Sugarcane farming has a long-established history in North Queensland and is a dominant land-use in lowland tropical areas, where catchments empty into the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) lagoon. The cane sector provides significant economic benefit to regional Queensland, is an important aspect of local cultural identity, and a major shaper of the physical landscape. Cane farmers face increasing scrutiny associated with the impacts of fertiliser run-off and the sector is subject to regulatory reform as a significant source of dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN), which is implicated as a threat to the condition of the GBR and the economic benefit and ecosystem services the GBR provides to Australians. Use of market-based instruments to meet policy objectives has become a favoured approach to pollution abatement, particularly where the costs of reducing emissions is not uniform across liable entities. The attractiveness of market-based approaches rests on the assumptions behind conventional economic behaviour – permitted polluters will increase abatement until the point marginal abatement costs equals permit prices, or compensation scheme payments. Farmer engagement in such schemes is driven by both external factors, such as the voluntary or involuntary nature of the scheme, market signals, and biophysical constraints and by internal (to the individual) factors, such as personal attitudes, behavioural controls, and personal moral norms. Therefore, though adequate financial incentives are necessary, they are insufficient in driving take-up. Thus, understanding attitudes and perspectives in the cane sector towards innovation is vital to predicting the likelihood of uptake of incentive schemes, such as water quality trading markets.