25 pages, n many countries farmers face pressure to adopt practices to promote sustainability and resilience while ensuring efficient business management to produce food and other agricultural products at reasonable cost. Given a policy context in which voluntary action is preferred over government regulation, understanding farmers’ motivation to embrace recommended practices has become a major subject for research. Increasingly, this endeavour is guided by the theory of planned behaviour, a reasoned action approach (Fishbein and Ajzen, 2010). We provide a brief overview of the theory of planned behaviour and an elaboration of good practices in the assessment of the theory’s constructs. We systematically review 124 applications of the theory to farmer behaviour on a number of specific review criteria. Based on observations of improper use, we consider theoretical and methodological issues and provide recommendations for research design and data analysis.
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.
13 pages, Online via UI Library electronic subscription, Described the mutually perceived influence of bankers and insurers on their agricultural clients' decision-making regarding health and safety. Authors concluded that insurers and bankers may prove both positive and negative, as farmers may be skeptical about the intention of the incentives, making messaging critical.
