Vai trò dẫn dắt của nhận thức: mô hình FACOPA để hiểu rõ việc thông qua đổi mới

Agricultural and Food Economics - Tập 10 - Trang 1-19 - 2022
Yari Vecchio1, Marcello De Rosa2, Gregorio Pauselli1, Margherita Masi1, Felice Adinolfi1
1Department of Veterinary Medical Sciences, University of Bologna, Ozzano dell’Emilia, Italy
2Department of Economics and Law, University of Cassino and Southern Lazio, Cassino, Italy

Tóm tắt

Trong công trình này, chúng tôi khai thác mối liên hệ giữa nhận thức về độ phức tạp và khả năng áp dụng các công cụ nông nghiệp chính xác (PATs). Nhiều nghiên cứu đã phân tích vai trò của nhận thức, chủ yếu xem xét nó như một yếu tố quyết định việc thông qua tương đương với các yếu tố bối cảnh khác. Ngược lại, nghiên cứu này đóng góp bằng cách giả định rằng độ phức tạp mà nông dân nhận thức là yếu tố chính ảnh hưởng đến xu hướng đổi mới của họ và nên được phân tích ở một cấp độ khác. Bắt đầu từ giả định này, một mô hình lý thuyết mới được đề xuất với mục tiêu nghiên cứu quá trình “các yếu tố – nhận thức về độ phức tạp – việc thông qua” (FACOPA). Để kiểm tra tính hợp lệ của giả thuyết của chúng tôi, một cuộc khảo sát được thực hiện dựa trên mẫu định hướng gồm 285 nông dân. Trước tiên, một mô hình hồi quy tuyến tính cho phép chúng tôi xác định các yếu tố quyết định nhận thức về độ phức tạp. Sau đó, một mô hình logistic đa nhánh được sử dụng để xác định những khía cạnh của độ phức tạp nhận thức có thể ảnh hưởng đến sự lựa chọn áp dụng các công cụ nông nghiệp chính xác của ba loại doanh nhân nông nghiệp khác nhau: người áp dụng, người không áp dụng và người lập kế hoạch. Đầu tiên, kết quả hồi quy tuyến tính cho thấy rằng các biến xã hội - cấu trúc có mối quan hệ logic với độ phức tạp mà nông dân nhận thức, với tuổi tác, quy mô trang trại, mức độ thông tin và mức độ công việc đều có ý nghĩa. Sau đó, mô hình logistic đa nhánh nhấn mạnh rằng những người không áp dụng coi hầu hết các khía cạnh của độ phức tạp là rào cản đối với việc áp dụng. Những người lập kế hoạch cho thấy nhận thức về độ phức tạp thấp hơn so với những người không áp dụng, với độ phức tạp được xác định bởi các khía cạnh tài chính và mạng lưới. Kết quả cung cấp những gợi ý thú vị cho các nhà hoạch định chính sách. Thực tế, mô hình FACOPA cung cấp cái nhìn sâu sắc về một khung can thiệp trong đó các biện pháp chính sách có thể được đa dạng hóa để phổ biến các PATs dựa trên các loại nông dân. Những người không áp dụng cần một tập hợp rộng hơn các công cụ chính sách, trong khi những người lập kế hoạch nên được khuyến khích trở thành những người áp dụng thông qua hỗ trợ tài chính và kích hoạt các mạng lưới đổi mới.

Từ khóa

#đổi mới #nhận thức #nông nghiệp chính xác #mô hình FACOPA #áp dụng công cụ nông nghiệp

Tài liệu tham khảo

Adesina AA, Zinnah MM (1993) Technology characteristics, farmers’ perceptions and adoption decisions: a Tobit model application in Sierra Leone. Agric Econ 9(4):297–311

Adrian AM, Norwood SH, Mask PL (2005) Producers’ perceptions and attitudes toward precision agriculture technologies. Comput Electron Agric 48(3):256–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2005.04.004

Ajewole OC (2010) Farmers response to adoption of commercially available organic fertilizers in Oyo state, Nigeria. Afr J Agric Res 5(18):2497–2503 (ISSN 1991-637X)

