Author
Listed:
- Marianne Lefebvre
- Laure Latruffe
- Maxime Colin
- Adeline Alonso Ugaglia
- Julie Borg
- Yann Desjeux
- Gaëlle Leduc
- Aurélien Milliat
- Laure Perchepied
- Yann Raineau
Abstract
Achieving ambitious pesticide reduction goals calls for collaboration and shared vision among multiple stakeholders. This study evaluates whether this is the case in three French pesticide‐intensive production sectors: vine‐growing, orchards and fruits & vegetables farming. To do so, it uses the Q‐method to assess farmers' decision‐making criteria when selecting crop protection strategies, taking stock of technical, economic, and organisational constraints, as well as health and environmental impacts. It also compares these criteria with the perspectives of researchers and advisors on farmers' priorities. After combining a factor analysis with a fractional multilogit model accounting for factor loadings, the findings reveal four distinct profiles across the sample: a competitiveness‐oriented approach; a focus on reducing health and environmental impacts; a risk management perspective; and an integrated vision combining multiple priorities. Being a farmer, advisor or researcher significantly influences the likelihood of belonging to one profile or another. However, close interactions between farmers, researchers, and advisors help bridge differences in priorities, fostering more closely aligned perspectives on crop protection strategies. These results point to key indicators that researchers and advisors could leverage to better inform farmers about alternative crop protection methods, ultimately supporting more sustainable agricultural practices.
Suggested Citation
Marianne Lefebvre & Laure Latruffe & Maxime Colin & Adeline Alonso Ugaglia & Julie Borg & Yann Desjeux & Gaëlle Leduc & Aurélien Milliat & Laure Perchepied & Yann Raineau, 2026.
"Criteria for Choosing Crop Protection Strategies: Comparative Perspectives From Farmers, Advisors and Researchers,"
Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 77(2), pages 441-459, June.
Handle:
RePEc:bla:jageco:v:77:y:2026:i:2:p:441-459
DOI: 10.1111/1477-9552.70023
Download full text from publisher
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:jageco:v:77:y:2026:i:2:p:441-459. 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.
We have no bibliographic 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.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-857X .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.