IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01123427.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences

Author

Listed:
  • Caroline Roussy

    () (UMR 1302 Structures et Marchés Agricoles, Ressources et Territoires - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - AGROCAMPUS OUEST - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - SMART - Structures et Marchés Agricoles, Ressources et Territoires)

  • Aude Ridier

    () (UMR 1302 Structures et Marchés Agricoles, Ressources et Territoires - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - AGROCAMPUS OUEST - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - SMART - Structures et Marchés Agricoles, Ressources et Territoires)

  • Karim Chaïb

    (INPT - EI Purpan - Ecole d'Ingénieurs de Purpan - Toulouse INP - Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) - Université Fédérale Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées)

Abstract

L'agriculture fait face à de nombreux enjeux à la fois réglementaires, économiques ou agronomiques. Pour y répondre les agronomes conçoivent des innovations agroécologiques de type systémique qui permettent de concilier la protection de l'environnement et les enjeux de productivité. Il s'agit d'innovations combinant des outils agronomiques traditionnels, comme l'allongement des rotations, avec des techniques de production novatrices telles que l'agriculture de précision (ex : bonnes pratiques agricoles, systèmes de culture innovants). L'adoption de ces innovations sur l'exploitation engendre des incertitudes supplémentaires pour les agriculteurs. Afin d'appréhender le comportement d'adoption des agriculteurs, les travaux en économie ont révélés que les préférences face au risque, et plus précisément l'aversion au risque des agriculteurs, est un frein à l'adoption d'innovations dans l'exploitation agricole. Mais d'autres déterminants individuels de l'adoption d'ordres agronomiques, économiques ou psycho-sociaux affectent aussi le processus de décision des agriculteurs. Cependant, malgré les avancées de la recherche sur ce sujet il n'apparait pas de déterminants qui puissent être généralisables dû à l'hétérogénéité des agriculteurs et des contextes de production. Ainsi d'autres déterminants, non directement observables, semblent influer sur la décision d'adoption de l'agriculteur. L'objectif de ce travail est de mettre en évidence le rôle joué à la fois par les déterminants observables mais aussi par des déterminants non observables comme les perceptions du risque et les préférences dans le processus d'adoption d'innovations agroécologiques

