IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/csc/cerisp/201305.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Technological Innovations in Agricultural Tractors: Adopters’ behaviour towards new technological trajectories and future directions

Author

Listed:
  • Ester Ferrari

    (PhD Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Institute for Agricultural and Earthmoving Machines (IMAMOTER), Italian National Research Council (CNR), Torino, Italy.)

  • Luigi Bollani

    (Researcher, University of Turin, Department of Economics and Statistics, Torino, Italy)

  • Mario Coccia

    (Ceris - Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth,Turin, Italy)

  • Eugenio Cavallo

    (PhD Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Institute for Agricultural and Earthmoving Machines (IMAMOTER), Italian National Research Council (CNR), Torino, Italy.)

Abstract

Latest advancements in tractors engineering have allowed farmers to increase productivity, and simultaneously to reduce operator’s hazards. However, little attention has been given to farmers’ behaviour and attitude toward the adoption of technological innovations concerning agricultural tractors. The study explores farmers’ behaviours on agricultural tractors current and future technological trajectories. A main case study concerning Italy is analyzed. Results show three different behaviours of farmers concerning tractors’ technological innovations. These adopters’ profiles would help developing new technologies that satisfy, more and more, farmers’ needs and expectations, speeding up the adoption process, enhancing agricultural tractors’ efficacy and efficiency.

Suggested Citation

  • Ester Ferrari & Luigi Bollani & Mario Coccia & Eugenio Cavallo, 2013. "Technological Innovations in Agricultural Tractors: Adopters’ behaviour towards new technological trajectories and future directions," CERIS Working Paper 201305, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
    • Handle: RePEc:csc:cerisp:201305
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.byterfly.eu/islandora/object/librib:343825
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David J. Teece, 2008. "Dosi's technological paradigms and trajectories: insights for economics and management," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 17(3), pages 507-512, June.
    2. Wright, Brian D., 2012. "Grand missions of agricultural innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 1716-1728.
    3. Rosenberg,Nathan, 1983. "Inside the Black Box," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521273671, November.
    4. Richard L. Daft & Robert H. Lengel, 1986. "Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 554-571, May.
    5. Coombs, R & Gibbons, M & Gardiner, P, 1981. "Innovation in the United Kingdom tractor industry," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 255-265.
    6. Richard R. Nelson, 2008. "Factors affecting the power of technological paradigms," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 17(3), pages 485-497, June.
    7. Kingsley, Gordon & Bozeman, Barrt & Coker, Karen, 1996. "Technology transfer and absorption: an 'R & D value-mapping' approach to evaluation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 967-995, September.
    8. Giovanni Dosi, 2000. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Chapters, in: Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics, chapter 2, pages 63-114, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    10. Douthwaite, B. & Keatinge, J. D. H. & Park, J. R., 2001. "Why promising technologies fail: the neglected role of user innovation during adoption," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 819-836, May.
    11. Leland Glenna & Raymond Jussaume & Julie Dawson, 2011. "How farmers matter in shaping agricultural technologies: social and structural characteristics of wheat growers and wheat varieties," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 28(2), pages 213-224, June.
    12. Sahal, Devendra, 1981. "The farm tractor and the nature of technological innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 368-402, October.
    13. Adesina, Akinwumi A. & Baidu-Forson, Jojo, 1995. "Farmers' perceptions and adoption of new agricultural technology: evidence from analysis in Burkina Faso and Guinea, West Africa," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, October.
    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. Mario Coccia & Matteo Bellitto, 2018. "Critical analysis of human progress: Its negative and positive sides in the late-capitalism," Papers 1804.09550, arXiv.org.
    2. Cavallo, Eugenio & Ferrari, Ester & Bollani, Luigi & Coccia, Mario, 2014. "Attitudes and behaviour of adopters of technological innovations in agricultural tractors: A case study in Italian agricultural system," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 44-54.

