Exploring the adoption of precision agricultural technologies: A cross regional study of EU farmers

被引:262
作者
Barnes, A. P. [1 ]
Soto, I. [2 ]
Eory, V. [1 ]
Beck, B. [3 ]
Balafoutis, A. [5 ,7 ]
Sanchez, B. [2 ]
Vangeyte, J. [4 ]
Fountas, S. [5 ]
van der Wal, T. [6 ]
Gomez-Barbero, M. [2 ]
机构
[1] SRUC, Land Econ Environm & Soc Res Grp, Kings Bldg, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, Midlothian, Scotland
[2] European Commiss, JRC, Directorate Sustainable Resources, Econ Agr, Edificio Expo,Calle Inca Garcilaso 3, E-41092 Seville, Spain
[3] Agentschap Innoveren Ondernemen VLAIO, Koning Albert II Laan,35 Bus 12, B-1030 Brussels, Belgium
[4] Inst Agr Fisheries & Food Res ILVO, Burgemeester Van Gansberghelaan 92 Box 1, B-9820 Merelbeke, Belgium
[5] Agr Univ Athens, Iera Odos 75, Athina 11855, Greece
[6] Wageningen Environm Res Alterra, POB 47, NL-6700 AA Wageningen, Netherlands
[7] Ctr Res & Technol Hellas, Inst Bioecon Agritechnol, Dimarchou Georgiadou 118, Volos 38221, Greece
关键词
Precision Agriculture; Random Intercept Logistic Regression; EU Policy; FARMING TECHNOLOGY; COMPUTER USE; MODEL; OPPORTUNITIES; PERCEPTION; DECISION; INDUSTRY;
D O I
10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.10.004
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Precision agricultural technologies (PATs) allow more detailed management of in-field variability. Policy and advisory communities have championed PATs as a route to preserving natural capital whilst increasing productivity from agricultural land. A range of PATs are currently available for the agricultural producer but uptake varies by the type of technology and region. Whereas most studies on uptake have focused on US or Australia we empirically examine uptake of machine guidance (MG) and variable rate nitrogen technologies (VRNT) within European farming systems. Using primary information from 971 arable crop growers across five countries: Belgium, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands and the UK, a multilevel random intercept regression estimated a) the differences between adoption and non-adoption and b) the differences between VRNT and MG adoption. We find, aside from size and income differences, which reflect the economic cost barrier to adoption, an attitudinal difference, in terms of optimism towards the technology's economic return leading to more probability of up-take. Moreover innovative and information seeking behaviour also proved significant when upgrading from machine guidance to variable rate technologies. Subsidy and taxation were considered positive drivers of uptake within the community. However, results suggest that more indirect interventions, such as informational support to counteract industry bias, and demonstration to prove the viability of economic return may be effective at meeting land manager and policy expectations towards PATs.
引用
收藏
页码:163 / 174
页数:12
相关论文
共 90 条
  • [1] Producers' perceptions and attitudes toward precision agriculture technologies
    Adrian, AM
    Norwood, SH
    Mask, PL
    [J]. COMPUTERS AND ELECTRONICS IN AGRICULTURE, 2005, 48 (03) : 256 - 271
  • [2] Jevons' paradox
    Alcott, B
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2005, 54 (01) : 9 - 21
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2017, Stata Statistical Software
  • [4] Computer use and satisfaction by Great Plains producers: Ordered logit model analysis
    Ascough, JC
    Hoag, DL
    McMaster, GS
    Frasier, WM
    [J]. AGRONOMY JOURNAL, 2002, 94 (06) : 1263 - 1269
  • [5] IT as enabler of sustainable farming: An empirical analysis of farmers' adoption decision of precision agriculture technology
    Aubert, Benoit A.
    Schroeder, Andreas
    Grimaudo, Jonathan
    [J]. DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, 2012, 54 (01) : 510 - 520
  • [6] Precision Agriculture Technologies Positively Contributing to GHG Emissions Mitigation, Farm Productivity and Economics
    Balafoutis, Athanasios
    Beck, Bert
    Fountas, Spyros
    Vangeyte, Jurgen
    van der Wal, Tamme
    Soto, Iria
    Gomez-Barbero, Manuel
    Barnes, Andrew
    Eory, Vera
    [J]. SUSTAINABILITY, 2017, 9 (08)
  • [7] Banerjee S., 2008, Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, V40, P345
  • [8] Barnes A., 2011, ALTERNATIVE PAYMENT
  • [9] Utilising a farmer typology to understand farmer behaviour towards water quality management: Nitrate Vulnerable Zones in Scotland
    Barnes, A. P.
    Willock, J.
    Toma, L.
    Hall, C.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT, 2011, 54 (04) : 477 - 494
  • [10] Quantifying ambivalence towards sustainable intensification: an exploration of the UK public's values
    Barnes, Andrew P.
    Lucas, Amanda
    Maio, Gregory
    [J]. FOOD SECURITY, 2016, 8 (03) : 609 - 619