IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i20p5571-d274911.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring the Relationship between Farmers’ Innovativeness and Their Values and Aims

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Walder

    (Institute of Agricultural and Forestry Economics, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, A-1180 Vienna, Austria)

  • Franz Sinabell

    (Austrian Institute of Economic Research, Vienna, 1030 Vienna, Austria)

  • Fabian Unterlass

    (Austrian Institute of Economic Research, Vienna, 1030 Vienna, Austria)

  • Andreas Niedermayr

    (Institute of Agricultural and Forestry Economics, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, A-1180 Vienna, Austria)

  • Denisa Fulgeanu

    (Faculty of Management, University of Agronomic Sciences and Veterinary Medicine of Bucharest, 011464 Bucharest, Romania)

  • Martin Kapfer

    (Bavarian State Research Center for Agriculture, 85354 Freising-Weihenstephan, Germany)

  • Michael Melcher

    (Institute of Agricultural and Forestry Economics, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, A-1180 Vienna, Austria)

  • Jochen Kantelhardt

    (Institute of Agricultural and Forestry Economics, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, A-1180 Vienna, Austria)

Abstract

To meet global demands towards food security, safety as well as sustainable agriculture and food systems innovative approaches are inevitable. Despite the growing body of literature in both innovation research and in values and aims, what has been explored to a lesser extent is the bridging link between these areas. This study represents a first step in addressing this relationship. Policy- and decision-makers foster sustainable innovation in agriculture, since on-farm innovation and innovation adoption have attracted their attention as a means of enhancing competitiveness as well as socially and environmentally benign farming also benefiting rural areas. By using a negative binomial model we explore the relationship between farmers’ innovativeness and those values and aims which guide farmers’ farm-management decisions as well as other farm/farmer characteristics. Based on a sample of 174 Austrian farmers agricultural education is found to be an essential driver of innovativeness. Regarding the different values we find that self-direction and hedonistic values, in contrast to achievement and economic, are associated with more innovative capabilities. In conclusion, we see a need to foster self-direction and hedonistic narratives in policy and extension service, together with reducing the focus on an economic angle to promote farmers’ innovation capabilities.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Walder & Franz Sinabell & Fabian Unterlass & Andreas Niedermayr & Denisa Fulgeanu & Martin Kapfer & Michael Melcher & Jochen Kantelhardt, 2019. "Exploring the Relationship between Farmers’ Innovativeness and Their Values and Aims," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-15, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:20:p:5571-:d:274911
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/20/5571/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/20/5571/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Romero, Isidoro & Martínez-Román, Juan A., 2012. "Self-employment and innovation. Exploring the determinants of innovative behavior in small businesses," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 178-189.
    2. Volker Hoffmann & Kirsten Probst & Anja Christinck, 2007. "Farmers and researchers: How can collaborative advantages be created in participatory research and technology development?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 24(3), pages 355-368, September.
    3. Sophie Theis & Nicole Lefore & Ruth Meinzen-Dick & Elizabeth Bryan, 2018. "What happens after technology adoption? Gendered aspects of small-scale irrigation technologies in Ethiopia, Ghana, and Tanzania," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(3), pages 671-684, September.
    4. Justin Yifu Lin, 1991. "Education and Innovation Adoption in Agriculture: Evidence from Hybrid Rice in China," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(3), pages 713-723.
    5. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    6. Feder, Gershon, 1980. "Farm Size, Risk Aversion and the Adoption of New Technology under Uncertainty," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 263-283, July.
    7. Johannes Sauer & David Zilberman, 2012. "Sequential technology implementation, network externalities, and risk: the case of automatic milking systems," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 43(3), pages 233-252, May.
    8. Alev Katrinli & Gulem Atabay & Gonca Gunay & Burcu Guneri & Ahenk Aktan, 2009. "Innovativeness: Is It a Function of the Leadership Style and the Value System of the Entrepreneur?," International Studies in Entrepreneurship, in: Neslihan Aydogan (ed.), Innovation Policies, Business Creation and Economic Development, chapter 8, pages 113-135, Springer.
    9. A. Colin Cameron & Pravin K. Trivedi, 1986. "Econometric models based on count data. Comparisons and applications of some estimators and tests," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 1(1), pages 29-53, January.
    10. Doris Läpple & Hugh Kelley, 2015. "Spatial dependence in the adoption of organic drystock farming in Ireland," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 42(2), pages 315-337.
    11. Paul Diederen & Hans Van Meijl & Arjan Wolters & Katarzyna Bijak, 2003. "Innovation adoption in agriculture : innovators, early adopters and laggards," Cahiers d'Economie et Sociologie Rurales, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 67, pages 29-50.
    12. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    13. Marcati, Alberto & Guido, Gianluigi & Peluso, Alessandro M., 2008. "The role of SME entrepreneurs' innovativeness and personality in the adoption of innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1579-1590, October.
    14. Hall, B.H., 2011. "Innovation and productivity," MERIT Working Papers 2011-028, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    15. Chrysovalantis Karafillis & Evaggelos Papanagiotou, 2011. "Innovation and total factor productivity in organic farming," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(23), pages 3075-3087.
    16. Hausman, Jerry & Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi, 1984. "Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 909-938, July.
