IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/agecon/v33y2005is3p467-478.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Organic pest management decisions: a systems approach to technology adoption

Author

Listed:
  • Timothy A. Park
  • Luanne Lohr

Abstract

Organic farmers make system-level crop protection decisions that combine complementary insect, disease, nematode, and weed management strategies. Data from a 1997 national survey of U.S. organic farmers were used in a multivariate count data model to identify the farm and regional factors influencing the adoption of practices across the linked pest management categories. The results show that weed management requires the greatest management effort by organic farmers. More intensive information-seeking and on-farm experimentation, higher educational attainment, and intensity of commitment to organic farming are positively related to the number of weed control strategies adopted. Predictions of adoption based on this model and customized to farm and region specifications will give information providers lead time to develop technical support for reduced chemical pest management systems. Copyright 2005 International Association of Agricultural Economics.

Suggested Citation

  • Timothy A. Park & Luanne Lohr, 2005. "Organic pest management decisions: a systems approach to technology adoption," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 33(s3), pages 467-478, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:agecon:v:33:y:2005:i:s3:p:467-478
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1574-0864.2005.00400.x
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James E. Anderson & J. Peter Neary, 1996. "A New Approach to Evaluating Trade Policy," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 63(1), pages 107-125.
    2. Winters, L. Alan, 1984. "Separability and the specification of foreign trade functions," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3-4), pages 239-263, November.
    3. Neary, J Peter, 1998. " Pitfalls in the Theory of International Trade Policy: Concertina Reforms of Tariffs, and Subsidies to High-Technology Industries," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 100(1), pages 187-206, March.
    4. Lloyd, P J, 1975. "Substitution Effects and Biases in Nontrue Price Indices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(3), pages 301-313, June.
    5. Lewbel, Arthur, 1996. "Aggregation without Separability: A Generalized Composite Commodity Theorem," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 524-543, June.
    6. Laird, Samuel & Yeats, Alexander, 1988. "A Note on the Aggregation Bias in Current Procedures for the Measurement of Trade Barriers," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 133-143, April.
    7. Oral Capps & H. Alan Love, 2002. "Econometric Considerations in the Use of Electronic Scanner Data to Conduct Consumer Demand Analysis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(3), pages 807-816.
    8. Bach, Christian F. & Martin, Will, 2001. "Would the right tariff aggregator for policy analysis please stand up?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 621-635, August.
    9. Bureau Jean-Christophe & Salvatici Luca, 2004. "WTO Negotiations on Market Access in Agriculture: a Comparison of Alternative Tariff Cut Proposals for the EU and the US," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-35, March.
    10. John C. Beghin & Jean-Christophe Bureau & Sung Joon Park, 2003. "Food Security and Agricultural Protection in South Korea," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(3), pages 618-632.
    11. Gibson, Paul R. & Wainio, John & Whitley, Daniel B. & Bohman, Mary, 2001. "Profiles Of Tariffs In Global Agricultural Markets," Agricultural Economics Reports 34055, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    12. Patrick A. Messerlin, 2001. "Measuring the Costs of Protection in Europe: European Commercial Policy in the 2000s," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 102.
    13. Shoven, John B & Whalley, John, 1984. "Applied General-Equilibrium Models of Taxation and International Trade: An Introduction and Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 22(3), pages 1007-1051, September.
    14. J-C Bureau & L Fulponi & L Salvatici, 2000. "Comparing EU and US trade liberalisation under the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 27(3), pages 259-280, September.
    15. Hertel, Thomas, 1997. "Global Trade Analysis: Modeling and applications," GTAP Books, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, number 7685.
    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. Kirui, Oliver & Mrzabaev, Alisher, 2015. "Costs of landj degradation in Eastern Africa," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212007, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Jara-Rojas, Roberto & Bravo-Ureta, Boris E. & Díaz, José, 2012. "Adoption of water conservation practices: A socioeconomic analysis of small-scale farmers in Central Chile," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 54-62.
    3. Ali, Jabir, 2011. "Adoption of Mass Media Information for Decision-Making Among Vegetable Growers in Uttar Pradesh," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 66(2).

    More about this item

    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:bla:agecon:v:33:y:2005:i:s3:p:467-478. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.html .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.