Empirical Study. LogForum Sci J Logist 20:191\u0026ndash;207. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.17270/j.log.001018\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.17270/j.log.001018\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOECD (2021) Making Better Policies for Food Systems /\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://www.oecd.org/en/publications/making-better-policies-for-food-systems_ddfba4de-en.html\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. Accessed 2 Apr 2025\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOSF (2025) Milk and milk products statistics \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.luke.fi/en/statistics/milk-and-milkproducts-statistics\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.luke.fi/en/statistics/milk-and-milkproducts-statistics\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e Accessed 22 May 2024\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePaloviita A, J\u0026auml;rvel\u0026auml; M (2015) Climate Change Adaptation and Food Supply Chain Management: An overview. In: Climate Change Adaptation and Food Supply Chain Management. Routledge Advances in Climate Change Research. Routledge. ISBN: 978-1-138-79666-9 (pp. 1\u0026ndash;14)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePeltonen-Sainio P, Jauhiainen L (2020) Large zonal and temporal shifts in crops and cultivars coincide with warmer growing seasons in Finland. Reg Environ Change 20:89. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-020-01682-x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10113-020-01682-x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePeltonen-Sainio P, Palosuo T, Ruosteenoja K et al (2018) Warming autumns at high latitudes of Europe: an opportunity to lose or gain in cereal production? Reg Environ Change 18:1453\u0026ndash;1465. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-017-1275-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10113-017-1275-5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePeltonen-Sainio P, Ven\u0026auml;l\u0026auml;inen A, M\u0026auml;kel\u0026auml; HM et al (2016) Harmfulness of weather events and the adaptive capacity of farmers at high latitudes of Europe. Clim Res 67:221\u0026ndash;240. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3354/cr01378\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3354/cr01378\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRojas-Downing MM, Nejadhashemi AP, Harrigan T, Woznicki SA (2017) Climate change and livestock: Impacts, adaptation, and mitigation. Clim Risk Manag 16:145\u0026ndash;163. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2017.02.001\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.crm.2017.02.001\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRust NA, Stankovics P, Jarvis RM et al (2022) Have farmers had enough of experts? Environ Manage 69:31\u0026ndash;44. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-021-01546-y\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s00267-021-01546-y\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSizemore GC (2015) Accounting for biodiversity in the dairy industry. J Environ Manage 155:145\u0026ndash;153. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.03.015\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.03.015\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSmith P, Martino D, Cai Z et al (2007) Greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 363:789\u0026ndash;813. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2184\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1098/rstb.2007.2184\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSorvali J, Kaseva J, Peltonen-Sainio P (2021) Farmer views on climate change\u0026mdash;a longitudinal study of threats, opportunities and action. Clim Change 164:50. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-03020-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10584-021-03020-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSoubry B, Sherren K, Thornton TF (2020) Are we taking farmers seriously? A review of the literature on farmer perceptions and climate change, 2007\u0026ndash;2018. J Rural Stud 74:210\u0026ndash;222. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.09.005\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.09.005\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTamminen L-M, B\u0026aring;ge R, \u0026Aring;kerlind M, Olmos Antill\u0026oacute;n G (2024) Farmers\u0026acute; sense of the biological impact of extreme heat and seasonality on Swedish high-yielding dairy cows \u0026ndash; A mixed methods approach. Prev Vet Med 224:106131. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2024.106131\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.prevetmed.2024.106131\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eValio (2024) Valio\u0026rsquo;s Joensuu cheese dairy creates flavour and wellbeing. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.valio.fi/yritys/valion-tehtaat-suomessa/joensuu/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.valio.fi/yritys/valion-tehtaat-suomessa/joensuu/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e Accessed 22 May 2024\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVirkaj\u0026auml;rvi P, Rinne M, Mononen J et al (2015) Dairy production systems in Finland. In: Grassland and forages in high output dairy farming systems, vol 20. Proceedings of the 18th Symposium of the European grassland federation. Wageningen, the Netherlands\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVroege W, Dalhaus T, Wauters E, Finger R (2023) Effects of extreme heat on milk quantity and quality. Agric Syst 210:103731. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2023.103731\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.agsy.2023.103731\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"climate change impact, climate change adaptation, dairy farming, farmer perceptions, milk buyer perceptions","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6922846/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6922846/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eTo promote adaptation of the dairy sector to climate change, researchers and agricultural extensionists need to better understand how dairy system operators perceive climate-related risks and what drives their adaptation responses. This study addresses that need by examining the experiences and priorities of two key actor groups, dairy farmers and milk buyers, in northern Europe. We hypothesized that these groups perceive climate-related risks and adaptation needs differently, based on their positions in the value chain. Using semi-structured interviews, we explored stakeholder views on climate impacts, future challenges and adaptation strategies, supported by an analysis of temperature effects on regional milk production. Interviews were conducted with dairy farmers and milk buyers in Finland, providing qualitative insights and contextual data. Here we show that farmers and buyers emphasize different aspects of climate resilience: farmers focused on field-level adaptations and technical solutions to cope with increasing weather extremes, while buyers emphasized systemic risks, economic stability, hygiene and milk quality. Both groups observed more frequent extreme events such as heatwaves and droughts, with farmers reporting declines in forage yields during hot summers, and buyers noting increased variability in milk quality. This is the first study to jointly investigate the climate change perceptions and adaptation priorities of both farmers and buyers in a northern European context. The findings highlight the need for mutual understanding, coordinated strategies, and strengthened collaboration to build resilience across the dairy value chain. Supporting skill development, encouraging farm-specific practices, and ensuring economic and infrastructural buffers are essential for sustaining dairy production in a changing climate.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Adapting Finnish dairy production to a warmer climate: Insights from producers and buyers","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-07-18 18:48:05","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6922846/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"8a4fb7c7-26ce-4232-a44e-35240212764d","owner":[],"postedDate":"July 18th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-01-23T07:23:08+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-07-18 18:48:05","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6922846","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6922846","identity":"rs-6922846","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}