IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v77y1995i3p602-612..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Market Effects of Cotton Integrated Pest Management

Author

Listed:
  • Fred C. White
  • Michael E. Wetzstein

Abstract

Widely reported research results indicate that cotton integrated pest management (IPM) generally reduces chemical use and increases net returns. Despite these favorable research results, many farmers have not adopted IPM and others have adopted only some of the available technologies. Given rising marginal costs and diminishing marginal benefits from IPM technology transfer, an optimal control framework is developed to identify optimal rates of technology transfer through educational programs. Results from an analysis of this dynamic adoption process for cotton IPM are presented. Considering the complex and evolving nature of cotton IPM, continuing educational efforts to transfer IPM technologies are warranted.

Suggested Citation

  • Fred C. White & Michael E. Wetzstein, 1995. "Market Effects of Cotton Integrated Pest Management," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(3), pages 602-612.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:77:y:1995:i:3:p:602-612.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/1243228
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Cokou Patrice Kpadé & Edouard Roméo Mensah & Michel Fok & Jupiter Ndjeunga, 2017. "Cotton farmers’ willingness to pay for pest management services in northern Benin," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 48(1), pages 105-114, January.
    2. Zilberman, David & Millock, Katti, 1997. "Financial incentives and pesticide use," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 133-144, April.
    3. Smith, Anna Rickett & Dorfman, Jeffrey H., 2002. "An Economic Evaluation Of Cotton And Peanut Research In Southeastern United States," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19900, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Batie, Sandra S. & Swinton, Scott M. & Schulz, Mary A., 1999. "Fqpa Implementation To Reduce Pesticide Residue Risks: Part I: Agricultural Producer Concerns," Staff Paper Series 11813, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    5. Govindasamy, Ramu & Italia, John & Liptak, Clare, 1997. "Quality of Agricultural Produce: Consumer Preferences and Perceptions," P Series 36739, Rutgers University, Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics.
    6. Wiebelt, Manfred, 2000. "Measuring the benefit-cost ratio of public IPM technology transfer programs: an optimal control framework and an application to Nepalese agriculture," Kiel Working Papers 989, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:ajagec:v:77:y:1995:i:3:p:602-612.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.