Identifying Socioeconomic Factors Affecting theAdoption of Modern Conservation Tillage Technologies in Darab Region (Multinomial Logit Model Approach)

مجله اقتصاد و توسعه کشاورزی

Article 2, Volume 28, Issue 3, October 2014, Pages 197-203   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jead2.v0i0.26251

Authors

S. Erfanifar^{* 1}; M. Zibaei²; M. Kasraei¹

¹Shiraz University

²Shiraz university

Abstract

To investigate factors affecting the adoption of conservation tillage systems, the tillage methods utilized by wheat producers in the central Darab county are categorized into conventional, reduced-tillage and no tillage systems. For this purpose, multinomial logit model approach using the stata software was applied to the data set collected by random cluster sampling method. The explanatory variables consisted of farmer’s age, farm land size, farmer’s level of education, farmer’s experience on conservation tillage methods, number of family members, off-farm employment, number of land parcels and farmer ‘s information on conservation tillage methods.The results indicated that some variables such as farmer ‘s level of education, farmer’s experience on conservation tillage methods, off-farm employment, farm land size and farmer’s information on conservation tillage systems have positive and significant effect on the adoption of reduced-tillage systems, while the variable of the number of land parcels has a negative and significant effect. Other variables such as the farmer’s age and the number of family members were found insignificants.

Keywords

Technology adoption; wheat; Conservation tillage; Multinomial logit model

References

1- محمدی ا. و ظریفیان ش. 1387. عوامل مؤثر بر وضعیت مکانیزاسیون اراضی کشاورزی (مطالعه موردی شهرستان نیشابور). مجموعه مقالات پنجمین کنگره مهندسی ماشین‌های کشاورزی و مکانیزاسیون.

2- Baltagi B.H. 2008. Econometrics, Fourth edition. Springer Press.

3- Den putts A.V., Govers G., Diels J., Gillijns K., and Demuzere M. 2010. Assessing the effect of soil tillage on crop growth: A meta regression analysis on European crop yield under conservation agriculture. European Journal of Agronomy, 33: 231-241.

4- Feeder G.1980. Farm size, risk aversion and the adoption of new technology under uncertainty. Oxford Economics Paper, 32: 263-283.

5- Gujarati D.N., and Porter D.C. 2009. Basic Econometrics, Fifth Edition. McGraw. Hill press.

6- Hausman J., and McFadden D. 1984. Specification tests for the multinomial logit model. Econometrica, 52: 1219-1240.

7- KnowlerD. andBradshaw B. 2007. Farmers’ adoption of conservation agriculture:A review and synthesis of recent research. Food Policy, 32: 25–48.

8- Lal R., Reicosky D.C., and Hanson J.D. 2007. Evolution of the plough over 10000 years and the rationale for no-till farming. Soil & Tillage Research, 93: 1–12.

9- Line J. Y.1991. Education and innovation adoption in agriculture. Evidence from hybrid rice china, 73: 713-723.

10- Nowak P. 1992. Why farmers adopt production technology. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 47:14-16.

11- Putler D.S., and Zilberman D. 1984. Computer use in agriculture, Evidence from Tulare County, California. American Journal of Agricultural Engineering, 70: 790-802.

12- Scott long J., and Frees J. 2001. Regression models for categorical dependent variables using stata. A stata press publication.

13- Yaron D., Dinar A., and Voet H. 1992. Innovation on family farm: The Nazareth region. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 74: 361-370.

14- Zentner R.P., McCokey B.G., Campbell C.A., Dyck F.B., and Selles F. 1999. Economics of conservation tillage in the semiarid prairie. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 76: 697-705.