Anselmi AA, Bredemeier C, Federizzi LC, Molin JP (2014) Factors related to adoption of precision agriculture technologies in southern Brazil. Retrieved 12 Mar 2018

Aubert BA, Schroeder A, Grimaudo J (2012) IT as enabler of sustainable farming: an empirical analysis of farmers’ adoption decision of precision agriculture technology. Decis Support Syst 54:510–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.07.002

Barnes AP, Soto I, Eory V, Beck B, Balafoutis A, Sánchez B et al (2019) Exploring the adoption of precision agricultural technologies: a cross regional study of EU farmers. Land Use Policy 80:163–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/21606544.2018.1561329

Bessant J, Oberg C, Trifilova A (2014) Framing problems in radical innovation. Ind Mark Manag 43(8):1284–1292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2014.09.003

Bewsell D, Kaine G (2005) Adoption of environmental best practice amongst dairy farmers. In: 11th Annual conference of the New Zealand agricultural and resource economics society Inc. Nelson

Birner R, Anderson JR (2009) How to make agricultural extension demand-driven? The case of India’s agricultural extension policy. In: Singh S, Reddy VR (eds) Changing contours of Asian agriculture policies, performance and challenges. Academic Foundation, New Delhi, pp 139–180

Ceschin F (2013) Critical factors for implementing and diffusing sustainable product-service systems: insights from innovation studies and companies’ experiences. J Clean Prod 45:74–88

Christensen RŽ (1990) Log-linear models. Springer, New York

Crevoisier O (2004) The innovative milieus approach: toward a territorialized understanding of the economy? Econ Geogr 80(4):367–379

Cullen R, Forbes SL, Grout R (2013) Non-adoption of environmental innovations in wine growing. N Z J Crop Hortic Sci 41:41–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/01140671.2012.744760

D’Antoni JM, Mishra AK, Joo H (2012) Farmers’ perception of precision technology: the case of autosteer adoption by cotton farmers. Comput Electron Agric 87:121–128

Danrhofer I (2015) Socio-technical transitions in farming. Key concepts. In: Sutherland LA, Darnhofer I, Wilson G, Zagata L (eds) Transition pathways towards sustainability in European agriculture. CABI Publisher, Wallingford

Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q 13:319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

De Baerdemaeker J (2013) Precision agriculture technology and robotics for good agricultural practices. IFAC Proc Vol 46(4):1–4

De Lillo A, Argentin G, Lucchini M, Sarti S, Terraneo M (2007) Analisi multivariata per le scienze sociali. Pearson Education, London, pp 197–245 (ISBN 978-88-7192-376-5)

del Río Gonzalez P (2005) Analysing the factors influencing clean technology adoption: a study of the Spanish pulp and paper industry. Bus Strategy Environ 14:20–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.426

Diederen P, van Meijl H, Wolters A, Bijak K (2003) Innovation adoption in agriculture: innovators, early adopters and laggards. Cahiers D’écon Sociol Rural 67:29–50

Doloreux D, Isaksen A, Aslene A, Melancon Y (2009) A comparative study of the aquaculture innovation systems in Quebec’s coastal region and Norway. Eur Plan Stud 17(7):963–981

Edwards-Jones G (2006) Modelling farmer decision-making: concepts, progress and challenges. Anim Sci 82(6):783–790. https://doi.org/10.1017/ASC2006112

Etikan I, Musa S, Alkassim R (2016) Comparison convenience sampling and purposive sampling. Am J Theor Appl Stat 5(1):1–4

European Commission (2017) The future of food and farming. COM (2017) 713 Final

Faber A, Hoppe T (2013) Co-constructing a sustainable built environment in the Netherlands dynamics and opportunities in an environmental sectoral innovation system. Energy Policy 52:628–638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.10.022

Far ST, Rezaei-Moghaddam K (2017) Determinants of Iranian agricultural consultants’ intentions toward precision agriculture: integrating innovativeness to the technology acceptance model. J Saudi Soc Agric Sci 16(3):280–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2015.09.003

Faure G, Chiffoleau Y, Goulet F, Temple L, Touzard JM (eds) (2018) Innovation and development in agricultural and food systems. Éditions Quæ, Versailles Cedex

