RESUMEN
Robotic weed control is not yet widely adopted, despite its technological availability and proven economics and sustainability in crop cultivation by replacing seasonal labor and synthetic pesticides. This impedes technologically enabled changes toward more sustainable agricultural systems. Given that adopting robotics for the weeding process requires changing existing systems, farmers' appraisals for the new and the current weeding technology may constitute barriers. However, this dualism has been largely ignored by previous studies. Based on a duality approach, we investigate farmers' beliefs, and adaptive and maladaptive appraisals of current and new robotic weeding in sugar beets. The main variable of interest is their behavioral intention to adopt weeding robots. For our sample of German farmers, we identify the main enablers perceived efficacy of the robots and social norms. The main barrier are maladaptive rewards from traditional weeding. We recommend policy incentives to promote large-scale uptake of new and more sustainable robotic technologies. To improve efficacy perceptions of such robotic systems public demonstrations/talks are mostly relevant. Maladaptive rewards can be reduced, for instance, by notifying about the dependency of the current practices on future availability of synthetic inputs or seasonal workers.
RESUMEN
The Data presented in this article contains information on farmers' acceptance of results-based agri-environmental schemes (AES) collected from German farmers in an online survey in spring 2020. Acceptance is measured in the willingness to participate and the intensity of participation in terms of area willing to enroll for the scheme. Personal, farm characteristics and behavioral factors have been considered. We used a between subject design to introduce a social nudge (i.e. information treatment) for one group of participants. The data was collected via the software LimeSurvey. We chose a two-step approach e.g. participants were asked for participation first and then only those who would be willing to participate were asked for the intensity in terms of area willing to enroll. This data is related to the paper Farmers' acceptance of results-based agri-environmental schemes: a German perspective[1].
RESUMEN
Increasing farmers' acceptance and adoption of environmentally beneficial farming practices is essential for mitigating negative impacts of agriculture. To support adoption through policy, it is necessary to understand which types of farms or farmers do or do not (yet) apply such practices. However, farmers are not a homogeneous group and their behavior is subject to a complex array of structural, socioeconomic, and socio-psychological influences. Reducing this complexity, farmer typologies or archetypes are useful tools for understanding differing motivations for the uptake of sustainable farming practices. Previous investigations of the role of farmer archetypes in the adoption of such practices rely on either purely qualitative or purely quantitative methods in data collection, typology creation, and hypothesis testing. Our study combines both approaches by classifying survey respondents into farmer types based on a previous Q methodological study. We then use these types in a two-part regression model that aims to explain participation in agri-environmental schemes (AES) and the level of scheme participation. To control for farm structural factors, we additionally link our questionnaire data to secondary data from the farm accountancy data network. Results indicate that in Austria, AES are attractive to all types of farmers, but the level of participation (AES income per hectare) in these schemes differs between archetypes: Profitability-oriented farmers participate less, and nature-oriented farmers participate more than other types. This suggests that monetary compensations for sustainable farming practices are not perceived as sufficient by certain groups of farmers, and policy makers need to consider additional kinds of incentives.
RESUMEN
The dataset includes responses from a contingent valuation study about the national climate change mitigation policies in Germany. The online survey was carried out in the spring of 2014. It assesses the willingness to pay for an increase of the national CO2 reduction target by 10 percentage points, which closely represents Germany׳s climate change mitigation strategy. Respondents were randomly allocated to one of the following three question formats: The dichotomous choice referendum, the dissonance minimizing referendum and the two-sided payment ladder. The data can be used to investigate the influence of alternative statistical approaches on the willingness to pay measures and their comparison across question formats.