13 pages, Encouraging farmers to increase the use of organic fertilizer will be conducive to promoting the green transformation of farmers’ production and realize sustainable agricultural development. As a long-term investment, the accuracy of farmers’ access to organic fertilizer information and the supporting role of credit are important factors that affect their organic fertilizer application decisions. However, the existence of information asymmetry in the organic fertilizer market and the credit constraints in the financial market, which restricts the enthusiasm of farmers to apply organic fertilizer. In recent years, the rapid development of the Internet in China’s rural areas has effectively alleviated the degree of information asymmetry in rural areas, and improved farmers’ access to credit, which provides a new opportunity for farmers to increase the application rate of organic fertilizer. This study takes 1030 apple growers in the main apple production areas of China as the research object, and employs Tobit model, IV-Tobit model and mediation effect model to explore the impact of internet use on farmers’ organic fertilizer investment. The results show that internet use can promote farmers’ organic fertilizer investment. After addressing the endogeneity issue and the robustness test, the conclusion is still robust. Heterogeneity analysis shows that internet use has a more significant impact on organic fertilizer investment in the older generation and the large-scale group of farmers. The mechanism analysis shows that internet use affects farmers’ organic fertilizer investment through improving access to credit. Therefore, it is necessary to continuously improve the construction of rural digital infrastructure, accelerate the development of the Internet in rural areas, and actively guide financial resources to agriculture, so as to effectively promote the green transformation of agricultural production.
5pgs, Millions of Maine’s fiber dollars is going to a mix of government entities, regional internet service providers, and large, out-of-state companies. Some worry these national companies have not worked well with communities in the past. Others say the investments should be evaluated on what they deliver, not who gets the money.
