IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i10p7823-d1143670.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research on the Impact of Internet Use on Farmers’ Adoption of Agricultural Socialized Services

Author

Listed:
  • Chunfang Yang

    (College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China)

  • Changming Cheng

    (College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
    School of Economics and Management, Chuzhou University, Chuzhou 239000, China)

  • Nanyang Cheng

    (College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China)

  • Yifeng Zhang

    (College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China)

Abstract

Developing agricultural socialized services is of great significance for promoting agricultural sustainable development and ensuring food security. The use of the Internet provides new opportunities to promote the development of agricultural socialized services. Using data from the China Family Panel Studies (CFPS) in 2016 and 2018 with 8850 observations, this paper investigates the effects of Internet use on farmers’ adoption decision and adoption degree of agricultural socialized services, and explores the mediating effect of social networks. The adoption of agricultural socialized services is divided into adoption decision and adoption degree, and the Probit model and Tobit model are used for empirical analysis. The results showed that: (1) Internet use has a significant positive impact on both the adoption decision and the adoption degree of agricultural socialized services. Specifically, the impact of Internet use on the adoption decision and adoption degree of agricultural machinery services is greater than that of agricultural hired labor services. (2) The mechanism analysis found that social networks partially mediated the effect of Internet use on farmers’ adoption decision and adoption degree of agricultural socialized services. Furthermore, social networks have a greater mediating effect on the influence of Internet use on farmers’ adoption decision and adoption degree of agricultural machinery services compared to agricultural hired labor services. (3) The heterogeneity test found that Internet use has no significant impact on the adoption of agricultural socialized services by older farmers and farmers with a low education level. Therefore, it is crucial to fully leverage the potential of the Internet to facilitate the supply and demand of agricultural socialized services. Moreover, it is essential to integrate the market of agricultural socialized services with the rural social network to realize the synergy of “Internet plus social network”. This integration facilitates the organic connection between small farmers and modern agricultural development.

