Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-568f69f84b-ftpnm Total loading time: 0.161 Render date: 2021-09-18T03:04:53.608Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Adoption of Site-Specific Information and Variable-Rate Technologies in Cotton Precision Farming

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Roland K. Roberts
Affiliation:
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN
Burton C. English
Affiliation:
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN
James A. Larson
Affiliation:
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN
Rebecca L. Cochran
Affiliation:
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN
W. Robert Goodman
Affiliation:
Auburn University, Auburn, AL
Sherry L. Larkin
Affiliation:
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
Michele C. Marra
Affiliation:
North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC
Steven W. Martin
Affiliation:
Delta Research and Extension Center, Mississippi State University, Stoneville, MS
W. Donald Shurley
Affiliation:
Rural Development Center, University of Georgia, Athens, GA
Jeanne M. Reeves
Affiliation:
Cotton Incorporated, Cary, NC
Get access

Abstract

Probit analysis identified factors that influence the adoption of precision farming technologies by Southeastern cotton farmers. Younger, more educated farmers who operated larger farms and were optimistic about the future of precision farming were most likely to adopt site-specific information technology. The probability of adopting variable-rate input application technology was higher for younger farmers who operated larger farms, owned more of the land they farmed, were more informed about the costs and benefits of precision farming, and were optimistic about the future of precision farming. Computer use was not important, possibly because custom hiring shifts the burden of computer use to agribusiness firms.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aerospace Corporation. “Global Positioning System Primer.” Public Affairs Department, Aerospace Corporation. Internet site: http://www. aero.org/publications/GPSPRIMER/index.html (Accessed June 2, 2003).Google Scholar
Arnholt, M., Batte, M.T., and Prochaska, S.. “Adoption and Use of Precision Farming Technologies: A Survey of Central Ohio Precision Farmers.” The Ohio State University Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Development Economics, Report Series: AEDE-RP-0011-01, 2001.Google Scholar
Batte, M.T., and Arnholt, M.W.. “Precision Farming Adoption and Use in Ohio: Case Studies of Six Leading-Edge Adopters.Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 38(2003):125–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belsley, D., Kuh, E., and Welsch, R.. Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daberkow, S., Fernandez-Cornejo, J., and Padgitt, M.. “Precision Agriculture Adoption Continues to Grow,” pp. 3538. Agricultural Outlook. Economic Research Service, USDA, Washington, D.C., November 2002a.Google Scholar
Daberkow, S., “Precision Agriculture Technology Diffusion: Current Status and Future Prospects.” Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Precision Agriculture, Minneapolis, MN. ASA/CSSA/SSSA, Madison, WI, July 14-17, 2002b.Google Scholar
Daberkow, S.G., and McBride, W.D.. “Adoption of Precision Agriculture Technologies by U.S. Farmers.” Proceedings of the 5,h International Conference on Precision Agriculture, Minneapolis, MN. ASA/CSSA/SSSA, Madison, WI, July 16-19, 2000.Google Scholar
Dillman, D.A.Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1978.Google Scholar
Durrence, J.S., Thomas, D.L., Perry, CD., and Vellidis, G.. “Preliminary Evaluation of Commercial Yield Monitors: The 1998 Season in South Georgia.” Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conference, pp. 366–72. Orlando, FL. Jan. 3-7, 1999. Memphis, TN: National Cotton Council of America, 1999.Google Scholar
Fernandez-Cornejo, J., Daberkow, S., and McBride, W.D.. “Decomposing the Size Effect on the Adoption of Innovations: Agrobiotechnology and Precision Agriculture.AgBioForum 4(2001):124–36.Google Scholar
Greene, W.H.Econometric Analysis. 5th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2003.Google Scholar
Greene, W.H.Gender Economics Courses in Liberal Arts Colleges: Further Results.Journal of Economic Education 29(1998a):291300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greene, W.H.LIMDEP Version 7.0 User's Manual Revised Edition. Plainview, NY: Econometric Software, Inc., 1998b.Google Scholar
