IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v156y2017icp115-125.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predicting farmer uptake of new agricultural practices: A tool for research, extension and policy

Author

Listed:
  • Kuehne, Geoff
  • Llewellyn, Rick
  • Pannell, David J.
  • Wilkinson, Roger
  • Dolling, Perry
  • Ouzman, Jackie
  • Ewing, Mike

Abstract

There is much existing knowledge about the factors that influence adoption of new practices in agriculture but few attempts have been made to construct predictive quantitative models of adoption for use by those planning agricultural research, development, extension and policy. ADOPT (Adoption and Diffusion Outcome Prediction Tool) is the result of such an attempt, providing predictions of a practice's likely rate and peak level of adoption as well as estimating the importance of various factors influencing adoption. It employs a conceptual framework that incorporates a range of variables, including variables related to economics, risk, environmental outcomes, farmer networks, characteristics of the farm and the farmer, and the ease and convenience of the new practice. The ability to learn about the relative advantage of the practice, as influenced by characteristics of both the practice and the potential adopters, plays a central role. Users of ADOPT respond to 22 questions related to: a) characteristics of the practice that influence its relative advantage, b) characteristics of the population influencing their perceptions of the relative advantage of the practice, c) characteristics of the practice influencing the ease and speed of learning about it, and d) characteristics of the potential adopters that influence their ability to learn about the practice. ADOPT provides a prediction of the diffusion curve of the practice and sensitivity analyses of the factors influencing the speed and peak level of adoption. In this paper the model is described and its ability to predict the diffusion of agricultural practices is demonstrated using examples of new crop types, new cropping technology and grazing options. As well as providing predictions, ADOPT is designed to increase the conceptual understanding and consideration of the adoption process by those involved in agricultural research, development, extension and policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Kuehne, Geoff & Llewellyn, Rick & Pannell, David J. & Wilkinson, Roger & Dolling, Perry & Ouzman, Jackie & Ewing, Mike, 2017. "Predicting farmer uptake of new agricultural practices: A tool for research, extension and policy," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 115-125.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:156:y:2017:i:c:p:115-125
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2017.06.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X16304541
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. John W. Cary & Roger L. Wilkinson, 1997. "Perceived Profitability And Farmers' Conservation Behaviour," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(1-3), pages 13-21.
    2. Teresa Serra & David Zilberman & José M. Gil, 2008. "Differential uncertainties and risk attitudes between conventional and organic producers: the case of Spanish arable crop farmers," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 39(2), pages 219-229, September.
    3. Marra, Michele & Pannell, David J. & Abadi Ghadim, Amir, 2003. "The economics of risk, uncertainty and learning in the adoption of new agricultural technologies: where are we on the learning curve?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 75(2-3), pages 215-234.
    4. Lynne, Gary D. & Franklin Casey, C. & Hodges, Alan & Rahmani, Mohammed, 1995. "Conservation technology adoption decisions and the theory of planned behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 581-598, December.
    5. Hoag, Dana L. & Ascough, James C. & Frasier, W. Marshall, 1999. "Farm Computer Adoption in the Great Plains," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(01), pages 57-67, April.
    6. Fuglie, Keith O., 1999. "Conservation Tillage And Pesticide Use In The Cornbelt," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 31(1), pages 1-15, April.
    7. Joly, P.B. & Gaunand, A. & Colinet, L. & Larédo, P. & Lemarié, S. & Matt, M., 2015. "ASIRPA: a comprehensive theory-based approach to assessing the societal impacts of a research organization," Working Papers 2015-04, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    8. Kuehne, Geoff & Nicholson, Cam & Robertson, Michael & Llewellyn, Rick & McDonald, Cam, 2012. "Engaging project proponents in R&D evaluation using bio-economic and socio-economic tools," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 94-103.
