This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Demographic and Management Factors Affecting the Perceived Benefit of Winter Cover Crops in the Southeast

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Bergtold, Jason S.
Duffy, Patricia A.
Hite, Diane
Raper, Randy L.

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

The inclusion of cover crops in cropping systems brings both direct and indirect costs and benefits. Farmers will adopt and continue to utilize cover crops in their production systems as long as the perceived benefit of using cover crops (e.g. increased yield, higher profits, and improved soil productivity) is positive. The perceived benefits, while partially based on actual changes, may be influenced by demographic, economic and management factors. The purpose of this paper is to examine the demographic and management factors affecting the perceived benefit, in terms of improved crop yield, of using winter annual cover crops. A tobit model is estimated using survey data of Alabama farmers examining cover crop use and management. The model examines the potential effect of different agronomic, demographic and management factors on the perceived yield gain from using winter cover crops of Alabama row crop producers. Estimation results indicated that growing peanuts, growing soybeans, high debt, high gross farm sales, use of conservation tillage, increased application of N to the cash crop after a legume cover crop, and applying N to the cover crop had a positive and statistically significant impact on farmers’ perceived yield gain from using a cover crop. In contrast, number of years farming, farm size, and high cover crop costs had a negative and statistically significant impact on farmers’ perceived yield gain from using a cover crop. Understanding the perceived benefits of using winter cover crops and the factors that shape these perceptions can provide insight into the decision making process farmers make in deciding to adopt and/or retain the use of cover crops on their farm.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/6424
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association) in its series 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida with number 6424.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2008
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea08:6424

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Email:
Web page: http://www.aaea.org
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (AgEcon Search).

Related research
Keywords: Cover Crops; Conservation; Adoption Process; Tobit Model; Value of Information; Farmer; Crop Production/Industries;

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Soule, Meredith J., 2001. "Soil Management And The Farm Typology: Do Small Family Farms Manage Soil And Nutrient Resources Differently Than Large Family Farms?," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 30(2), October. [Downloadable!]
  2. Luzar, E. Jane & Diagne, Assane, 1999. "Participation in the next generation of agriculture conservation programs: the role of environmental attitudes," The Journal of Socio-Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 335-349. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Abadi Ghadim, Amir K. & Pannell, David J., 1999. "A conceptual framework of adoption of an agricultural innovation," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 145-154, October. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Soule, Meredith J & Tegene, Abebayehu & Wiebe, Keith D, 2000. " Land Tenure and the Adoption of Conservation Practices," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, American Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 82(4), pages 993-1005, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Lichtenberg, Erik, 2004. "Cost-Responsiveness of Conservation Practice Adoption: A Revealed Preference Approach," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 29(03), December. [Downloadable!]
  6. Allen M. Featherstone & Barry K. Goodwin, 1993. "Factors Influencing a Farmer's Decision to Invest in Long-Term Conservation Improvements," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 69(1), pages 67-81. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? No RePEc service, like IDEAS, charges for the use or the display of bibliographic data.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-11.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.