Feder G, Just RJ, Zilberman D (1985) Adoption of agricultural innovations in developing countries: a survey. Econ Dev Cult Change 33(2):255–298. https://doi.org/10.1086/451461

Fernandez-Cornejo J, Daberkow SG, McBride WD (2001) Decomposing the size effect on the adoption of innovations: agrobiotechnology and precision farming (No. 374-2016-19657)

Fiske A, Kitayama S, Markus HR, Nisbett RE (1998) The cultural matrix of social psychology. In: Gilbert D, Fiske S, Lindzey G (eds) The handbook of social psychology, vol 2, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill, San Francisco, pp 915–981

Folorunso O, Ogunseye SO (2008) Applying an enhanced technology acceptance model to knowledge management in agricultural extension services. Data Sci J 7:31–45

Fountas S, Blackmore S, Ess D, Hawkins S, Blumhoff G, Lowenberg-Deboer J, Sorensen CG (2005) Farmer experience with precision agriculture in Denmark and the US Eastern Corn Belt. Precis Agric 6(2):121–141

Geels FW, Schot J (2007) Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways. Res Policy 36(3):399–417

Ghadim AKA, Pannell DJ (1999) A conceptual framework of adoption of an agricultural innovation. Agric Econ 21(2):145–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5150(99)00023-7

Griffin TW, Lowenberg-DeBoer J, Lambert DM, Peone J, Payne T, Daberkow SG (2004) Adoption, profitability, and making better use of precision farming data. Staff Paper #04–06 Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, USA

Hamilton WH (1932) Institutions. In: Seligman E, Johnson A (eds) Encyclopedia of social sciences. pp 560–595, Macmillan puplishers, London

Hodgson GM (2003) The hidden persuaders: institutions and individuals in economic theory. Camb J Econ 27:159–175

Hoff K, Stiglitz JE (2016) Striving for balance in economics: towards a theory of the social determination of behavior. J Econ Behav Organ 126:25–57

Hoffman AJ, Henn R (2008) Overcoming the social and psychological barriers to green building. Organ Environ 21(4):390–419. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026608326129

Hudson D, Hite D (2003) Producer willingness to pay for precision application technology: implications for government and the technology industry. Can J Agric Econ Can Agroeco 51:39–53

Isgin T, Bilgic A, Forster DL, Batte M (2008) Using count data models to determine the factors affecting farmers’ quantity decisions of precision farming technology adoption. Comput Electron Agric 62:231–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2008.01.004

Joffre OM, Klerkx L, Khoa TN (2018) Aquaculture innovation system analysis of transition to sustainable intensification in shrimp farming. Agron Sustain Dev 38(3):1–11

Kabunga NS, Dubois T, Qaim M (2012) Heterogeneous information exposure and technology adoption: the case of tissue culture bananas in Kenya. Agric Econ 43(5):473–486

Kelley K, Clark B, Brown V, Sitzia J (2003) Good practice in the conduct and reporting of survey research. Int J Quality Health Care 15:261–266. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzg031

Khanna M (2001) Sequential adoption of site-specific technologies and its implications for nitrogen productivity: a double selectivity model. Am J Agric Econ 83:35–51

Kitchen NR, Snyder CJ, Franzen DW, Wiebold WJ (2002) Educational needs of precision agriculture. Precis Agric 3(4):341–351

Kutter T, Tiemann S, Siebert R, Fountas S (2011) The role of communication and co-operation in the adoption of precision farming. Precis Agric 2011(12):2–17

Lambert DM, Paudel KP, Larson JA (2015) Bundled adoption of precision agriculture technologies by cotton producers. J Agric Resour Econ 40(2):325–345

Läpple D, Renwick A, Thorne F (2015) Measuring and understanding the drivers of agricultural innovation: evidence from Ireland. Food Policy 51:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2014.11.003

Larson JA, Roberts RK, English BC, Larkin SL, Marra MC, Martin SW, Paxton KW, Reeves JM (2008) Factors affecting farmer adoption of remotely sensed imagery for precision management in cotton production. Precis Agric 9:195–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-008-9065-1

