IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/isfiwp/275417.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Adoption of Agricultural Innovations: The Case of Drip Irrigation of Cotton in Isreal

Author

Listed:
  • Fishelson, Gideon
  • Rymon, Dan

Abstract

The adoption parameters of drip irrigation in cotton growing in the collective farms sector (kibbutzim) in Israel are estimated. The classical logistic function is perfectly retrieved. The estimated parameters are then explained by a variable that represents profitability, the change in yield. In spite of the small number of data points it again appears that profitability is the major explanatory variable for the adoption of a new technology. A hypothesis of dynamic ceiling is described and estimates are drawn.

Suggested Citation

  • Fishelson, Gideon & Rymon, Dan, 1986. "Adoption of Agricultural Innovations: The Case of Drip Irrigation of Cotton in Isreal," Foerder Institute for Economic Research Working Papers 275417, Tel-Aviv University > Foerder Institute for Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:isfiwp:275417
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.275417
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/275417/files/TEL-AVIV-FSWP-097.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.275417?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. Feder, Gershon & Just, Richard E & Zilberman, David, 1985. "Adoption of Agricultural Innovations in Developing Countries: A Survey," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 33(2), pages 255-298, January.
    2. Just, Richard E & Zilberman, David, 1983. "Stochastic Structure, Farm Size and Technology Adoption in Developing Agriculture," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(2), pages 307-328, July.
    3. 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.
    4. Margriet Caswell & David Zilberman, 1985. "The Choices of Irrigation Technologies in California," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 67(2), pages 224-234.
    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. Rymon, Dan & Fishelson, Gideon, 1986. "Economic Analysis of Cotton Irrigation Technologies," Foerder Institute for Economic Research Working Papers 275419, Tel-Aviv University > Foerder Institute for Economic Research.

    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. Jean-Louis Fusillier & Lionel Richefort, 2010. "Imitation, rationalité et adoption de technologies d’irrigation améliorées à l’île de la Réunion," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 193(2), pages 59-73.
    2. Bellon, Mauricio R & Taylor, J Edward, 1993. ""Folk" Soil Taxonomy and the Partial Adoption of New Seed Varieties," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(4), pages 763-786, July.
    3. Doan Nainggolan & Faizal Rahmanto Moeis & Mette Termansen, 2023. "Does risk preference influence farm level adaptation strategies? – Survey evidence from Denmark," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 28(7), pages 1-23, October.
    4. Elaine Meichen Liu, 2008. "Time to Change What to Sow: Risk Preferences and Technology Adoption Decisions of Cotton Farmers in China," Working Papers 1064, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    5. Awel Y. & Azomahou T.T., 2015. "Risk preference or financial literacy? Behavioural experiment on index insurance demand," MERIT Working Papers 2015-005, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    6. Barham, Bradford & Carter, Michael R. & Sigelko, Wayne, 1995. "Agro-export production and peasant land access: Examining the dynamic between adoption and accumulation," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 85-107, February.
    7. Alcon, Francisco & De Miguel, María Dolores & Burton, Michael P., 2008. "Adopción de tecnología de distribución y control del agua en las Comunidades de Regantes de la Región de Murcia," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 8(01), pages 1-19.
    8. 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.
    9. Kim, Tae-Kyun, 1989. "The factor bias of technical change and technology adoption under uncertainty," ISU General Staff Papers 1989010108000010138, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    10. Dimara, Efthalia & Skuras, Dimitrios, 1998. "Adoption of new tobacco varieties in Greece: Impacts of empirical findings on policy design," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 19(3), pages 297-307, December.
    11. Prisca Koncy Fosso & Roger Tsafack Nanfosso, 2016. "Adoption of agricultural innovations in risky environment: the case of corn producers in the west of Cameroon," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 97(1), pages 51-62, June.
    12. Elaine M. Liu, 2013. "Time to Change What to Sow: Risk Preferences and Technology Adoption Decisions of Cotton Farmers in China," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(4), pages 1386-1403, October.
    13. Ahsanuzzaman, & Priyo, Asad Karim Khan & Nuzhat, Kanti Ananta, 2022. "Effects of communication, group selection, and social learning on risk and ambiguity attitudes: Experimental evidence from Bangladesh," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    14. Arslan, AslIhan, 2011. "Shadow vs. market prices in explaining land allocation: Subsistence maize cultivation in rural Mexico," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 605-613, October.
    15. 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.
    16. Damianos, Dimitrios & Skuras, Dimitrios, 1996. "Unconventional adjustment strategies for rural households in the less developed areas in Greece," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 15(1), pages 61-72, September.
    17. Sirkka Schukat & Heinke Heise, 2021. "Towards an Understanding of the Behavioral Intentions and Actual Use of Smart Products among German Farmers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-24, June.
    18. Kidane Mariam Gebregziabher, 2014. "Agricultural Extension Service and Input Application Intensity: Evidence from Ethiopia," Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, AMH International, vol. 6(9), pages 735-747.
    19. Freudenreich, H., 2018. "Explaining Mexican Farmers Adoption of Hybrid Maize Seed - The Role of Social Psychology, Risk and Ambiguity Aversion," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277410, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. De Pinto, Alessandro & Robertson, Richard D. & Obiri, Beatrice Darko, 2013. "Adoption of climate change mitigation practices by risk-averse farmers in the Ashanti Region, Ghana," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 47-54.

    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:isfiwp:275417. 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/fotauil.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.