IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i11p6026-d568386.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Deviation of the Behaviors of Rice Farmers from Their Stated Willingness to Apply Biopesticides—A Study Carried Out in Jilin Province of China

Author

Listed:
  • Hongpeng Guo

    (College of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, Jilin University, 5988 Renmin Street, Changchun 130022, China)

  • Fanhui Sun

    (College of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, Jilin University, 5988 Renmin Street, Changchun 130022, China)

  • Chulin Pan

    (College of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, Jilin University, 5988 Renmin Street, Changchun 130022, China)

  • Baiming Yang

    (Changchun Guoxin Modern Agricultural Science and Technology Development Co., Ltd., Shuangyang District, Changchun 130600, China)

  • Yin Li

    (Changchun Guoxin Modern Agricultural Science and Technology Development Co., Ltd., Shuangyang District, Changchun 130600, China)

Abstract

The substitution of chemical pesticides by biopesticides is crucial to ensure the quality of agricultural products and to foster environmental sustainability. This study takes the willingness and the behaviors of rice farmers on the application of biopesticides as the research object. The survey questionnaire was designed based on the theory of rational small-scale farmers from three aspects: “individual and family characteristics of farmers”, “cognition of farmers” and “external factors”. The survey was then conducted on 163 rice farmers in seven prefecture-level cities in Jilin Province of China. The logistic model was used to analyze the influencing factors resulting in the deviation of the behaviors of the rice farmers from their initial willingness on the application of biopesticides. The explanatory structure model (ISM) was used to analyze the logical hierarchical relationship among various influencing factors. The results show that: (1) For 45% of the farmers surveyed, there’s a deviation between their willingness and behaviors regarding the application of biopesticides; (2) Among the significant factors leading to the deviation between farmers’ willingness and behaviors concerning the application of biopesticides, the surface-level direct factor is biopesticide awareness. The mid-level indirect factors are agricultural product quality and safety awareness and the deep-level root cause is farmers’ education level. (3) The primary reason for the deviation of the farmers’ behaviors from their willingness is their lack of knowledge about biopesticides and the biopesticides’ incomplete market structure. Based on the comprehensive analysis, it is recommended to improve the professionalization of the farmers, to strengthen the publicity of green production and to accelerate the formulation of the biopesticides market to further promote the usage of biopesticides.

Suggested Citation

  • Hongpeng Guo & Fanhui Sun & Chulin Pan & Baiming Yang & Yin Li, 2021. "The Deviation of the Behaviors of Rice Farmers from Their Stated Willingness to Apply Biopesticides—A Study Carried Out in Jilin Province of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-17, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:11:p:6026-:d:568386
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/11/6026/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/11/6026/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhang, Yuanxia & Halder, Pradipta & Zhang, Xiaoning & Qu, Mei, 2020. "Analyzing the deviation between farmers' Land transfer intention and behavior in China's impoverished mountainous Area: A Logistic-ISM model approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    2. Hans P. Binswanger, 1980. "Attitudes Toward Risk: Experimental Measurement in Rural India," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 62(3), pages 395-407.
    3. Edwards, Jeffrey R., 2002. "The Past, Present, and Future of Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 1-4, January.
    4. Paudel, K. P. & Lohr, L. & Martin, N. R., 2000. "Effect of risk perspective on fertilizer choice by sharecroppers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 115-128, November.
    5. Henry Schultz, 1927. "Theoretical Considerations Relating to Supply," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(4), pages 437-437.
    6. Elinor Ostrom, 2000. "Collective Action and the Evolution of Social Norms," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 137-158, Summer.
    7. Doss, Cheryl R. & Morris, Michael L., 2001. "How does gender affect the adoption of agricultural innovations?: The case of improved maize technology in Ghana," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 27-39, June.
    8. Evangelia Karasmanaki & Panagiota Dimopoulou & Zisis Vryzas & Philippos Karipidis & Georgios Tsantopoulos, 2021. "Is the Environmental Behavior of Farmers Affecting Their Pesticide Practices? A Case Study from Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-15, January.
    9. Lei Deng & Lei Chen & Jingjie Zhao & Ruimei Wang, 2021. "Comparative analysis on environmental and economic performance of agricultural cooperatives and smallholder farmers: The case of grape production in Hebei, China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(1), pages 1-19, January.
    10. Chèze, Benoît & David, Maia & Martinet, Vincent, 2020. "Understanding farmers' reluctance to reduce pesticide use: A choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    11. Yazhen Gong & Kathy Baylis & Robert Kozak & Gary Bull, 2016. "Farmers’ risk preferences and pesticide use decisions: evidence from field experiments in China," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(4), pages 411-421, July.
    12. Duc, Nguyen Minh, 2008. "Farmers' satisfaction with aquaculture -- A logistic model in Vietnam," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 525-531, December.
    13. Sanzidur Rahman & Chidiebere Daniel Chima, 2018. "Determinants of Pesticide Use in Food Crop Production in Southeastern Nigeria," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-14, February.
    14. Bakker, L. & Sok, J. & van der Werf, W. & Bianchi, F.J.J.A., 2021. "Kicking the Habit: What Makes and Breaks Farmers' Intentions to Reduce Pesticide Use?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    15. Liu, Elaine M. & Huang, JiKun, 2013. "Risk preferences and pesticide use by cotton farmers in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 202-215.
    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. Zejun He & Yunfei Jia & Yifan Ji, 2023. "Analysis of Influencing Factors and Mechanism of Farmers’ Green Production Behaviors in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-25, January.
    2. Dan Qiao & Shuting Xu & Tao Xu & Qinchuan Hao & Zhen Zhong, 2022. "Gap between Willingness and Behaviors: Understanding the Consistency of Farmers’ Green Production in Hainan, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-18, September.
    3. Yong Liu & Jixin Yang & Guanghong Zhang & Xufeng Cui, 2024. "Driving factors of green production behaviour among farmers of different scales: Evidence from North China," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 70(10), pages 474-494.
    4. Siyu Gong & Bo Wang & Zhigang Yu, 2022. "Whether the Use of the Internet Can Assist Farmers in Selecting Biopesticides or Not: A Study Based on Evidence from the Largest Rice-Producing Province in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-17, December.
    5. Hongpeng Guo & Wenkai Zhao & Chulin Pan & Guijie Qiu & Shuang Xu & Shun Liu, 2022. "Study on the Influencing Factors of Farmers’ Adoption of Conservation Tillage Technology in Black Soil Region in China: A Logistic-ISM Model Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-16, June.
    6. Lina Yan & Xue Zhao & Dan Zhang & Jian Deng & Yuan Zhang, 2022. "Associated Factors of Pesticide Packaging Waste Recycling Behavior Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior in Chinese Fruit Farmers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-11, September.
    7. Qiu, Xin & Jin, Jianjun & He, Rui & Mao, Jiansu, 2022. "The deviation between the willingness and behavior of farmers to adopt electricity-saving tricycles and its influencing factors in Dazu District of China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    8. repec:caa:jnlage:v:preprint:id:188-2024-agricecon is not listed on IDEAS