Suggested Citation

  • Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01123427
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01123427
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Awudu Abdulai & Wallace E. Huffman, 2005. "The Diffusion of New Agricultural Technologies: The Case of Crossbred-Cow Technology in Tanzania," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(3), pages 645-659.
    2. Sauer, Johannes & Zilberman, David, 2009. "Innovation Behaviour At Farm Level – Selection And Identification," 83rd Annual Conference, March 30 - April 1, 2009, Dublin, Ireland 51073, Agricultural Economics Society.
    3. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge & Daberkow, Stan G. & McBride, William D., 2001. "Decomposing The Size Effect On The Adoption Of Innovations: Agrobiotechnology And Precision Farming," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20527, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Wiktor Adamowicz & Peter Boxall & Michael Williams & Jordan Louviere, 1998. "Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 64-75.
    5. Ward, Clement E. & Vestal, Mallory K. & Doye, Damona G. & Lalman, David L., 2008. "Factors Affecting Adoption of Cow-Calf Production Practices in Oklahoma," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(3), pages 851-863, December.
    6. Kuhfuss, Laure & Preget, Raphaële & Thoyer, Sophie, 2015. "Préférences individuelles et incitations collectives : quels contrats agroenvironnementaux pour la réduction des herbicides par les viticulteurs ?," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 95(1).
    7. Meredith J. Soule & Abebayehu Tegene & Keith D. Wiebe, 2000. "Land Tenure and the Adoption of Conservation Practices," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(4), pages 993-1005.
    8. Pilar Useche & Bradford L. Barham & Jeremy D. Foltz, 2013. "Trait-based Adoption Models Using Ex-Ante and Ex-Post Approaches," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 95(2), pages 332-338.
    9. Blazy, Jean-Marc & Carpentier, Alain & Thomas, Alban, 2011. "The willingness to adopt agro-ecological innovations: Application of choice modelling to Caribbean banana planters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 140-150.
    10. Caswell, Margriet & Fuglie, Keith O. & Ingram, Cassandra & Jans, Sharon & Kascak, Catherine, 2001. "Adoption of Agricultural Production Practices: Lessons Learned from the U.S. Department of Agriculture Area Studies Project," Agricultural Economic Reports 33985, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    11. Makokha, Stella Nabwile & Karugia, Joseph Thuo & Staal, Steven J. & Oluoch-Kosura, Willis, 2007. "Valuation of cow attributes by conjoint analysis: A case study of Western Kenya," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 1(2), pages 1-19, September.
    12. Barham, Bradford L. & Chavas, Jean-Paul & Fitz, Dylan & Salas, Vanessa Ríos & Schechter, Laura, 2014. "The roles of risk and ambiguity in technology adoption," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 204-218.
    13. Gedikoglu, Haluk & McCann, Laura M.J. & Artz, Georgeanne M., 2011. "Off-Farm Employment Effects on Adoption of Nutrient Management Practices," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 40(2), pages 1-14, August.
    14. 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.
    15. Gedikoglu, Haluk & McCann, Laura & Artz, Georgeanne, 2011. "Off-Farm Employment Effects on Adoption of Nutrient Management Practices," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(2), pages 293-306, September.
    16. D'souza, Gerard & Cyphers, Douglas & Phipps, Tim, 1993. "Factors Affecting the Adoption of Sustainable Agricultural Practices," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 159-165, October.
    17. Gillespie, Jeffrey M. & Davis, Christopher G. & Rahelizatovo, Noro C., 2004. "Factors Influencing the Adoption of Breeding Technologies in U.S. Hog Production," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(1), pages 35-47, April.
    18. Adamowicz, Wiktor & Swait, Joffre & Boxall, Peter & Louviere, Jordan & Williams, Michael, 1997. "Perceptions versus Objective Measures of Environmental Quality in Combined Revealed and Stated Preference Models of Environmental Valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 65-84, January.
    19. Maria Espinosa‐Goded & Jesús Barreiro‐Hurlé & Eric Ruto, 2010. "What Do Farmers Want From Agri‐Environmental Scheme Design? A Choice Experiment Approach," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 259-273, June.
    20. JunJie Wu & Bruce A. Babcock, 1998. "The Choice of Tillage, Rotation, and Soil Testing Practices: Economic and Environmental Implications," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(3), pages 494-511.
    21. Nyaupane, Narayan P. & Gillespie, Jeffrey M., 2009. "The Influences Of Land Tenancy And Rotation Selection On Crawfish Farmers’ Adoption Of Best Management Practices," 2009 Annual Meeting, January 31-February 3, 2009, Atlanta, Georgia 46174, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    22. Feder, Gershon, 1980. "Farm Size, Risk Aversion and the Adoption of New Technology under Uncertainty," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 263-283, July.
    23. Christine A. Ervin & David E. Ervin, 1982. "Factors Affecting the Use of Soil Conservation Practices: Hypotheses, Evidence, and Policy Implications," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 58(3), pages 277-292.
    24. Rosenberg, Nathan, 1976. "On Technological Expectations," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 86(343), pages 523-535, September.
