All articles published by are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by , including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https:///openaccess.
Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.
Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.
Managing Migration In Ireland
Knowledge and Farmers’ Adoption of Green Production Technologies: An Empirical Study on IPM Adoption Intention in Major Indica-Rice-Producing Areas in the Anhui Province of China
As a comprehensive technology with social, economic, and ecological benefits, integrated pest management (IPM) is crucial in fundamentally alleviating the environmental pollution caused by traditional high-input agriculture. Based on the random-sampled data of 981 farmer households in major Indica-rice-producing areas in Anhui Province, this study analyzes the impact of agricultural production knowledge on farmers’ willingness to adopt IPM technology through logit models, considering integrated knowledge and categorized knowledge. The results indicate that integrated agricultural production knowledge significantly increases farmers’ willingness to adopt IPM technology. However, pest-management knowledge was the only one out of four specific disciplines that significantly individually affect farmers’ adoption intention. The more knowledge farmers acquire about pest management, the higher intention they have to adopt IPM. Some demographic and household characteristics also significantly influence their willingness. Based on these results, we suggest that increasing farmers’ agricultural production knowledge, especially knowledge about pest management, is essential in promoting IPM technology. Besides this, IPM technology should be promoted purposely and consciously, combined with farmers’ individual and family characteristics.
In a situation of an ever-increasing world population and more intensive agriculture, food security is of constant concern globally. From the angle of production, it is of great significance to avoid crop loss from pathogens, diseases, pests, and weeds. For decades, farmers utilized chemical pesticides/herbicides for disease, pest, and weed control [1]. However, for multiple reasons, e.g., a lack of pest-management knowledge [2, 3], misleading information [2, 3], the pursuit of high crop yield [4], and pest resistance [5], the misuse of pesticides/herbicides (including incorrect application, overuse, underuse, and use of restricted or even banned products), agricultural and environmental sustainability and human health have been heavily threatened, especially in developing countries [3]. Misuse of pesticides also causes pest resistance, the emergence of new pests, and the destruction of beneficial insects [5, 6]. For agricultural sustainability, stakeholders, agricultural professionals, and policymakers have paid considerable efforts to alternative and more environment-friendly pest-control methods [7, 8].
Quick Nlp/encoder_bpe_40000.json At Master · Vd44/quick Nlp · Github
Integrated pest management (IPM), as a sustainable pest-management approach, has gained much attention. In general, IPM refers to a comprehensive science-based decision-making process that identifies pest-relative risks and coordinates multiple disciplines to prevent and control pest damages using the most economical means, at the same time relieving stresses on humans, property, resources, and the environment [9]. IPM, allowing farmers to manage pests in a cost-effective and environmentally-friendly way, involves biological control, physical control, agricultural control, and scientific ways of using pesticides [10, 11]; thus meeting the requirements of sustainable development and being suitable to adopt under local conditions [12]. Applying IPM reduces pesticide use [7, 13, 14, 15, 16], saves input costs [16, 17], increases crop yields [7, 14, 15, 17], protects the environment [11, 13], ensures the quality of agricultural produce [11], and brings extra economic benefits [11, 13, 14]. Because of multiple benefits of IPM, ways of boosting its application have attracted significant interest from various stakeholders.
Since farmers are decision-makers, it is important to identify their IPM-adopting behavior. According to previous literature, agricultural production factors, such as farm size [10, 18, 19, 20, 21], farming experience [10, 19], number of farm-labor forces [10, 20], and non-agricultural involvement of the farm household [10, 21, 22] significantly influence farmers’ IPM adoption. Farmers’ risk perception and environmental awareness both influence their adoption behavior. Risk-averse farmers are less likely to adopt IPM [22]. Meanwhile, if farmers care more about the environment, they are more likely to adopt IPM in agricultural production [22, 23]. Market incentives and governmental supports are also important factors in farmers’ decision-making [23]. Besides this, the availability of loans [22], the availability of extension activities [19], and promotion strength [20] all enhance farmers’ IPM adoption.
Last but not least, as a compounded agricultural technique, IPM application requires appliers to be familiar with relevant knowledge. According to specific field conditions, IPM involves techniques in cultivation, soil management, mechanical control, biological control, chemical control, etc. [9, 14, 19]. To adopt IPM, farmers have to master skills in pest monitoring, crop science, biology, ecology, etc. [5]. Knowledge is crucial to farmers’ IPM adoption [2, 7, 19]. As IPM is knowledge-intensive [2, 15], lack of knowledge might hinder farmers’ IPM adoption [24, 25]. Though researchers include farmers’ knowledge when investigating the impact factors of farmers’ IPM adoption, they usually use farmers’ education levels as an indicator of farmers’ knowledge [10, 18, 22]. There are two limits for using farmers’ education level for their agricultural production knowledge. First, education level and the level of agricultural production knowledge may not be completely correlated. Second, even though it is hard to increase farmers’ education level, it is possible to increase farmers’ knowledge through training. Some other scholars include farmers’ training experiences in their IPM-adoption analyses and conclude that farmers who have training experiences, such as FFS, IPM technology training, and agricultural training, are more likely to adopt IPM approaches compared with untrained farmers [10, 18, 21, 22]. However, using farmers’ training experience to represent their agricultural knowledge is not rigorous either.