    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. Kanchan Joshi & Thiagu Ranganathan & Ram Ranjan, 2021. "Exploring Higher Order Risk Preferences of Farmers in a Water-Scarce Region: Evidence from a Field Experiment in West Bengal, India," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 19(2), pages 317-344, June.
    2. Chenchen Yang & Jianhua Wang, 2019. "Evaluation of Policies on Inappropriate Treatment of Dead Hogs from the Perspective of Loss Aversion," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-20, August.
    3. Dan Qiao & Shuting Xu & Tao Xu & Qinchuan Hao & Zhen Zhong, 2022. "Gap between Willingness and Behaviors: Understanding the Consistency of Farmers’ Green Production in Hainan, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-18, September.
    4. Tang, Lin & Luo, Xiaofeng, 2021. "Can agricultural insurance encourage farmers to apply biological pesticides? Evidence from rural China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    5. Pan, Dan & Zhang, Ning & Kong, Fanbin, 2021. "Does it matter who gives information? The impact of information sources on farmers’ pesticide use in China," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    6. Freudenreich, Hanna & Musshoff, Oliver, 2022. "Experience of losses and aversion to uncertainty - experimental evidence from farmers in Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    7. Kerri Brick & Martine Visser & Justine Burns, 2012. "Risk Aversion: Experimental Evidence from South African Fishing Communities," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(1), pages 133-152.
    8. Mwambi, Mercy & Depenbusch, Lutz & Bonnarith, Uon & Sotelo-Cardona, Paola & Kieu, Khemrin & di Tada, Nicolas & Srinivasan, Ramasamy & Schreinemachers, Pepijn, 2023. "Can phone text messages promote the use of integrated pest management? A study of vegetable farmers in Cambodia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    9. Carpentier, A. & Reboud, X., 2018. "Why farmers consider pesticides the ultimate in crop protection: economic and behavioral insights," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277528, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. repec:hic:wpaper:204 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Hasibuan, Abdul Muis & Gregg, Daniel & Stringer, Randy, 2022. "Risk preferences, intra-household dynamics and spatial effects on chemical inputs use: Case of small-scale citrus farmers in Indonesia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    12. Lefebvre, Marianne & Midler, Estelle & Bontems, Philippe, 2020. "Adoption of environmentally-friendly agricultural practices with background risk: experimental evidence," TSE Working Papers 20-1079, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    13. Sheremenko, Ganna & Magnan, Nicholas, 2015. "Gender-specific Risk Preferences and Fertilizer Use in Kenyan Farming Households," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205766, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Tina L. Saitone & Richard J. Sexton & Benoît Malan, 2018. "Price premiums, payment delays, and default risk: understanding developing country farmers’ decisions to market through a cooperative or a private trader," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(3), pages 363-380, May.
    15. Feng, Shuaizhang & Han, Yujie & Qiu, Huanguang, 2021. "Does crop insurance reduce pesticide usage? Evidence from China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    16. Naranjo, Maria A. & Alpízar, Francisco & Martinsson, Peter, 2019. "Alternatives for Risk Elicitation in the Field: Evidence from Coffee Farmers in Costa Rica," EfD Discussion Paper 19-21, Environment for Development, University of Gothenburg.
    17. Pamela Jakiela & Owen Ozier, 2019. "The Impact of Violence on Individual Risk Preferences: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(3), pages 547-559, July.
    18. Marianne Lefebvre & Estelle Midler & Philippe Bontems, 2020. "Adoption of Environment-Friendly Agricultural Practices with Background Risk: Experimental Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(2), pages 405-428, July.
    19. Julia Ihli, Hanna & Chiputwa, Brian & Winter, Etti & Gassner, Anja, 2022. "Risk and time preferences for participating in forest landscape restoration: The case of coffee farmers in Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    20. Briones, Roehlano M., 2016. "Inadequate N Application of Rice Farmers in the Philippines: Problems, Causes, Solutions," Discussion Papers DP 2016-01, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    21. Niklas Möhring & Martina Bozzola & Stefan Hirsch & Robert Finger, 2020. "Are pesticides risk decreasing? The relevance of pesticide indicator choice in empirical analysis," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(3), pages 429-444, May.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:11:p:6026-:d:568386. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.