IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea22/335650.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Producers Willingness to Adopt Best Management Practices in Floridan Aquifer Region

Author

Listed:
  • He, Fei
  • Lai, John
  • Court, Christa D.
  • Borisova, Tatiana
  • Athearn, Kevin R.

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • He, Fei & Lai, John & Court, Christa D. & Borisova, Tatiana & Athearn, Kevin R., 2023. "Producers Willingness to Adopt Best Management Practices in Floridan Aquifer Region," 2023 Annual Meeting, July 23-25, Washington D.C. 335650, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea22:335650
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/335650/files/26599.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Migliaccio, Kati W. & Schaffer, Bruce & Crane, Jonathan H. & Davies, Frederick S., 2010. "Plant response to evapotranspiration and soil water sensor irrigation scheduling methods for papaya production in south Florida," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(10), pages 1452-1460, October.
    2. Rath, S. & Zamora-Re, M. & Graham, W. & Dukes, M. & Kaplan, D., 2021. "Quantifying nitrate leaching to groundwater from a corn-peanut rotation under a variety of irrigation and nutrient management practices in the Suwannee River Basin, Florida," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    3. Nick Hanley & Douglas MacMillan & Robert E. Wright & Craig Bullock & Ian Simpson & Dave Parsisson & Bob Crabtree, 1998. "Contingent Valuation Versus Choice Experiments: Estimating the Benefits of Environmentally Sensitive Areas in Scotland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1), pages 1-15, March.
    4. Miranowski, John & Shortle, J., 1986. "Effects of Risk Perceptions and Other Characteristics of Farmers and Farm Operations on the Adoption of Conservation Tillage Practices," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10703, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    5. Pannell, David J. & Malcolm, Bill & Kingwell, Ross S., 2000. "Are we risking too much? Perspectives on risk in farm modelling," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 69-78, June.
    6. Hua Zhong & Ping Qing & Wuyang Hu, 2016. "Farmers' willingness to participate in best management practices in Kentucky," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(6), pages 1015-1039, June.
    7. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde & Jürgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, 2011. "Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants, And Behavioral Consequences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 522-550, June.
    8. Pamela Lamba & Glen Filson & Bamidele Adekunle, 2009. "Factors affecting the adoption of best management practices in southern Ontario," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 64-77, March.
    9. Christian A. Vossler & Maurice Doyon & Daniel Rondeau, 2012. "Truth in Consequentiality: Theory and Field Evidence on Discrete Choice Experiments," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 145-171, November.
    10. Meredith J. Soule & Abebayehu Tegene & Keith D. Wiebe, 2000. "Land Tenure and the Adoption of Conservation Practices," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(4), pages 993-1005.
    11. Levers, Lucia & Pradhananga, Amit & Peterson, Jeffrey M., 2018. "Reducing the Environmental Impact of Corn Monoculture: Farmer Willingness to Accept for Alternative Cropping Systems," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274013, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Lijun Zuo & Zengxiang Zhang & Kimberly M. Carlson & Graham K. MacDonald & Kate A. Brauman & Yingchun Liu & Wen Zhang & Huayong Zhang & Wenbin Wu & Xiaoli Zhao & Xiao Wang & Bin Liu & Ling Yi & Qingke , 2018. "Progress towards sustainable intensification in China challenged by land-use change," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 1(6), pages 304-313, June.
    13. Yehouenou, Lauriane S. & Grogan, Kelly A. & Bi, Xiang & Borisova, Tatiana, 2020. "Improving BMP Cost-Share Enrollment Rates: Insights from a Survey of Florida Farmers," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(2), pages 237-269, August.
    14. Chouinard, Hayley H. & Wandschneider, Philip R. & Paterson, Tobias, 2016. "Inferences from sparse data: An integrated, meta-utility approach to conservation research," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 71-78.
    15. Liu, Haiyan & Brouwer, Roy, 2022. "Incentivizing the future adoption of best management practices on agricultural land to protect water resources: The role of past participation and experiences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    16. Adamowicz W. & Louviere J. & Williams M., 1994. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 271-292, May.
    17. Emily Lancsar & Jordan Louviere, 2008. "Conducting Discrete Choice Experiments to Inform Healthcare Decision Making," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 26(8), pages 661-677, August.
    18. Rose, John M. & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A. & Collins, Andrew T., 2008. "Designing efficient stated choice experiments in the presence of reference alternatives," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 395-406, May.
    19. Neill, Sean P & Lee, David R, 2001. "Explaining the Adoption and Disadoption of Sustainable Agriculture: The Case of Cover Crops in Northern Honduras," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 49(4), pages 793-820, July.
