IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/erevae/v43y2016i3p359-382..html

Understanding producers' motives for adopting sustainable practices: the role of expected rewards, risk perception and risk tolerance

Author

Listed:
  • Andres Trujillo-Barrera
  • Joost M. E. Pennings
  • Dianne Hofenk

Abstract

Understanding the motives and risk attitudes of producers to engage in sustainable practices is important for policy-makers who wish to increase the likelihood of adoption and improve the design of incentives. This article examines the underlying motives of producers to adopt sustainable practices. We focus on expected economic, social and personal rewards and analyse the role of producers' financial risk perception and risk tolerance. Results from personal interviews with 164 hog producers show that the adoption of sustainable practices is affected by expected economic rewards but not by social and personal rewards. Further, while perceived risk is a barrier to the adoption of sustainable practices, risk tolerance is a positive moderator of the relationship between economic rewards and adoption. In addition, perceived tax benefits and turnover have a significant positive relationship with adoption, while education and age do not play a role.

Suggested Citation

  • Andres Trujillo-Barrera & Joost M. E. Pennings & Dianne Hofenk, 2016. "Understanding producers' motives for adopting sustainable practices: the role of expected rewards, risk perception and risk tolerance," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 43(3), pages 359-382.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:erevae:v:43:y:2016:i:3:p:359-382.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/erae/jbv038
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    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:oup:erevae:v:43:y:2016:i:3:p:359-382.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.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.