Drivers of Farmers' Investments in Nutrient Abatement Technologies in Five Baltic Sea Countries

被引:29
作者
Konrad, Maria Theresia [1 ]
Nielsen, Helle Orsted [1 ]
Pedersen, Anders Branth [1 ]
Elofsson, Katarina [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Aarhus Univ, Dept Environm Sci, Aarhus, Denmark
[2] Swedish Univ Agr Sci, Dept Econ, Uppsala, Sweden
[3] Sodertorn Univ, Dept Social Sci, Huddinge, Sweden
基金
芬兰科学院;
关键词
Baltic Sea; Farmer heterogeneity; Nutrient abatement; Technology adoption; LAND-USE; ADOPTION; EFFICIENCY; MANAGEMENT; ENGLAND;
D O I
10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.12.022
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Adoption of new manure and fertiliser technology is considered an effective tool to reduce diffuse nutrient pollution from agriculture, and policy instruments to encourage technology uptake are therefore widespread. But policy makers need to understand farmers' reasons for adoption of such technologies to design policies that actually work. Using data from a survey with responses from 2439 farmers in five countries around the Baltic Sea, we identify the drivers of technology adoption for three different abatement technologies: manure spreading equipment, slurry tanks, and precision technology for fertiliser application. We compare drivers for technology investments across technologies with a particular focus on the role of the scale of farm operations, neighbour relations, environmental concerns and innovation readiness. The results show that the scale of farm operation is important for the uptake of all three technologies, while we find no evidence that neighbour relations are important for technology investments. Environmental concerns for soil quality and other on-farm environmental qualities do drive investment; however, the impact of environmental concerns differs across technologies. Innovation readiness is a driver of investments in relation to some technologies, suggesting that the novelty or sophistication of the technology matters to the investing farmers.
引用
收藏
页码:91 / 100
页数:10
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]  
Algerbo P.-A., 2000, 267 JTI
[2]   Mitigating diffuse nitrogen losses in the Nordic-Baltic countries [J].
Andersen, Hans Estrup ;
Blicher-Mathiesen, Gitte ;
Bechmann, Marianne ;
Povilaitis, Arvydas ;
Iital, Arvo ;
Lagzdins, Ainis ;
Kyllmar, Katarina .
AGRICULTURE ECOSYSTEMS & ENVIRONMENT, 2014, 195 :53-60
[3]   IT as enabler of sustainable farming: An empirical analysis of farmers' adoption decision of precision agriculture technology [J].
Aubert, Benoit A. ;
Schroeder, Andreas ;
Grimaudo, Jonathan .
DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, 2012, 54 (01) :510-520
[4]   The evolution and empirical estimation of ecological-economic production possibilities frontiers [J].
Bekele, Elias G. ;
Lant, Christopher L. ;
Soman, Sethuram ;
Misgna, Girmay .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2013, 90 :1-9
[5]   Agent Heterogeneity in Adoption of Anaerobic Digestion Technology: Integrating Economic, Diffusion, and Behavioral Innovation Theories [J].
Bishop, Clark P. ;
Shumway, C. Richard ;
Wandschneider, Philip R. .
LAND ECONOMICS, 2010, 86 (03) :585-608
[6]   Will farmers trade profits for stewardship? Heterogeneous motivations for farm practice selection [J].
Chouinard, Hayley H. ;
Paterson, Tobias ;
Wandschneider, Philip R. ;
Ohler, Adrienne M. .
LAND ECONOMICS, 2008, 84 (01) :66-82
[7]   The role of best management practices in alleviating water quality problems associated with diffuse pollution [J].
D'Arcy, B ;
Frost, A .
SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2001, 265 (1-3) :359-367
[8]  
DairyCo, 2010, COST EFF SLURR STOR
[9]   Spreading dead zones and consequences for marine ecosystems [J].
Diaz, Robert J. ;
Rosenberg, Rutger .
SCIENCE, 2008, 321 (5891) :926-929
[10]  
Focus on Nutrients, 2018, COUNT YOURSELF SELEC