IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea99/21599.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Sequential Adoption Of Site-Specific Technologies And Its Implications For Nitrogen Productivity: A Double Selectivity Model

Author

Listed:
  • Khanna, Madhu

Abstract

This paper analyzes the sequential decision to adopt two site-specific technologies, soil testing and variable rate technology (VRT), and their impact on nitrogen productivity in four Midwestern states. The results indicate that while farm location was a key variable influencing the adoption of soil testing, human capital and innovativeness of farmers had a significant impact on the adoption of VRT. A double selectivity model applied to correct for sample selection bias shows that gains in nitrogen productivity due to the two adoption decisions are largest for farms with below average soil quality and statistically insignificant for farms with above average soil quality. These findings have implications for the targeting of public policies designed to promote adoption to reduce nitrate pollution.

Suggested Citation

  • Khanna, Madhu, 1999. "Sequential Adoption Of Site-Specific Technologies And Its Implications For Nitrogen Productivity: A Double Selectivity Model," 1999 Annual meeting, August 8-11, Nashville, TN 21599, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea99:21599
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/21599/files/sp99kh01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hausman, Jerry A & Wise, David A, 1978. "A Conditional Probit Model for Qualitative Choice: Discrete Decisions Recognizing Interdependence and Heterogeneous Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(2), pages 403-426, March.
    2. Howard D. Leathers & Melinda Smale, 1991. "A Bayesian Approach to Explaining Sequential Adoption of Components of a Technological Package," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(3), pages 734-742.
    3. Kevin T. McNamara & Michael E. Wetzstein & G. Keith Douce, 1991. "Factors Affecting Peanut Producer Adoption of Integrated Pest Management," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 13(1), pages 129-139.
    4. Ariel Dinar & Mark Campbell & David Zilberman, 1992. "Adoption of improved irrigation and drainage reduction technologies under limiting environmental conditions," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(4), pages 373-398, July.
    5. Fishe, Raymond P. H. & Trost, R. P. & Lurie, Philip M., 1981. "Labor force earnings and college choice of young women: An examination of selectivity bias and comparative advantage," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 169-191, April.
    6. Daniel S. Putler & David Zilberman, 1988. "Computer Use in Agriculture: Evidence from Tulare County, California," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 70(4), pages 790-802.
    7. Feder, Gershon & Just, Richard E & Zilberman, David, 1985. "Adoption of Agricultural Innovations in Developing Countries: A Survey," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 33(2), pages 255-298, January.
    8. Jeffrey H. Dorfman, 1996. "Modeling Multiple Adoption Decisions in a Joint Framework," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(3), pages 547-557.
    9. Lee, Lung-Fei, 1978. "Unionism and Wage Rates: A Simultaneous Equations Model with Qualitative and Limited Dependent Variables," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 19(2), pages 415-433, June.
    10. Keith O. Fuglie & Darrell J. Bosch, 1995. "Economic and Environmental Implications of Soil Nitrogen Testing: A Switching-Regression Analysis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(4), pages 891-900.
    11. Gershon Feder, 1982. "Adoption of Interrelated Agricultural Innovations: Complementarity and the Impacts of Risk, Scale, and Credit," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 64(1), pages 94-101.
    Full references (including those not matched with items 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:ags:aaea99:21599. 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: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.

    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.