IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ifaamr/307218.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Farmer awareness, perceptions and adoption of unmanned aerial vehicles: evidence from Missouri

Author

Listed:
  • Skevas, Theodoros
  • Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas

Abstract

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) are expected to play an important role in the future of farming. Because UAVs can provide precise, real-time information on biotic and abiotic stressors in agricultural production while they can also carry out autonomous operations to counter them, they can enhance farm profitability while reducing the environmental footprint of agriculture. Yet little is known about the current adoption of UAVs in agriculture or about the profile of the adopters. In this study we report actual and expected adoption of UAVs for a rich cross section of crop farmers and examine the factors that shape such adoption. In our empirical analysis we describe the inherent farmer heterogeneity – as shaped by differential awareness of UAV applications, perceptions of technical complexities, expectations of economic and environmental benefits and various socioeconomic factors – and analyze which of all these factors shape individual farmer adoption of UAVs. We also estimate and describe a small number of farmer segments that might adequately describe general population tendencies in the adoption of UAVs.

Suggested Citation

  • Skevas, Theodoros & Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas, 2020. "Farmer awareness, perceptions and adoption of unmanned aerial vehicles: evidence from Missouri," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 23(3), August.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ifaamr:307218
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.307218
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/307218/files/ifamr2019.0151.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.307218?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shi Zheng & Zhigang Wang & Cheryl Joy Wachenheim, 2018. "Technology adoption among farmers in Jilin Province, China," China Agricultural Economic Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 11(1), pages 206-216, August.
    2. Bradford L. Barham & Jeremy D. Foltz & Douglas Jackson-Smith & Sunung Moon, 2004. "The Dynamics of Agricultural Biotechnology Adoption: Lessons from series rBST Use in Wisconsin, 1994–2001," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 61-72.
    3. Läpple, Doris & Rensburg, Tom Van, 2011. "Adoption of organic farming: Are there differences between early and late adoption?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1406-1414, May.
    4. Amemiya, Takeshi, 1981. "Qualitative Response Models: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 1483-1536, December.
    5. Wooldridge, Jeffrey M., 2014. "Quasi-maximum likelihood estimation and testing for nonlinear models with endogenous explanatory variables," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 182(1), pages 226-234.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Collins M. Bulinda & Eric O. Gido & Holger Kirscht & Chrysantus M. Tanga, 2023. "Gendered Awareness of Pig and Poultry Farmers on the Potential of Black Soldier Fly ( Hermetia illucens ) Farming in Kenya," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-14, February.
    2. Theodoros Skevas & Ray Massey & Jasper Grashuis, 2022. "Farmer adoption and intensity of use of extreme weather adaptation and mitigation strategies: evidence from a sample of Missouri farmers," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 174(1), pages 1-23, September.
    3. Ioannis Skevas, 2023. "A novel modeling framework for quantifying spatial spillovers on total factor productivity growth and its components," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(4), pages 1221-1247, August.
    4. Wang, Tong & Jin, Hailong & Sieverding, Heidi & Kumar, Sandeep & Miao, Yuxin & Rao, Xudong & Obembe, Oladipo & Mirzakhani Nafchi, Ali & Redfearn, Daren & Cheye, Stephen, 2023. "Understanding farmer views of precision agriculture profitability in the U.S. Midwest," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    5. Osrof, Hazem Yusuf & Tan, Cheng Ling & Angappa, Gunasekaran & Yeo, Sook Fern & Tan, Kim Hua, 2023. "Adoption of smart farming technologies in field operations: A systematic review and future research agenda," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    6. Limin Yu & Sha Tao & Yanzhao Ren & Wanlin Gao & Xinliang Liu & Yongkang Hu & Redmond R. Shamshiri, 2021. "Comprehensive Evaluation of Soil Moisture Sensing Technology Applications Based on Analytic Hierarchy Process and Delphi," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-16, November.