    17. Baron, Robert A. & Tang, Jintong, 2011. "The role of entrepreneurs in firm-level innovation: Joint effects of positive affect, creativity, and environmental dynamism," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 49-60, January.
    18. Grunert, Suzanne C. & Juhl, Hans Jorn, 1995. "Values, environmental attitudes, and buying of organic foods," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 39-62, March.
    19. Läpple, Doris & Renwick, Alan & Thorne, Fiona, 2015. "Measuring and understanding the drivers of agricultural innovation: Evidence from Ireland," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-8.
    20. Klerkx, Laurens & Aarts, Noelle & Leeuwis, Cees, 2010. "Adaptive management in agricultural innovation systems: The interactions between innovation networks and their environment," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(6), pages 390-400, July.
    21. Klerkx, Laurens & Nettle, Ruth, 2013. "Achievements and challenges of innovation co-production support initiatives in the Australian and Dutch dairy sectors: A comparative study," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 74-89.
    22. Rice, Gillian, 2006. "Individual values, Organizational Context, and self-perceptions of employee creativity: Evidence from Egyptian organizations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 233-241, February.
    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. Lishi Mao & Junfeng Song & Siyuan Xu & Degui Yu, 2023. "Impact of Digital Platform Organization on Reducing Green Production Risk to Tackle COVID-19: Evidence from Farmers in Jiangsu China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, January.
    2. Yuan Fang & Yahong Fan & Dehong Yu & Jing Shen & Wankun Jiang & Degui Yu, 2020. "Impact of farmers' benefits linking stability on cloud farm platform of company to farmer model," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 66(9), pages 424-433.
    3. Han, Guang & Niles, Meredith T., 2023. "An adoption spectrum for sustainable agriculture practices: A new framework applied to cover crop adoption," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 212(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. Läpple, Doris & Renwick, Alan & Thorne, Fiona, 2015. "Measuring and understanding the drivers of agricultural innovation: Evidence from Ireland," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-8.
    2. Bjerke, Lina & Johansson, Sara, 2022. "Innovation in agriculture: An analysis of Swedish agricultural and non-agricultural firms," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    3. Iordanis Parikoglou & Grigorios Emvalomatis & Doris Läpple & Fiona Thorne & Michael Wallace, 2024. "The contribution of innovation to farm-level productivity," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 62(2), pages 239-255, October.
    4. Pu Liu & Yingying Shao, 2022. "Innovation and new business formation: the role of innovative large firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 691-720, August.
    5. Micheels, Eric T. & Nolan, James F., 2016. "Examining the effects of absorptive capacity and social capital on the adoption of agricultural innovations: A Canadian Prairie case study," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 127-138.
    6. Baptista, Rui & Swann, Peter, 1998. "Do firms in clusters innovate more?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 525-540, September.
    7. Yuzhe Miao & Robert M. Salomon & Jaeyong Song, 2021. "Learning from Technologically Successful Peers: The Convergence of Asian Laggards to the Technology Frontier," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(1), pages 210-232, January.
    8. Gopinath, Munisamy & Vasavada, Utpal, 1999. "Patents, R&D, And Market Structure In The U.S. Food Processing Industry," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 24(1), pages 1-13, July.
    9. Costantini, Valeria & Crespi, Francesco & Palma, Alessandro, 2017. "Characterizing the policy mix and its impact on eco-innovation: A patent analysis of energy-efficient technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 799-819.
    10. Pan, Dan & Zhang, Ning, 2018. "The Role of Agricultural Training on Fertilizer Use Knowledge: A Randomized Controlled Experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 77-91.
    11. Roberto Ganau & Eleonora Di Maria, 2014. "Determinants of technological innovation in SMEs. Firm-level factors, agglomeration economies and the role of KIBS providers," ERSA conference papers ersa14p820, European Regional Science Association.
    12. Anna Laura Baraldi & Claudia Cantabene & Giulio Perani, 2014. "Reverse causality in the R&D-patents relationship: an interpretation of the innovation persistence," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 304-326, April.
    13. Maria, Kernecker & Maria, Busse & Andrea, Knierim, 2021. "Exploring actors, their constellations, and roles in digital agricultural innovations," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    14. Yari Vecchio & Giulio Paolo Agnusdei & Pier Paolo Miglietta & Fabian Capitanio, 2020. "Adoption of Precision Farming Tools: The Case of Italian Farmers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-16, January.
    15. Valeria Costantini & Francesco Crespi & Alessandro Palma, 2015. "Characterizing the policy mix and its impact on eco-innovation in energy-efficient technologies," SEEDS Working Papers 1115, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised Jun 2015.
    16. Franz Sinabell & Fabian Unterlass & Peter Walder & Jochen Kantelhardt, 2017. "Österreich 2025 – Innovation: der Motor für Wachstum und Beschäftigung in der ländlichen Wirtschaft," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 60801, March.
    17. Criscuolo, Chiara & Haskel, Jonathan E. & Slaughter, Matthew J., 2010. "Global engagement and the innovation activities of firms," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 191-202, March.
    18. Franz Sinabell & Fabian Unterlass & Peter Walder & Jochen Kantelhardt, 2017. "Austria 2025 – Innovation: A Motor of Growth and Employment in the Rural Economy," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 60604, March.
    19. Pradhan, Jaya Prakash, 2013. "The Geography of Patenting In India: Patterns and Determinants," MPRA Paper 50595, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Hunecke, C. & Meyer, S. & Brummer, B., 2018. "Technology Diffusion through Networks - Adoption of automatic milking systems in Germany," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277543, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:20:p:5571-:d:274911. 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.