Leeuwis C, Van den Ban A (2004) Communication for innovation: rethinking agricultural extension, 3rd edn. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford

Lencsés E, Takács I, Takács-György K (2014) Farmers’ perception of precision farming technology among Hungarian farmers. Sustainability 6(12):8452–8465

Lima E, Hopkins T, Gurney E, Shortall O, Lovatt F, Davies P, Shortall O, Lovatt F, Davies P, Williamson G, Kaler J (2018) Drivers for precision livestock technology adoption: a study of factors associated with adoption of electronic identification technology by commercial sheep farmers in England and Wales. PLoS ONE 13(1):e0190489

Long TB, Blok V, Coninx I (2016) Barriers to the adoption and diffusion of technological innovations for climate-smart agriculture in Europe: evidence from the Netherlands, France, Switzerland and Italy. J Clean Prod 112:9–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.044

Lugandu S (2013) Factors influencing the adoption of conservation agriculture by smallholder farmers in Karatu and Kongwa districts of Tanzania. In: REPOA’s18thannual research workshop held at the Kunduchi Beach Hotel, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

Markus HR, Kitayama S (2010) Cultures and selves: a cycle of mutual constitution. Perspect Psychol Sci 5(4):420–430

McBride WD, Daberkow SG (2003a) Information and the adoption of precision farming technologies. J Agribus 21(1):21–38

McBride WD, Daberkow SG (2003b) Farm and operator characteristics affecting the awareness and adoption of precision agriculture technologies in the US. Precis Agric 4:163–177. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024557205871

McCarthy N, Lipper L, Branca G (2011) Climate-smart agriculture: smallholder adoption and implications for climate change adaptation and mitigation. Mitigation of climate change in agriculture series. FAO, Rome

Miller NJ, Griffin TW, Bergtold J, Ciampitti IA, Sharda A (2017) Farmers’ adoption path of precision agriculture technology. Eur Conf Precis Agric 2017(8):708–712

Moore GC, Benbasat I (1991) Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Inf Syst Res 2:192–222. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2.3.192

Ntshangase N, Muroyiwa B, Sibanda M (2018) Farmers’ perceptions and factors influencing the adoption of no-till conservation agriculture by small-scale farmers in Zashuke, KwaZulu-Natal Province. Sustainability 10(2):555

Ogle SM, Olander L, Wollenberg L, Rosenstock T, Tubiello F, Paustian K, Buendia L, Nihart A, Smith P (2014) Reducing greenhouse gas emissions and adapting agricultural management for climate change in developing countries: providing the basis for action. Glob Change Biol 20(1):1–6

Pannell DJ, Marshall GR, Barr N, Curtis A, Vanclay F, Wilkinson R (2006) Understanding and promoting adoption of conservation practices by rural landholders. Aust J Exp Agric 46(11):1407–1424. https://doi.org/10.1071/EA05037

Pathak HS, Brown P, Best T (2019) A systematic literature review of the factors affecting the precision agriculture adoption process. Precis Agric 20(6):1292–1316

Paustian M, Theuvsen L (2016) Adoption of precision agriculture technologies by German crop farmers. Precis Agric 18:1–16

Paxton K, Mishra A, Chintawar S, Roberts R, Larson JA, English B, Lambert DM, Marra MC, Larkin SL, Reeves JM, Martin SW (2011) Intensity of precision agriculture technology adoption by cotton producers. Agric Resour Econ Rev 40(1):133–144. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1068280500004561

Pierpaoli E, Carli G, Pignatti E, Canavari M (2013) Drivers of precision agriculture technologies adoption: a literature review. Procedia Technol 8:61–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2013.11.010

Pretty J (2001) Farmer-based agroecological technology. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC. Available at Web site www.ifpri.org/2020/focus/focus07/focus07_02.htm. Verified 26 April 2005.