    9. Alcon, Francisco & Tapsuwan, Sorada & Martínez-Paz, José M. & Brouwer, Roy & de Miguel, María D., 2014. "Forecasting deficit irrigation adoption using a mixed stakeholder assessment methodology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 183-193.
    10. Thornton, PK & Schuetz, T & Förch, W & Cramer, L & Abreu, D & Vermeulen, S & Campbell, BM, 2017. "Responding to global change: A theory of change approach to making agricultural research for development outcome-based," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 145-153.
    11. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    12. Jensen, Richard, 1982. "Adoption and diffusion of an innovation of uncertain profitability," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 182-193, June.
    13. Douthwaite, B. & Keatinge, J. D. H. & Park, J. R., 2001. "Why promising technologies fail: the neglected role of user innovation during adoption," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 819-836, May.
    14. 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.
    15. Gary D. Lynne & J. S. Shonkwiler & Leandro R. Rola, 1988. "Attitudes and Farmer Conservation Behavior," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 70(1), pages 12-19.
    16. 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.
    17. Ekboir, Javier, 2003. "Why impact analysis should not be used for research evaluation and what the alternatives are," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 166-184, November.
    18. Lindner, Robert K. & Pardey, Philip G. & Jarrett, Frank G., 1982. "Distance To Information Source And The Time Lag To Early Adoption Of Trace Element Fertilisers," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 0(Number 2), pages 1-16, August.
    19. Schut, Marc & Klerkx, Laurens & Rodenburg, Jonne & Kayeke, Juma & Hinnou, Léonard C. & Raboanarielina, Cara M. & Adegbola, Patrice Y. & van Ast, Aad & Bastiaans, Lammert, 2015. "RAAIS: Rapid Appraisal of Agricultural Innovation Systems (Part I). A diagnostic tool for integrated analysis of complex problems and innovation capacity," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 1-11.
    20. John Marangos & Catherine Williams, 2005. "The effect of drought on uncertainty and agricultural investment in Australia," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(4), pages 575-594.
    21. Fuglie, Keith O., 1999. "Conservation Tillage and Pesticide Use in the Cornbelt," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(01), pages 133-147, April.
    22. Kassie, Menale & Jaleta, Moti & Shiferaw, Bekele & Mmbando, Frank & Mekuria, Mulugetta, 2013. "Adoption of interrelated sustainable agricultural practices in smallholder systems: Evidence from rural Tanzania," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 525-540.
    23. Zepeda, Lydia, 1990. "Predicting Bovine Somatotropin Use By California Dairy Farmers," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 15(1), pages 1-8, July.
    24. W. Lesser & John Bernard & Kaafee Billah, 1999. "Methodologies for ex ante projections of adoption rates for agbiotech products: Lessons learned from rBST," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(2), pages 149-162.
    25. Foran, Tira & Butler, James R.A. & Williams, Liana J. & Wanjura, Wolf J. & Hall, Andy & Carter, Lucy & Carberry, Peter S., 2014. "Taking Complexity in Food Systems Seriously: An Interdisciplinary Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 85-101.
    26. Douthwaite, Boru & Alvarez, Sophie & Thiele, Graham & Mackay, Ronald, 2008. "Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis: A practical method for project planning and evaluation," ILAC Briefs 52527, Institutional Learning and Change (ILAC) Initiative.
    27. Gershon Feder & Gerald T. O'Mara, 1982. "On Information and Innovation Diffusion: A Bayesian Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 64(1), pages 145-147.
    28. Dixon, Robert J, 1980. "Hybrid Corn Revisited," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(6), pages 1451-1461, September.
    29. Kenneth A. Baerenklau & Keith C. Knapp, 2007. "Dynamics of Agricultural Technology Adoption: Age Structure, Reversibility, and Uncertainty," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(1), pages 190-201.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Blog mentions

    As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. 314 – ADOPT goes online
      by David Pannell in Pannell Discussions on 2018-06-11 15:10:59

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:eee:agisys:v:164:y:2018:i:c:p:84-94 is not listed on IDEAS

    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:eee:agisys:v:156:y:2017:i:c:p:115-125. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    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 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.

    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.