Herrera, Beatriz (author), Gerster-Bentaya, Maria (author), Tzouramani, Irene (author), Knierim, Andrea (author), and University of Hohenheim
Agricultural Economics Research Institute
Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2019
Published:
Germany: Taylor & Francis
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 7 Document Number: D10258
22 pages., Via online journal., Purpose: This study explores the use of advisory services by farm managers and its linkages with the economic, environmental and social performance of farms.
Design/methodology/approach: Using cluster analysis we determined groups of farms according to their sustainability performance and explored the correlations between contacts with advisory services and a set of farm-level sustainability indicators.
Findings: There exist significant differences in the number of farmers’ contacts with advisory services across countries, type of farms, farmers’ degree of agricultural education, utilized agricultural area, legal type of farm ownership and economic size of the farms. We identified three groups of farms that have different sustainability performance, are different in farm characteristics and relate differently to advisory services. The number of contacts with advisory services is positively related to the adoption of innovations, the number of information sources utilized and the adoption of farm risk management measures. We find no clear linear relationship between advisory services and environmental sustainability.
Theoretical implications: This study derives hypotheses to analyze causalities between indicators of farm-level sustainability and advisory services.
Practical implications: Results suggest the importance of taking into account the heterogeneity of farming systems for the design, targeting and evaluation of advisory services. In addition, results confirm the importance of selection of indicators that can be used in multiple sites.
Originality/value: We used a harmonized indicator of advisory services and a harmonized set of farm-level sustainability indicators in nine different EU countries that could be used to evaluate the role of advisory services in the achievement of multiple objectives in different groups of farms in multiple sites.
8 pages, Purpose
Inappropriate application of pesticides is quite common in the study area, causing health issues and in some cases fatalities. The intent of the current study is to gauge the farmers’ level of knowledge on the safe usage of pesticides and biosafety to keep the famers healthy through the focused extension programs.
Methodology
The study is carried out in 41 union councils of Tehsil Sahiwal, District Sahiwal, Punjab, Pakistan. Data are collected through a cluster sampling technique by conducting face-to-face interviews. Statistical analysis is used to determine relationships and interpret them.
Results
The findings show that the majority of farmers (87.2%) earn their livelihoods from farming and 2.1% are traders. More than half of the respondents (51.8%) own small land-holdings with an area of 4–8 ha, with only 16.4% having a land area of more than 12 ha. The results also reveal that the majority of respondents obtain information from private agents and only about one third (34.4%) respondents get information on the safe usage of pesticides from the Department of Agriculture (Extension). The internet has emerged as a fast and reliable source of information in the new paradigm; however, only 14.4% of the respondents take advantage of this economical and fast information tool/medium. The findings also reveal that the farmers employ unhealthy and poor practices by not following the recommendations regarding the safe usage of pesticides. The study also reveals that more than half of the farmers (54.4%) use unsafe storage practices on their farms, and about 48.2% do not follow the instructions.
Conclusions
Inappropriate application of pesticides can have negative effects on human health and the adoption safety measures are necessary to avoid the harmful effects of pesticides. Due to high illiteracy in the area, farmers mainly seek advice of neighboring farmers, having ignorance on the biosafety issues. Variables like education level, land ownership, total land size and the trainings on safe pesticide usage significantly influence the knowledge level of farmers on the safe usage of pesticides.
Recommendations
Farmers do not follow the recommendations of the extension department or the instructions printed on pesticide bottles/containers, therefore educational (formal and informal) and training programs are necessary on the safe pesticide usage to upgrade their skills and expertise on safe usage of pesticides and the importance of biosafety.
21 pages, via Online Journal, This paper explores the role of regulation and legislation on influencing the development and diffusion of technologies and methods of crop production. To do this, the change in pesticide registration under European Regulation 1107/2009 ‘Placing Plant Protection Products on the Market’ was followed through the UK’s agricultural system of innovation. Fieldwork included: a series of interviews conducted with scientists, agronomists and industry organisations; a programme of visiting agricultural events; as well as sending an electronic survey to British potato growers. The innovation system is noted to have made the legislation less restrictive than originally proposed. The most notable system response to the legislation is the adjustment of agrochemical company pesticide discovery strategy and their expansion into biologically derived treatments. There have also been other innovation responses: agricultural seed companies have been breeding in pathogen resistance in their cultivars; agricultural consultancies are prepared to recommend pathogen-resistant seeds; scientists are using the change as justification for adopting their solutions; the agricultural levy boards funded research into off-label pesticide uses; and producers, potato growers in particular, have been seeking advice, but not changing their growing practices.
14pgs, The World Health Organization (WHO) has used communication methods to promote the international ban of the agricultural pesticides paraquat, glyphosate and chlorpyrifos. This ban has led to misunderstanding among farmers who still use these chemicals, which may be available under different brand names. Communication with the non-scientific community is uncertain leading to miscommunication, especially where scientific language is used. Governments have banned the use of these agricultural chemicals. The scientific arguments are not necessarily understood by famers so they may ignore the prohibition and continue using them or other similar chemicals. This study uses story-telling and qualitative research methods where a questionnaire is combined with the content analytical technique. The quantitative research method was used to collect data in the field where 351 participants took part. Participatory action research is a method where community farmers engaged in self-reflection on the impact of chemicals on their fields, their health and the health of others. Their understanding of the non-chemical usage model and good agricultural practice farmers in the vicinity, especially as they were personally involved in the creation of the media from script preparation, to acting, filming, and evaluating the final docu-dramas. The findings of the docu–drama programmes of 5 GAP farmers are presented to identify the perception of how to avoid using chemicals and their solutions for tangerine farmers through a manual that is the media output from the project and the resulting findings suggesting that the factors related to the effectiveness of scientific communication are divided into pull factors and push factors.
8 pages, Does it matter whether farmers receive advice on pest management strategies from public or from private (pesticide company affiliated) extension services? We use survey data from 733 Swiss fruit growers who are currently contending with an infestation by an invasive pest, the fruit fly Drosophila Suzukii. We find that farmers who are advised by public extension services are more likely (+9–10%) to use preventive measures (e.g. nets) while farmers who are advised by private extension services are more likely (+8–9%) to use synthetic insecticides. These results are robust to the inclusion of various covariates, ways to cluster standard errors, and inverse probability weighting. We also show that our results are unlikely to be driven by omitted variable bias. Our findings have implications for the current debates on both the ongoing privatization of agricultural extension and concerns regarding negative environmental and health externalities of pesticide use.
Online from publication. 2 pages., Identification of produce items cited as problematic and acceptable by the Environmental Working Group. Article indicates that more than 99 percent of produce samples tested for these reports have residue levels that are compliant with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards (which EWG considers insufficient).
15pgs, Research has suggested to not solely include cognitive processes but also affective processes in economic choice modeling. Studying Medjool dates, we conducted a laboratory experiment combining choice experiments and eye-tracking to account for cognitive processes. In addition, participants indicated their level of worry related to production practices to account for affective processes. Our results show that consumers worry more about pesticide residues than genetic modification in foods. They also pay more attention to labels related to these production practices compared to other labels; and the production practice labels received the highest willingness to pay (WTP). Results from linear regressions show that both cognitive and affective processes are associated with WTP. Especially in the full model for WTP for pesticide-free labeling an increase of attention by 1 s increases WTP on average by $0.10 and an increase of the level of worry from one category to the next increases WTP on average by $0.17. Overall, results show that including both cognitive and affective processes as explanatory variables is important when determining factors associated with WTP.