Rallet A, Torre A (2004) Proximité et localisation. Econ Rural 284:25–41

Reimer AP, Weinkauf DK, Prokopy LS (2012) The influence of perceptions of practice characteristics: an examination of agricultural best management practice adoption in two Indiana watersheds. J Rural Stud 28(1):118–128

Rezaei-Moghaddam K, Salehi S (2010) Agricultural specialists’ intention toward precision agriculture technologies: integrating innovation characteristics to technology acceptance model. Afr J Agric Res 5:1191–1199

Roberts RK, English BC, Larson JA, Cochran RL, Goodman WR, Larkin SL et al (2004) Adoption of site-specific information and variable-rate technologies in cotton precision farming. J Agric Appl Econ 36:143–158

Robertson MJ, Llewellyn RS, Mandel R, Lawes R, Bramley RGV, Swift L et al (2012) Adoption of variable rate fertiliser application in the Australian grains industry: status, issues and prospects. Precis Agric 13:181–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-011-9236-3

Rogers EM (2003) Diffusion of innovations, 5th edn. Free Press, New York

Sassenrath GF, Heilman P, Luschei E, Bennett GL, Fitzgerald G, Klesius P, Tracy W, Williford JR, Zimba PV (2008) Technology, complexity and change in agricultural production systems. Renew Agric Food Syst 23(4):285–295. https://doi.org/10.1017/S174217050700213X

Say SM, Keskin M, Sehri M, Sekerli YE (2018) Adoption of precision agriculture technologies in developed and developing countries. Online J Sci Technol 8(1):7–15

Schirmer J, Bull L (2014) Assessing the likelihood of widespread landholder adoption of afforestation and reforestation projects. Glob Environ Change 24:306–320

Schwab JA (2002) Multinomial logistic regression: basic relationships and complete problems. Retrieved from http://www.utexas.edu/courses/schwab/sw388r7/SolvingProblems

Sneddon J, Soutar G, Mazzarol T (2011) Modelling the faddish, fashionable and efficient diffusion of agricultural technologies: a case study of the diffusion of wool testing technology in Australia. Technol Forecast Soc Change 78:468–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.06.005

Storper M (2001) The poverty of radical theory today: from the false promises of Marxism to the mirage of the cultural turn. Int J Urban Reg Res 25(1):155–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00303·

Struik PC, Klerkx L, Hounkonnou D (2014) Unravelling institutional determinants affecting change in agriculture in West Africa. Int J Agr Sustain 12(3):370–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2014.909642

Taherdoost H (2016) Sampling methods in research methodology; how to choose a sampling technique for research. Int J Adv Res Manag 5(2):18–27

Tey YS, Brindal M (2012) Factors influencing the adoption of precision agricultural technologies: a review for policy implications. Precis Agric 13:713–730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-012-9273-6

Van der Weerdt C, de Boer J (2016) Focusing on behaviour to ensure adoption of big data information services in precision livestock farming. In: Proceedings of the 7th European conference on precision livestock farming. pp 721–729

Vecchio Y, Agnusdei GP, Miglietta PP, Capitanio F (2020a) Adoption of precision farming tools: the case of Italian farmers. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17:869

Vecchio Y, De Rosa M, Adinolfi F, Bartoli L, Masi M (2020b) Adoption of precision farming tools: a context-related analysis. Land Use Policy 94:104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104481 (ISSN 0264-8377)

Venkatesh V, Davis FD (1996) A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: development and test. Decis Sci 27(3):451–481

Walton JC, Larson JA, Roberts RK, Lambert DM, English BC, Larkin SL, Marra MC, Martin SW, Paxton KW, Reeves JM (2010) Factors influencing farmer adoption of portable computers for site-specific management: a case study for cotton production. J Agric Appl Econ 42(2):193–209. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1074070800003400

Welter F (2011) Contextualizing entrepreneurship—conceptual challenges and ways forward, entrepreneurship. Theory Pract 35(1):165–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00427.x

Wheeler SA (2008) The barriers to further adoption of organic farming and genetic engineering in Australia: views of agricultural professionals and their information sources. Renew Agric Food Syst 23:161–170. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170507002128

Zarco-Tejada PJ, Hubbard N, Loudjani P (2014) Precision agriculture: an opportunity for EU farmers—potential support with the CAP 2014–2020. Document prepared for the European Parliament's Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Agricultural and Food Economics

Tập 10

1-19

Thông tin tác giả