    25. Kim, Seon-Ae & Gillespie, Jeffrey M. & Paudel, Krishna P., 2004. "The Effect Of Economic Factors On The Apoption Of Best Management Practices In Beef Cattle Production," 2004 Annual Meeting, February 14-18, 2004, Tulsa, Oklahoma 34670, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    26. Parcell, Joseph L. & Gedikoglu, Haluk, 2013. "A Differential Game Approach to Adoption of Conservation Practices," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 149619, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    27. Noltze, Martin & Schwarze, Stefan & Qaim, Matin, 2012. "Understanding the adoption of system technologies in smallholder agriculture: The system of rice intensification (SRI) in Timor Leste," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 64-73.
    28. Baidu-Forson, Jojo & Ntare, Bonny R. & Waliyar, Farid, 1997. "Utilizing conjoint analysis to design modern crop varieties: Empirical example for groundnut in Niger," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 16(3), pages 219-226, August.
    29. Norris, Patricia E. & Kramer, Randall A., 1990. "The Elicitation of Subjective Probabilities with Applications in Agricultural Economics," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 58(02,03), pages 1-21, December.
    30. Paudel, Krishna P. & Gauthier, Wayne M. & Westra, John V. & Hall, Larry M., 2008. "Factors Influencing and Steps Leading to the Adoption of Best Management Practices by Louisiana Dairy Farmers," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 203-222, April.
    31. Jeffrey Gillespie & Seon‐Ae Kim & Krishna Paudel, 2007. "Why don't producers adopt best management practices? An analysis of the beef cattle industry," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 36(1), pages 89-102, January.
    32. Hanley, Nick & Mourato, Susana & Wright, Robert E, 2001. "Choice Modelling Approaches: A Superior Alternative for Environmental Valuation?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 435-462, July.
    33. Glenn W. Harrison & Morten I. Lau & E. Elisabet Rutström, 2007. "Estimating Risk Attitudes in Denmark: A Field Experiment," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 109(2), pages 341-368, June.
    34. Asrat, Sinafikeh & Yesuf, Mahmud & Carlsson, Fredrik & Wale, Edilegnaw, 2010. "Farmers' preferences for crop variety traits: Lessons for on-farm conservation and technology adoption," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2394-2401, October.
    35. Hardaker, J. Brian & Lien, Gudbrand, 2010. "Probabilities for decision analysis in agriculture and rural resource economics: The need for a paradigm change," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(6), pages 345-350, July.
    36. Madhu Khanna, 2001. "Sequential Adoption of Site-Specific Technologies and its Implications for Nitrogen Productivity: A Double Selectivity Model," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(1), pages 35-51.
    37. Unknown, 2013. "SAEA 2013 Annual Meetings," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 45, pages 1-1, August.
    38. Ghazalian, Pascal L. & Larue, Bruno & West, Gale E., 2009. "Best Management Practices to Enhance Water Quality: Who is Adopting Them?," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(3), pages 1-20, December.
    39. Arnaud Reynaud & Stéphane Couture, 2012. "Stability of risk preference measures: results from a field experiment on French farmers," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(2), pages 203-221, August.
    40. Awudu Abdulai & Wallace Huffman, 2014. "The Adoption and Impact of Soil and Water Conservation Technology: An Endogenous Switching Regression Application," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 90(1), pages 26-43.
    41. Phoebe Koundouri & Céline Nauges & Vangelis Tzouvelekas, 2006. "Technology Adoption under Production Uncertainty: Theory and Application to Irrigation Technology," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(3), pages 657-670.
    42. Allen M. Featherstone & Barry K. Goodwin, 1993. "Factors Influencing a Farmer's Decision to Invest in Long-Term Conservation Improvements," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 69(1), pages 67-81.
    43. 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.
    44. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, August.
    45. Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2011. "Farmers adoption of integrated crop protection and organic farming: Do moral and social concerns matter?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1536-1545, June.
    46. Amir K. Abadi Ghadim & David J. Pannell & Michael P. Burton, 2005. "Risk, uncertainty, and learning in adoption of a crop innovation," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 33(1), pages 1-9, July.
    47. Tano, Kouadio & Kamuanga, Mulumba & Faminow, Merle D. & Swallow, Brent, 2003. "Using conjoint analysis to estimate farmer's preferences for cattle traits in West Africa," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 393-407, July.
    48. Kebede, Yohannes & Gunjal, Kisan & Coffin, Garth, 1990. "Adoption of new technologies in Ethiopian agriculture: The case of Tegulet-Bulga district Shoa province," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 4(1), pages 27-43, April.
    49. Stine Broch & Suzanne Vedel, 2012. "Using Choice Experiments to Investigate the Policy Relevance of Heterogeneity in Farmer Agri-Environmental Contract Preferences," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 561-581, April.