    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. Cavallo, Eugenio & Ferrari, Ester & Bollani, Luigi & Coccia, Mario, 2014. "Attitudes and behaviour of adopters of technological innovations in agricultural tractors: A case study in Italian agricultural system," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 44-54.
    2. Coccia, Mario & Wang, Lili, 2015. "Path-breaking directions of nanotechnology-based chemotherapy and molecular cancer therapy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 155-169.
    3. Coccia, Mario, 2015. "General sources of general purpose technologies in complex societies: Theory of global leadership-driven innovation, warfare and human development," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 199-226.
    4. Sofia Patsali, 2019. "Opening the black box of university-suppliers' co-invention: some field study evidence," Working Papers of BETA 2019-46, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    5. Smith, Adrian & Voß, Jan-Peter & Grin, John, 2010. "Innovation studies and sustainability transitions: The allure of the multi-level perspective and its challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 435-448, May.
    6. Coccia, Mario, 2012. "Driving forces of technological change in medicine: Radical innovations induced by side effects and their impact on society and healthcare," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 271-283.
    7. Ugo Finardi, 2013. "The technological paradigm of Nanosciences and Technologies: a study of science-technology time and space relations," Economía: teoría y práctica, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, México, vol. 39(2), pages 11-29, Julio-Dic.
    8. Nicolas Petit & Thibault Schrepel, 2023. "Complexity-minded antitrust," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 541-570, April.
    9. Grebel, Thomas, 2009. "Technological change: A microeconomic approach to the creation of knowledge," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 301-312, December.
    10. Francesco Bogliacino & Mario Pianta, 2016. "The Pavitt Taxonomy, revisited: patterns of innovation in manufacturing and services," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 33(2), pages 153-180, August.
    11. Carolina Castaldi & Roberto Fontana & Alessandro Nuvolari, 2009. "‘Chariots of fire’: the evolution of tank technology, 1915–1945," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 545-566, August.
    12. Luigi Orsenigo & Fabio Pammolli & Massimo Riccaboni & Andrea Bonaccorsi & Giuseppe Turchetti, 1997. "The Evolution of Knowledge and the Dynamics of an Industry Network," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 1(2), pages 147-175, June.
    13. Lai, Kuei-Kuei & Chen, Yu-Long & Kumar, Vimal & Daim, Tugrul & Verma, Pratima & Kao, Fang-Chen & Liu, Ruirong, 2023. "Mapping technological trajectories and exploring knowledge sources: A case study of E-payment technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PB).
    14. Zheng, Bobo & Xu, Jiuping & Ni, Ting & Li, Meihui, 2015. "Geothermal energy utilization trends from a technological paradigm perspective," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 430-441.
    15. Chang, Yuan-Chieh & Chen, Min-Nan, 2016. "Service regime and innovation clusters: An empirical study from service firms in Taiwan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1845-1857.
    16. Ciarli, Tommaso & Ràfols, Ismael, 2019. "The relation between research priorities and societal demands: The case of rice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 949-967.
    17. Maxim Kotsemir & Alexander Abroskin & Dirk Meissner, 2013. "Innovation concepts and typology – an evolutionary discussion," HSE Working papers WP BRP 05/STI/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    18. Pottier, Antonin & Hourcade, Jean-Charles & Espagne, Etienne, 2014. "Modelling the redirection of technical change: The pitfalls of incorporeal visions of the economy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 213-218.
    19. Lionel Nesta & Vincent Mangematin, 2002. "Industry Life Cycle, Knowledge Generation and Technological Networks," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-03398092, HAL.
    20. Colombo, Massimo G. & Garrone, Paola, 1996. "Technological cooperative agreements and firm's R & D intensity. A note on causality relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 923-932, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    agricultural tractor; technological innovation; technological trajectories; adopters; farmers;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services
    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:csc:cerisp:201305. 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: Anna Perin or Giancarlo Birello (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cerisit.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.