Recognition And Assessment Of Resident' Deterioration In The Nursing Home Setting: A Critical Ethnography
There is limited research investigating how farmers’ knowledge influences their IPM adoption. Pouratashi and Iravani [26] assessed farmers’ IPM knowledge using four attributes including the negative aspects of pesticide use, awareness of pest-control alternatives, knowledge of beneficial insects, and the definition of IPM. However, they did not evaluate the impact of knowledge on IPM adoption. Including a self-reported question on a scale of five, Allahyari et al. [19] evaluated the effect of farmers’ knowledge on their IPM adoption from a more niche-targeting point of view, focusing on the techniques of IPM. Yaguana et al. [2] examined the long-term effect of farmers’ IPM knowledge on their IPM adoption over ten years and concluded that farmers’ IPM knowledge promoted their adoption even over a long period. Gautam et al. [7] evaluated the correlation between farmers’ knowledge and their adopted IPM practices. However, they focused solely on farmers’ knowledge of insect pests. Even though Liu et al. [23] asked farmers three questions to evaluate their knowledge of IPM technologies, the three questions were somewhat shallow, and may not imply farmers’ real perception of IPM technology. In this study, we test farmers through 45 questions concerning four disciplines of knowledge related to agricultural production and IPM to obtain scores that more precisely reflect their knowledge levels.
Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is one of the major staple grains in China, with a total yield achieving 211.86 million tons [27]. This high yield of rice was associated with a huge usage of chemical pesticides and fertilizers [3]. In 2019, commercial pesticide usage in China was 1.46 million tons [28], counting for approximately 12% of the world’s total [29]. The utilization rate of pesticides in China is about 39.8% for rice, maize, and wheat [28], causing severe environmental and health problems [30], not to mention the misuse and overuse of pesticides to ensure rice yield [3, 5, 30]. Misuse of pesticides severely threatens the sustainability of pest control, farmers’ health, and the environment [31], causing high input costs and pest resistance, as well as the elimination of the natural enemies of pests [30]. To ease the threats caused by pesticide misuse and overuse, the Chinese government has promoted IPM for decades. In the late 1970s, the Chinese government promoted crop IPM programs with a top-down extension approach. However, as the land policy changed to the household responsibility system in the 1980s, a huge number of smallholder farms became agricultural business entities. Thus, the top-down IPM approach was replaced by national IPM programs supported by international organizations. China participated in the Inter-Country IPM program for Rice from Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in 1988, introducing the farmer-led IPM tactics through the Farmer Field Schools (FFS) and the Training of Trainers program [5]. At present, the farmer-led IPM is still the major IPM approach in China, but with a low application rate
There is limited research investigating how farmers’ knowledge influences their IPM adoption. Pouratashi and Iravani [26] assessed farmers’ IPM knowledge using four attributes including the negative aspects of pesticide use, awareness of pest-control alternatives, knowledge of beneficial insects, and the definition of IPM. However, they did not evaluate the impact of knowledge on IPM adoption. Including a self-reported question on a scale of five, Allahyari et al. [19] evaluated the effect of farmers’ knowledge on their IPM adoption from a more niche-targeting point of view, focusing on the techniques of IPM. Yaguana et al. [2] examined the long-term effect of farmers’ IPM knowledge on their IPM adoption over ten years and concluded that farmers’ IPM knowledge promoted their adoption even over a long period. Gautam et al. [7] evaluated the correlation between farmers’ knowledge and their adopted IPM practices. However, they focused solely on farmers’ knowledge of insect pests. Even though Liu et al. [23] asked farmers three questions to evaluate their knowledge of IPM technologies, the three questions were somewhat shallow, and may not imply farmers’ real perception of IPM technology. In this study, we test farmers through 45 questions concerning four disciplines of knowledge related to agricultural production and IPM to obtain scores that more precisely reflect their knowledge levels.
Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is one of the major staple grains in China, with a total yield achieving 211.86 million tons [27]. This high yield of rice was associated with a huge usage of chemical pesticides and fertilizers [3]. In 2019, commercial pesticide usage in China was 1.46 million tons [28], counting for approximately 12% of the world’s total [29]. The utilization rate of pesticides in China is about 39.8% for rice, maize, and wheat [28], causing severe environmental and health problems [30], not to mention the misuse and overuse of pesticides to ensure rice yield [3, 5, 30]. Misuse of pesticides severely threatens the sustainability of pest control, farmers’ health, and the environment [31], causing high input costs and pest resistance, as well as the elimination of the natural enemies of pests [30]. To ease the threats caused by pesticide misuse and overuse, the Chinese government has promoted IPM for decades. In the late 1970s, the Chinese government promoted crop IPM programs with a top-down extension approach. However, as the land policy changed to the household responsibility system in the 1980s, a huge number of smallholder farms became agricultural business entities. Thus, the top-down IPM approach was replaced by national IPM programs supported by international organizations. China participated in the Inter-Country IPM program for Rice from Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in 1988, introducing the farmer-led IPM tactics through the Farmer Field Schools (FFS) and the Training of Trainers program [5]. At present, the farmer-led IPM is still the major IPM approach in China, but with a low application rate
0 komentar
Posting Komentar