IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/inijae/229940.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Green Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture: Policy Options Towards Farmer Adoption

Author

Listed:
  • Devi, P. Indira
  • Solomon, Sebin Sara
  • Jayasree, M.G.

Abstract

Bio-fertilisers (BF) and bio-control agents (BCA) are the biotechnological interventions tried to improve crop production and protection for sustainable agricultural development. This paper based on a study, conducted in the state of Kerala, depending both on primary and secondary data, analyses the consumption pattern and farmer responses to the technology and cases thereof. A total of 840 farmers were surveyed using a structured, pretested questionnaire. Later on, the crop-wise use was estimated through a post stratification of the data. Logit analysis was done to study the adoption behaviour of the respondents. In Kerala, BF/BCA is produced by the public sector, private sector and NGO, and is distributed either directly to the farmers or indirectly through the retail shops. A sizeable part of production is sold to the Department of Agriculture itself as part of department schemes where the BF/BCA is given at subsidy. The analysis on the level of adoption of BF/BCA showed that the percentage of adoption is more in the case of BCA when compared to BF. The adoption of BF was found to be less than 1 per cent and for BCA it was around 11 per cent. The logistic regression analysis to study the adoption behaviour of the respondents (rice farmers) showed that educational level, farming experience, returns from farming and extension of technical support received by the farmers are the major factors that influenced the decision making with regard to the adoption of bioagents. Though subsidies facilitate the economic access to the technology, it did not ensure the sustained adoption and scientifically proper application. The analysis supports the statistically significant influence of technical support in the adoption of the technology, which underlines the importance of infrastructural and technological support mechanism in the wider adoption of the technology. Thus subsidies can be considered as a necessary but not a sufficient condition for the sustained technology adoption.

Suggested Citation

  • Devi, P. Indira & Solomon, Sebin Sara & Jayasree, M.G., 2015. "Green Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture: Policy Options Towards Farmer Adoption," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(3), pages 1-12.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:inijae:229940
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.229940
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/229940/files/19-Indira%20devi-01-n.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.229940?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Indira Devi P, 2007. "Pesticide Use in the Rice Bowl of Kerala: Health Costs and Policy Options," Working Papers id:1147, eSocialSciences.
    2. Pandit, Arun & Pandey, N.K. & Lal, Barsati & Chandran, K.P. & Rana, Rajesh K., 2007. "Financing Agriculture: A Study of Bihar and West Bengal Potato Cultivation," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 62(3), pages 1-10.
    3. Suresh, A. & Gupta, D.C. & Solanki, M.R. & Mann, J.S., 2007. "Reducing the Risk in Livestock Production: Factors Influencing the Adoption of Vaccination Against Bovine Diseases," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 62(3), pages 1-9.
    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. Isabella Tamine Parra Miranda & Juliana Moletta & Bruno Pedroso & Luiz Alberto Pilatti & Claudia Tania Picinin, 2021. "A Review on Green Technology Practices at BRICS Countries: Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, May.

    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. Devi, P. Indira & Shanmugam, K.R. & Jayasree, M.G., 2012. "Compensating Wages for Occupational Risks of Farm Workers in India," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 67(2), pages 1-12.
    2. N. L. Panwar & Surendra Kothari & S. C. Kaushik, 2014. "Cost-benefit and systems analysis of passively ventilated solar greenhouses for food production in arid and semi-arid regions," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 160-167, March.
    3. Kishor Atreya & Bishal Sitaula & Roshan Bajracharya, 2013. "Distribution of health costs of pesticide use by household economy," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 827-839, June.
    4. Atreya, Kishor, 2008. "Health costs from short-term exposure to pesticides in Nepal," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 511-519, August.
    5. Ghislain B. D. Aïhounton & Arne Henningsen & Neda Trifkovic, 2021. "Pesticide Handling and Human Health: Conventional and Organic Cotton Farming in Benin," IFRO Working Paper 2021/06, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    6. Kishor Atreya & Fred Johnsen & Bishal Sitaula, 2012. "Health and environmental costs of pesticide use in vegetable farming in Nepal," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 477-493, August.

    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:inijae:229940. 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/isaeeea.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.