    20. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    21. Danny Campbell & Seda Erdem, 2019. "Including Opt-Out Options in Discrete Choice Experiments: Issues to Consider," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, February.
    22. Broch, Stine Wamberg & Strange, Niels & Jacobsen, Jette B. & Wilson, Kerrie A., 2013. "Farmers' willingness to provide ecosystem services and effects of their spatial distribution," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 78-86.
    23. Brian W. Gould & William E. Saupe & Richard M. Klemme, 1989. "Conservation Tillage: The Role of Farm and Operator Characteristics and the Perception of Soil Erosion," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 65(2), pages 167-185.
    24. Adam Reimer & Aaron Thompson & Linda Prokopy, 2012. "The multi-dimensional nature of environmental attitudes among farmers in Indiana: implications for conservation adoption," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 29(1), pages 29-40, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    2. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Integrative synthesis of empirical evidence and conceptualisation of external validity," Papers 2102.02940, arXiv.org.
    3. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    4. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Macro-scale analysis of literature and integrative synthesis of empirical evidence from applied economics, experimental psychology and neuroimag," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    5. Greiner, Romy, 2015. "Motivations and attitudes influence farmers' willingness to participate in biodiversity conservation contracts," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 154-165.
    6. Admasu, Wubante Fetene & Van Passel, Steven & Nyssen, Jan & Minale, Amare Sewnet & Tsegaye, Enyew Adgo, 2021. "Eliciting farmers’ preferences and willingness to pay for land use attributes in Northwest Ethiopia: A discrete choice experiment study," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    7. Mesfin G. Genie & Nicolas Krucien & Mandy Ryan, 2021. "Weighting or aggregating? Investigating information processing in multi‐attribute choices," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(6), pages 1291-1305, June.
    8. Na-na Wang & Liang-guo Luo & Ya-ru Pan & Xue-mei Ni, 2019. "Use of discrete choice experiments to facilitate design of effective environmentally friendly agricultural policies," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1543-1559, August.
    9. Abildtrup, Jens & Garcia, Serge & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Stenger, Anne, 2013. "Spatial preference heterogeneity in forest recreation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 67-77.
    10. Jan Vanstockem & Liesbet Vranken & Brent Bleys & Ben Somers & Martin Hermy, 2018. "Do Looks Matter? A Case Study on Extensive Green Roofs Using Discrete Choice Experiments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-15, January.
    11. Chinedu, Obi & Sanou, Edouard & Tur-Cardona, Juan & Bartolini, Fabio & Gheysen, Godelieve & Speelman, Stijn, 2018. "Farmers’ valuation of transgenic biofortified sorghum for nutritional improvement in Burkina Faso: A latent class approach," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 132-140.
    12. Sawadgo, Wendiam & Zhang, Wendong & Plastina, Alejandro, 2019. "What drives landowners’ conservation decisions? Evidence from Iowa," ISU General Staff Papers 201905230700001082, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    13. Thompson, Nathanael M. & Reeling, Carson J. & Fleckenstein, Michelle R. & Prokopy, Linda S. & Armstrong, Shalamar D., 2021. "Examining intensity of conservation practice adoption: Evidence from cover crop use on U.S. Midwest farms," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    14. Marita Laukkanen & NAUGES Céline, 2009. "Environmental and production cost impacts of no-till: estimates from observed behavior," LERNA Working Papers 09.28.304, LERNA, University of Toulouse.
    15. Tingting Liu & Randall J. F. Bruins & Matthew T. Heberling, 2018. "Factors Influencing Farmers’ Adoption of Best Management Practices: A Review and Synthesis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-26, February.
    16. Knowler, Duncan & Bradshaw, Ben, 2007. "Farmers' adoption of conservation agriculture: A review and synthesis of recent research," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 25-48, February.
    17. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Macro-scale analysis of literature and effectiveness of bias mitigation methods," Papers 2102.02945, arXiv.org.
    18. Que, Sisi & Awuah-Offei, Kwame & Weidner, Nathan & Wang, Yumin, 2017. "Discrete choice experiment validation: A resource project case study," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 39-50.
    19. Francisco Guijarro & Prodromos Tsinaslanidis, 2020. "Analysis of Academic Literature on Environmental Valuation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-14, March.
    20. Kessels, Roselinde, 2016. "Homogeneous versus heterogeneous designs for stated choice experiments: Ain't homogeneous designs all bad?," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 2-9.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy; Research Methods/Statistical Methods; Production Economics;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ags:aaea22:335650. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.