IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/14764.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Integrated Pest Management Portfolios in UK Arable Farming: Results of a Farmer Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Bailey, Alastair
  • Bertaglia, Marco
  • Fraser, Iain
  • Sharma, Abhijit
  • Douarin, Elodie

Abstract

BACKGROUND. Farmers are faced with a wide range of pest management (PM) options which can be adopted in isolation or alongside complement or substitute strategies. This paper presents the results of a survey of UK cereal producers focusing on the character and diversity of PM strategies currently used by, or available to, farmers. In addition, the survey asked various questions pertaining to agricultural policy participation, attitude toward environmental issues, sources of PM advice and information and the important characteristics of PM technologies. RESULTS. The results indicate that many farmers do make use of a suite of PM techniques and that their choice of integrated PM (IPM) portfolio appears to be jointly dictated by farm characteristics and Government policy. Results also indicate that portfolio choice does affect the number of subsequent insecticide applications per crop. CONCLUSIONS. These results help to identify the type of IPM portfolios considered adoptable by farmers and highlight the importance of substitution in IPM portfolios. As such, these results will help to direct R&D effort toward the realisation of more sustainable PM approaches and aid the identification of potential portfolio adopters. These findings highlight the opportunity a revised agri-environmental policy design could generate in terms of by enhancing coherent IPM portfolio adoption.

Suggested Citation

  • Bailey, Alastair & Bertaglia, Marco & Fraser, Iain & Sharma, Abhijit & Douarin, Elodie, 2009. "Integrated Pest Management Portfolios in UK Arable Farming: Results of a Farmer Survey," MPRA Paper 14764, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:14764
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/14764/1/MPRA_paper_14764.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Abhijit Sharma & Alastair Bailey & Iain Fraser, 2011. "Technology Adoption and Pest Control Strategies Among UK Cereal Farmers: Evidence from Parametric and Nonparametric Count Data Models," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(1), pages 73-92, February.
    2. Stephen Jess & David I. Matthews & Archie K. Murchie & Michael K. Lavery, 2018. "Pesticide Use in Northern Ireland’s Arable Crops from 1992–2016 and Implications for Future Policy Development," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-16, August.
    3. Waters, James, 2013. "The influence of information sources on inter- and intra-firm diffusion: evidence from UK farming," MPRA Paper 50955, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Case, S.D.C. & Oelofse, M. & Hou, Y. & Oenema, O. & Jensen, L.S., 2017. "Farmer perceptions and use of organic waste products as fertilisers – A survey study of potential benefits and barriers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 84-95.
    5. Margaux Lapierre & Alexandre Sauquet & Julie Subervie, 2019. "Providing technical assistance to peer networks to reduce pesticide use in Europe: Evidence from the French Ecophyto plan," CEE-M Working Papers hal-02190979, CEE-M, Universtiy of Montpellier, CNRS, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro.
    6. Valborg Kvakkestad & Åsmund Lægreid Steiro & Arild Vatn, 2021. "Pesticide Policies and Farm Behavior: The Introduction of Regulations for Integrated Pest Management," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Pest management; pesticide alternatives; technology and portfolio approaches;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services
    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation
    • O14 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Industrialization; Manufacturing and Service Industries; Choice of Technology

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:pra:mprapa:14764. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.