1 - 4 of 4
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. Does it matter who advises farmers? Pest management choices with public and private extension
- Collection:
- Agricultural Communications Documentation Center (ACDC)
- Contributers:
- Wuepper, David (author), Roleff, Nikolaus (author), and Finger, Robert (author)
- Format:
- Journal article
- Publication Date:
- 2020-01-01
- Published:
- Switzerland: Elsevier
- Location:
- Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 204 Document Number: D12514
- Journal Title:
- Food Policy
- Journal Title Details:
- 99
- Notes:
- 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.
3. Facilitating improved chemical use: the phosphine awareness program
- Collection:
- Agricultural Communications Documentation Center (ACDC)
- Contributers:
- White, Graham (author) and Botta, Peter (author)
- Format:
- Conference paper
- Publication Date:
- 2001-10-05
- Published:
- Australia
- Location:
- Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 119 Document Number: C13546
- Notes:
- 5 p., APEN (Australasia Pacific Extension Network) 2001 International Conference, Oct3-5, 2001, at University of South queensland, Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia
4. Quantifying rice farmers’ pest management decisions: beliefs and subjective norms in stem borer control
- Collection:
- Agricultural Communications Documentation Center (ACDC)
- Contributers:
- Heong, K.L. (author) and Escalada, M.M. (author)
- Format:
- Online journal article
- Publication Date:
- 1999-01
- Published:
- Elsevier
- Location:
- Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 138 Document Number: D11478
- Journal Title:
- Crop Protection
- Journal Title Details:
- 18(5)
- Notes:
- 8 pages., via online journal., The paper introduces the pest belief model and Fishbein and Ajzen's theory of reasoned action to analyze farmers’ decisions in stem borer management. Farmers spent an average of $39/ha (median $18) on insecticides believing that if they had not controlled an average loss of 1004 kg/ha or $402 (median 592, $237) would occur. Farmers’ estimates of the worst attack averaged 19 white heads/m2 (median10) with the associated average loss of 1038 kg/ha or $415 (median 592, $270), implying that farmers’ decisions were guided by the worst attacks. Perceived benefits from insecticides were directly related with farmers’ insecticide use and perceived severity. Perceived susceptibility was also high, with 59% of farmers believing that a loss of 450 kg/ha would be “extremely or very likely”. Farmers believed insecticides could destroy natural enemies but placed only moderate importance to conserving them. Health was believed to be very important but farmers had mixed beliefs that spraying could bring about poor health. This study also provides evidence suggesting high peer pressure on farmers’ spray decisions directly influencing perceived benefits from sprays, insecticide spending and spray frequency.