    50. Bradford L. Barham & Jeremy D. Foltz & Douglas Jackson-Smith & Sunung Moon, 2004. "The Dynamics of Agricultural Biotechnology Adoption: Lessons from series rBST Use in Wisconsin, 1994–2001," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 61-72.
    51. Paudel, Krishna P. & Pandit, Mahesh & Mishra, Ashok K. & Segarra, Eduardo, 2011. "Why Don't Farmers Adopt Precision Farming Technologies in Cotton Production?," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 104828, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    52. Jeremy D. Foltz & Hsiu-Hui Chang, 2002. "The Adoption and Profitability of rbST on Connecticut Dairy Farms," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(4), pages 1021-1032.
    53. Pandit, Mahesh & Mishra, Ashok K. & Paudel, Krishna P. & Larkin, Sherry L. & Rejesus, Roderick M. & Lambert, Dayton M. & English, Burton C. & Larson, James A. & Velandia, Margarita M. & Roberts, Rolan, 2011. "Reasons for Adopting Precision Farming: A Case Study of U.S. Cotton Farmers," 2011 Annual Meeting, February 5-8, 2011, Corpus Christi, Texas 98575, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    54. Adesina, Akinwumi A. & Zinnah, Moses M., 1993. "Technology characteristics, farmers' perceptions and adoption decisions: A Tobit model application in Sierra Leone," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 9(4), pages 297-311, December.
    55. Greiner, Romy & Patterson, Louisa & Miller, Owen, 2009. "Motivations, risk perceptions and adoption of conservation practices by farmers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 99(2-3), pages 86-104, February.
    56. Bocqueho, Geraldine & Jacquet, Florence & Reynaud, Arnaud, 2011. "Expected Utility or Prospect Theory Maximizers? Results from a Structural Model based on Field-experiment Data," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114257, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    57. Luisa Menapace & Gregory Colson & Roberta Raffaelli, 2013. "Risk Aversion, Subjective Beliefs, and Farmer Risk Management Strategies," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 95(2), pages 384-389.
    58. Nick Hanley & Douglas MacMillan & Robert E. Wright & Craig Bullock & Ian Simpson & Dave Parsisson & Bob Crabtree, 1998. "Contingent Valuation Versus Choice Experiments: Estimating the Benefits of Environmentally Sensitive Areas in Scotland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1), pages 1-15, March.
    59. D'Souza, Gerard E. & Cyphers, Douglas & Phipps, Tim T., 1993. "Factors Affecting The Adoption Of Sustainable Agricultural Practices," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 22(2), pages 1-7, October.
    60. Machina, Mark J & Schmeidler, David, 1992. "A More Robust Definition of Subjective Probability," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(4), pages 745-780, July.
    61. Mariano, Marc Jim & Villano, Renato & Fleming, Euan, 2012. "Factors influencing farmers’ adoption of modern rice technologies and good management practices in the Philippines," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 41-53.
    62. Paudel, Krishna P. & Gauthier, Wayne M. & Westra, John V. & Hall, Larry M., 2008. "Factors Influencing and Steps Leading to the Adoption of Best Management Practices by Louisiana Dairy Farmers," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 40(1), pages 1-20, April.
    63. Jeanne Dachary-Bernard, 2004. "Une évaluation économique du paysage : une application de la méthode des choix multi-attributs aux Monts d'Arrée," Post-Print hal-00450861, HAL.
    64. Adesina, Akinwumi A. & Baidu-Forson, Jojo, 1995. "Farmers' perceptions and adoption of new agricultural technology: evidence from analysis in Burkina Faso and Guinea, West Africa," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, October.
    65. François Bonnieux & Philippe Le Goffe & Dominique Vermersch, 1995. "La méthode d'évaluation contingente : application à la qualité des eaux littorales," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 117(1), pages 89-106.
    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. Féménia, Fabienne & Letort, Elodie, 2016. "How to achieve significant reduction in pesticide use? An empirical evaluation of the impacts of pesticide taxation associated to a change in cropping practice," Working Papers 233482, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    2. Femenia, Fabienne & Letort, Elodie, 2016. "How to significantly reduce pesticide use: An empirical evaluation of the impacts of pesticide taxation associated with a change in cropping practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 27-37.
    3. Deffontaines, Landry & Mottes, Charles & Della Rossa, Pauline & Lesueur-Jannoyer, Magalie & Cattan, Philippe & Le Bail, Marianne, 2020. "How farmers learn to change their weed management practices: Simple changes lead to system redesign in the French West Indies," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    4. Bago, Jean-Louis & Koutaba, Aude E. A. & Valéa, Aristide B., 2018. "Factors Affecting Adoption of Improved Crops by Rural Farmers in Niger," AfricArxiv b8ezn, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    adoption; innovations agroécologiques; perceptions; révélation des préférences; risque;

    JEL classification:

    • Q1 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles

    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:hal:journl:hal-01123427. 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: (CCSD). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.