Hausman, J.A., and Wise, D.A.. “A Conditional Probit Model for Qualitative Choice: Discrete Decisions Recognizing Interdependence and Heterogeneous Preferences.Econometrica 46(1978):403–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isik, M., Khanna, M., and Winter-Nelson, A.. “Adoption of Site-Specific Technologies Under Uncertainty.” Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Precision Agriculture, Minneapolis, MN. ASA/CSSA/SSSA, Madison, WI, July 16-19, 2000.Google Scholar
Jaenicke, D.C., and Cohen-Vogel, D.R.. “Sequential Adoption of Precision-Farming Technologies Under Uncertainty.” Paper presented at the Southern Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Lexington, KY, January 29-Febraary 2, 2000.Google Scholar
Khanna, M.Sequential Adoption of Site-Specific Technologies and Its Implications for Nitrogen Productivity: A Double Selectivity Model.American Journal of Agricultural Economics 83(2001):3551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maohua, W.Possible Adoption of Precision Agriculture for Developing Countries at the Threshold of the New Millennium.Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 30(2001):4550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Napier, TL., Robinson, J., and Tucker, M.. “Adoption of Precision Farming within Three Midwest Watersheds.Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 55(2000):135–41.Google Scholar
National Research Council. Precision Agriculture in the 21st Century: Geospatial and Information Technologies in Crop Production. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1997.Google Scholar
Norton, G.W., and Swinton, S.M.. “Precision Agriculture: Global Prospects and Environmental Implications,” Tomorrow's Agriculture: Incentives, Institutions, Infrastructure and Innovations: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference of Agricultural Economists, 2000. Peters, G.H. and Pingali, P., eds. pp. 269–86. London: Ashgate, 2001.Google Scholar
Plant, R.E.Site-Specific Management: The Application of Information Technology to Crop Production.Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 30(2001):929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popp, J., and Griffin, T.. “Adoption Trends of Early Adopters of Precision Farming in Arkansas.” Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Precision Agriculture, Minneapolis, MN. ASA/CSSA/SSSA, Madison, WI, July 16-19, 2000.Google Scholar
Roades, J.P., Beck, A.D., and Searcy, S.W.. “Cotton Yield Mapping: Texas Experiences in 1999.” pp. 404–07. In Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conference, San Antonio, TX. Jan. 4-8, 2000. Memphis, TN: National Cotton Council of America, 2000.Google Scholar
Roberts, R.K., English, B.C., and Larson, J.A.. “Factors Affecting the Location of Precision Farming Technology Adoption in Tennessee.Journal of Extension 40(2002):pages not available.Google Scholar
Roberts, R.K., English, B.C., Larson, J.A., Cochran, R.L., Goodman, B., Larkin, S., Marra, M., Martin, S., Reeves, J., and Shurley, D.. Precision Farming by Cotton Producers in Six Southern States: Results from the 2001 Southern Precision Farming Survey. The University of Tennessee Agricultural Experiment Station, Department of Agricultural Economics, Research Series 03-02, 2002.Google Scholar
Skorupa, B. Cotton Board, 871 Ridgeway Loop, Ste. 100, Memphis, TN, 2000.Google Scholar
Swinton, S.M., and Lowenberg-DeBoer, J.. “Evaluating the Profitability of Site-Specific Farming.Journal of Production Agriculture 11(1998):439–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swinton, S.M., “Global Adoption of Precision Agriculture Technologies: Who, When and Why?,” Third European Conference on Precision Agriculture, Grenier, G. and Blackmore, S., eds., pp. 557–62. Montpellier, France: Agro Montpellier, 2001.Google Scholar
Whipker, L.D., and Akridge, J.T.. “2002 Precision Agricultural Services Dealership Survey Results.” CropLife Magazine and Center for Food and Agricultural Business, Purdue University, Staff Paper No. 02-02, 2002.Google Scholar
46
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Adoption of Site-Specific Information and Variable-Rate Technologies in Cotton Precision Farming
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Adoption of Site-Specific Information and Variable-Rate Technologies in Cotton Precision Farming
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Adoption of Site-Specific Information and Variable-Rate Technologies in Cotton Precision Farming
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *