IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ifma11/345592.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

PR - Technological Profile Of Brazilian Innovative Beef Farmers: Which Technologies These Farmers Adopt, Which They Don’t And Reasons For The Difference (p316-323)

Author

Listed:
  • Pereira, Mariana de Aragão
  • Woodford, Keith

Abstract

The adoption of 45 production, environmental and managerial technologies by 26 Brazilian innovative beef farmers is analysed in relation to technology attributes and adoption rationale. The farmers were purposively selected based on their self-enrolment in an organisation or program that promotes beef farming innovations. They were interviewed using a semi structured in-depth interview. On average, farmers adopted 27 of the 45 technologies, with highest adoption rates for production and managerial technologies. Environmental technologies perceived as more compatible with production systems had higher levels of adoption compared to other environmental technologies. In general, farmers adopted technologies that were compatible with their goals, farming systems and constraints. Results confirmed and extended Rogers’ proposition of technologies attributes which influence adoption behaviour, and provided evidence for a hierarchy among these attributes. Compatibility and advantages relative to alternative technologies were the most important technology attributes in explaining adoption by individual farmers. Relevant but of secondary importance were observability and trialability prior to major commitment. Complexity was a deterrent to adoption but could be overcome by highly valued attributes aspects. Non-adoption was typically a considered decision consistent with goals and farming systems. Therefore, failure to adopt amongst innovative farmers should not in itself be considered an irrational behaviour or a failure of the research, development and extension systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Pereira, Mariana de Aragão & Woodford, Keith, 2011. "PR - Technological Profile Of Brazilian Innovative Beef Farmers: Which Technologies These Farmers Adopt, Which They Don’t And Reasons For The Difference (p316-323)," 18th Congress, Methven, New Zealand, 2011 345592, International Farm Management Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ifma11:345592
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.345592
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/345592/files/11_PereiraWoodford_P316-323.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.345592?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. Kaliba, Aloyce R. M. & Featherstone, Allen M. & Norman, David W., 1997. "A stall-feeding management for improved cattle in semiarid central Tanzania: factors influencing adoption," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 17(2-3), pages 133-146, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items 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. Staal, Steven J. & Romney, D. & Baltenweck, Isabelle & Waithaka, Michael M. & Muriuki, H. & Njoroge, L., 2003. "Spatial Analysis Of Soil Fertility Management Using Integrated Household And Gis Data From Smallholder Kenyan Farms," 2003 Annual Meeting, August 16-22, 2003, Durban, South Africa 25903, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Staal, S. J. & Baltenweck, I. & Waithaka, M. M. & deWolff, T. & Njoroge, L., 2002. "Location and uptake: integrated household and GIS analysis of technology adoption and land use, with application to smallholder dairy farms in Kenya," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 295-315, November.
    3. Twine, Edgar E. & Omore, Amos & Githinji, Julius, 2018. "Uncertainty in milk production by smallholders in Tanzania and its implications for investment," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 21(1).
    4. Sara Savastano & Pasquale Lucio Scandizzo, 2010. "The Adoption and Diffusion of GM Crops in USA: A Real Option Approach," CEIS Research Paper 169, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 20 Jul 2010.
    5. Makokha, Stella Nabwile & Karugia, Joseph Thuo & Staal, Steven J. & Oluoch-Kosura, Willis, 2008. "Analysis of Factors Influencing Adoption of Dairy Technologies In Western Kenya," 2007 Second International Conference, August 20-22, 2007, Accra, Ghana 52094, African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE).
    6. Sidibe, Amadou, 2005. "Farm-level adoption of soil and water conservation techniques in northern Burkina Faso," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 211-224, February.
    7. Hadush, Muuz & Gebregziabher, Kidanemariam, 2022. "It is Too Late to Regret and Take Risk: Farmers' Adoption Decision for Stall-Feeding (SF) on Tigray, Ethiopia," Review of Agricultural and Applied Economics (RAAE), Faculty of Economics and Management, Slovak Agricultural University in Nitra, vol. 25(2), December.
    8. Jing Ren & Fuduo Li & Changbin Yin & Jiudong Zhang, 2022. "Uncovering the Deviation of Farmers’ Green Manure Planting Willingness and Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-19, November.
    9. Twine, Edgar & Rao, Elizaphan & Baltenweck, Isabelle & Omore, Amos, 2015. "Credit, Technology Adoption and Collective Action in Tanzania’s Smallholder Dairy Sector," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 204198, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    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:ifma11:345592. 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/ifmaaea.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.