Suggested Citation

  • Chunfang Yang & Changming Cheng & Nanyang Cheng & Yifeng Zhang, 2023. "Research on the Impact of Internet Use on Farmers’ Adoption of Agricultural Socialized Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-17, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:10:p:7823-:d:1143670
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/7823/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/7823/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lori Beaman & Ariel BenYishay & Jeremy Magruder & Ahmed Mushfiq Mobarak, 2021. "Can Network Theory-Based Targeting Increase Technology Adoption?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(6), pages 1918-1943, June.
    2. Björkegren, Daniel & Karaca, Burak Ceyhun, 2022. "Network adoption subsidies: A digital evaluation of a rural mobile phone program in Rwanda," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    3. Shu Jiang & Zhanpeng Wang & Zilai Sun & Junhu Ruan, 2022. "Determinants of Buying Produce on Short-Video Platforms: The Impact of Social Network and Resource Endowment—Evidence from China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-19, October.
    4. Qilin Liu & Qianqian Li, 2023. "Impact of New Rural Pension Insurance on Farmers’ Agricultural Mechanization Service Inputs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-18, January.
    5. Manu Goyal & Serguei Netessine, 2007. "Strategic Technology Choice and Capacity Investment Under Demand Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(2), pages 192-207, February.
    6. Jenny C. Aker, 2011. "Dial “A” for agriculture: a review of information and communication technologies for agricultural extension in developing countries," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 42(6), pages 631-647, November.
    7. Xin Deng & Dingde Xu & Miao Zeng & Yanbin Qi, 2020. "Does outsourcing affect agricultural productivity of farmer households? Evidence from China," China Agricultural Economic Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 12(4), pages 673-688, August.
    8. Ogutu, Sylvester Ochieng & Okello, Julius Juma & Otieno, David Jakinda, 2014. "Impact of Information and Communication Technology-Based Market Information Services on Smallholder Farm Input Use and Productivity: The Case of Kenya," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 311-321.
    9. Jenny C. Aker & Ishita Ghosh & Jenna Burrell, 2016. "The promise (and pitfalls) of ICT for agriculture initiatives," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(S1), pages 35-48, November.
    10. Xiuru Zhang & Lin Zhang & Tangzhe Nie, 2023. "Study on the Impact of Social Capital on Farmers’ Decision-Making Behavior of Adopting Trusteeship Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-16, March.
    11. Chunfang Yang & Hengyuan Zeng & Yifeng Zhang, 2022. "Are Socialized Services of Agricultural Green Production Conducive to the Reduction in Fertilizer Input? Empirical Evidence from Rural China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-16, November.
    12. Changming Cheng & Qiang Gao & Yuqing Qiu, 2022. "Assessing the Ability of Agricultural Socialized Services to Promote the Protection of Cultivated Land among Farmers," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-16, August.
    13. Meng Qu & Kai Zhao & Renhui Zhang & Yuan Gao & Jing Wang, 2022. "Divergence between Willingness and Behavior of Farmers to Purchase Socialized Agricultural Services: From a Heterogeneity Perspective of Land Scale," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-21, July.
    14. Stiglitz, Joseph E & Weiss, Andrew, 1981. "Credit Rationing in Markets with Imperfect Information," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(3), pages 393-410, June.
    15. Fengwan Zhang & Xueling Bao & Xin Deng & Dingde Xu, 2022. "Rural Land Transfer in the Information Age: Can Internet Use Affect Farmers’ Land Transfer-In?," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-14, October.
    16. Annemie Maertens, 2017. "Who Cares What Others Think (or Do)? Social Learning and Social Pressures in Cotton Farming in India," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(4), pages 988-1007.
    17. Xin Deng & Dingde Xu & Miao Zeng & Yanbin Qi, 2020. "Does outsourcing affect agricultural productivity of farmer households? Evidence from China," China Agricultural Economic Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 12(4), pages 673-688, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yonghu Zhang & Yifeng Zhang, 2024. "The Influence of Digital Literacy on the Phenomenon of Deviation between Farmers’ E-Commerce Sales Willingness and Behavior: Evidence from Rural China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-22, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cai, Yi & Sun, Yucheng & Qi, Wene & Yi, Famin, 2022. "Impact of smartphone use on production outsourcing: evidence from litchi farming in southern China," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 25(4), September.
    2. Xuelan Li & Rui Guan, 2023. "How Does Agricultural Mechanization Service Affect Agricultural Green Transformation in China?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-23, January.
    3. Min, Shi & Liu, Min & Huang, Jikun, 2020. "Does the application of ICTs facilitate rural economic transformation in China? Empirical evidence from the use of smartphones among farmers," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    4. Qianqian Chen & Chao Zhang & Ruifa Hu & Shengyang Sun, 2022. "Can Information from the Internet Improve Grain Technical Efficiency? New Evidence from Rice Production in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-16, December.
    5. Yi Cai & Wene Qi & Famin Yi, 2023. "Smartphone use and willingness to adopt digital pest and disease management: Evidence from litchi growers in rural China," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(1), pages 131-147, January.
    6. Kazushi Takahashi & Rie Muraoka & Keijiro Otsuka, 2020. "Technology adoption, impact, and extension in developing countries’ agriculture: A review of the recent literature," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 31-45, January.
    7. Kahsay, Goytom Abraha & Garcia, Nerea Turreira & Bosselmann, Aske Skovmand, 2023. "Mobile Internet Use and Climate Adaptation: Empirical Evidence from Vietnamese Coffee Farmers," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 48(3), September.
    8. Paul Christian & Florence Kondylis & Valerie Mueller & Astrid Zwager & Tobias Siegfried, 2022. "Monitoring Water for Conservation: A Proof of Concept from Mozambique," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(1), pages 92-110, January.
    9. Berazneva, Julia & Maertens, Annemie & Mhango, Wezi & Michelson, Hope, 2023. "Paying for agricultural information in Malawi: The role of soil heterogeneity," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    10. Zhu, Xiaoke & Hu, Ruifa & Zhang, Chao & Shi, Guanming, 2021. "Does Internet use improve technical efficiency? Evidence from apple production in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    11. Yoko Kijima, 2022. "Effect of Nigeria’s e-voucher input subsidy program on fertilizer use, rice production, and household income," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 14(4), pages 919-935, August.
    12. Elisabeth SADOULET, 2016. "Review of Theories of Learning for Adopting," Working Papers P163, FERDI.
    13. Fang, Lan & Quan, Yurong & Mao, Hui & Chen, Shaojian, 2022. "The Information Communication Technology and Off-farm Employment of Rural Laborers: An Analysis Based on the Micro Data of China Family Panel Studies," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322088, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Ezinne M. Emeana & Liz Trenchard & Katharina Dehnen-Schmutz, 2020. "The Revolution of Mobile Phone-Enabled Services for Agricultural Development (m-Agri Services) in Africa: The Challenges for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-27, January.
    15. Wantchekon, Leonard & Riaz, Zara, 2019. "Mobile technology and food access," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 344-356.
    16. de Janvry, Alain & Sadoulet, Elisabeth, 2020. "Using agriculture for development: Supply- and demand-side approaches," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    17. Michelson, Hope & Fairbairn, Anna & Ellison, Brenna & Maertens, Annemie & Manyong, Victor, 2021. "Misperceived quality: Fertilizer in Tanzania," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    18. Kamiche Zegarra, J. & Bravo-Ureta, B., 2018. "Are users of market information efficient? A stochastic production frontier model corrected by sample selection," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 275870, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Xiang Li & Xiaoqin Guo, 2023. "Can Policy Promote Agricultural Service Outsourcing? Quasi-Natural Experimental Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-18, January.
    20. Apoorv Gupta & Jacopo Ponticelli & Andrea Tesei, 2020. "Language Barriers, Technology Adoption and Productivity: Evidence from Agriculture in India," NBER Working Papers 27192, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:10:p:7823-:d:1143670. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.