    7. Aliloo, Jamileh & Abbasi, Enayat & Karamidehkordi, Esmail & Ghanbari Parmehr, Ebadat & Canavari, Maurizio, 2024. "Dos and Don'ts of using drone technology in the crop fields," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hao, Jinghui & Bijman, Jos & Gardebroek, Cornelis & Heerink, Nico & Heijman, Wim & Huo, Xuexi, 2018. "Cooperative membership and farmers’ choice of marketing channels – Evidence from apple farmers in Shaanxi and Shandong Provinces, China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 53-64.
    2. Aminata Diagne & Lota Tamini & Patrick Mundler, 2019. "Factors Explaining the Dynamics of Agricultural Technology Adoption: Evidence from Senegal's Rain Maize Farmers," CIRANO Working Papers 2019s-08, CIRANO.
    3. Läpple, Doris & Rensburg, Tom Van, 2011. "Adoption of organic farming: Are there differences between early and late adoption?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1406-1414, May.
    4. Saem Lee & Trung Thanh Nguyen & Patrick Poppenborg & Hio-Jung Shin & Thomas Koellner, 2016. "Conventional, Partially Converted and Environmentally Friendly Farming in South Korea: Profitability and Factors Affecting Farmers’ Choice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-18, July.
    5. Jinsuk Yang & Qing Hao & Mahmut Yaşar, 2023. "Institutional investors and cross‐border mergers and acquisitions: The 2000–2018 period," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 553-583, September.
    6. Brown, Philip & Roper, Simon, 2017. "Innovation and networks in New Zealand farming," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 61(3), July.
    7. Cardak, Buly A. & Martin, Vance L., 2023. "Household willingness to take financial risk: Stockmarket movements and life‐cycle effects," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    8. Arturo Estrella & Anthony P. Rodrigues, 1998. "Consistent covariance matrix estimation in probit models with autocorrelated errors," Staff Reports 39, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    9. T.R.L. Fry & R.D. Brooks & Br. Comley & J. Zhang, 1993. "Economic Motivations for Limited Dependent and Qualitative Variable Models," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 69(2), pages 193-205, June.
    10. Fernando Rios-Avila & Gustavo Canavire-Bacarreza, 2018. "Standard-error correction in two-stage optimization models: A quasi–maximum likelihood estimation approach," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 18(1), pages 206-222, March.
    11. Pauly, Stefan & Stipanicic, Fernando, 2021. "The creation and diffusion of knowledge: Evidence from the Jet Age," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Docweb) 2112, CEPREMAP.
    12. Cuong Le Van & Nguyen To The, 2019. "Farmers’ adoption of organic production," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 33-59, February.
    13. Paleti, Rajesh, 2018. "Generalized multinomial probit Model: Accommodating constrained random parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 248-262.
    14. Maria Iacovou, 2002. "Class Size in the Early Years: Is Smaller Really Better?," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 261-290.
    15. Erik Stam & Roy Thurik & Peter van der Zwan, 2010. "Entrepreneurial exit in real and imagined markets," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(4), pages 1109-1139, August.
    16. Tesfaye, Wondimagegn & Tirivayi, Nyasha, 2020. "Crop diversity, household welfare and consumption smoothing under risk: Evidence from rural Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    17. Michael J. Motta, 2021. "Diffusion and Typology: The Invention and Early Adoption of Medicinal Marijuana and Offshore Wind Policies," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(1), pages 567-584, January.
    18. Sarah Ann Wheeler & Céline Nauges & Alec Zuo, 2021. "How stable are Australian farmers’ climate change risk perceptions? New evidence of the feedback loop between risk perceptions and behaviour," Post-Print hal-04670841, HAL.
    19. Haoying Wang & Guohui Wu, 2022. "Modeling discrete choices with large fine-scale spatial data: opportunities and challenges," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 325-351, July.
    20. Y. Saks, 2016. "Socio-economic transitions on the labour market : a European benchmarking exercise," Economic Review, National Bank of Belgium, issue iii, pages 41-58, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ifaamr:307218. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifamaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.