The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Roles of Adoption and Behavior Change in Agricultural Policy
Abstract
Much of agricultural and agri‐environmental policy is concerned with influencing the behavior of farmers in adopting new practices. An ability to understand and predict adoption of practices is useful for agricultural policy in several ways, including assessing additionality, selecting policy mechanisms, targeting policy to practices, farmer types or regions, and assessing likely policy success. Clear thinking about adoption is sometimes clouded by ambiguous and inconsistent language. We suggest a number of terms that are more specific than “adoption.” Research needs include collection of long‐term data sets on adoption of a variety of practices, understanding what determines continuous, sustained adoption of conservation practices and a better understanding of why adoption varies between farms.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Predicting farmer uptake of new agricultural practices: a tool for research, extension and policy
Kuehne, G., Llewellyn, R., Pannell, D. J., Wilkinson, R., Dolling, P., Ouzman, J., & Ewing, M. (2017) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2017.06.007 · Cited by 367
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 40
- 10.1016/j.agee.2013.08.008 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.10.006 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jeem.2012.09.003 · DOI
- 10.1002/aepp.13003 · DOI
- 10.3368/le.84.1.66 · DOI
- Claassen R. M.Bowman J.McFadden D.Smith andS.Wallander.2018. Tillage Intensity and Conservation Cropping in the United States. Economic Information Bulletin EIB‐197. Economic Research Service U.S. Department of Agriculture September.
- 10.3368/le.94.1.19 · DOI · Paper page
- Claassen R., 2016, Cost‐Effective Conservation Programs for Sustaining Environmental Quality, Choices, 31, 1
- Claassen R., 2017, Additionality in Grassland Easements to Provide Migratory Bird Habitat in the Northern Plains, Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 42, 291
- Ding Y., 2009, The Impact of Weather Extremes on Agricultural Production Methods: Does Drought Increase Adoption of Conservation Tillage Practices?, Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 34, 395
- 10.1071/EA08284 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.05.023 · DOI
- 10.1016/0040-1625(93)90053-A · DOI
- 10.1016/j.agsy.2012.06.001 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jeem.2018.08.007 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.landusepol.2010.06.006 · DOI
- 10.2489/jswc.65.6.413 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.foodpol.2006.01.003 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/erae/jbv031 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1746-692X.2007.00073.x · DOI
- 10.2307/1244139 · DOI
- Lichtenberg E., 2004, Cost‐Responsiveness of Conservation Practice Adoption: A Revealed Preference Approach, Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 29, 420
- 10.1016/j.fcr.2012.03.013 · DOI
- 10.3368/le.89.4.722 · DOI
- 10.1002/aepp.13008 · DOI
- 10.3368/le.84.2.225 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1574-0862.2008.00362.x · DOI
- 10.1071/EA05037 · DOI
- Pannell D.J.andA.M.Roberts.2015. Public Goods and Externalities: Agri‐Environmental Policy Measures in Australia. OECD Food Agriculture and Fisheries Paper No. 80. Paris: OECD Publishing.https://doi.org/10.1787/5js08hx1btlw-en. · DOI
- 10.2489/jswc.63.5.300 · DOI
- 10.1071/AN16432 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2011.09.005 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.agsy.2011.10.009 · DOI
- 10.1111/0002-9092.00097 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1467-8489.2003.t01-1-00224.x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.iswcr.2019.03.002 · DOI
- 10.1017/aae.2016.48 · DOI
- Wade T. R.Claassen andS.Wallander.2015. Conservation‐Practice Adoption Rates Vary Widely by Crop and Region. Economic Information Bulletin EIB‐147. Economic Research Service U.S. Department of Agriculture.
- Wade T., 2016, Modeling Field‐Level Conservation Tillage Adoption with Aggregate Choice Data, Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 41, 266
- 10.1002/aepp.13004 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The adopters versus the technology: which matters more when predicting or explaining adoption?
de Oca Munguia, O. M., & Llewellyn, R. (2020) · Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy · doi:10.1002/aepp.13007 · Cited by 90
Extension and management pathways for enhanced farm sustainability: evidence from Irish dairy farms
Balaine, L., Läpple, D., Dillon, E. J., & Buckley, C. (2023) · European Review of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1093/erae/jbac033 · Cited by 18
Metadata
- Authors
- Pannell, D. J., & Claassen, R.
- Venue
- Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2020-02-05
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 31-41
- ISSN
- 2040-5790
- 2040-5804
- Cited by
- 123
- References
- 1
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
