Factors Affecting Perceived Improvements in Environmental Quality from Precision Farming

By Larkin, Sherry L.; Perruso, Larry et al. | Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, December 2005 | Go to article overview

Factors Affecting Perceived Improvements in Environmental Quality from Precision Farming


Larkin, Sherry L., Perruso, Larry, Marra, Michele C., Roberts, Roland K., et al., Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics


This study identified the factors that influenced whether farmers in the Southeastern United States perceived an improvement in environmental quality from adopting precision farming technologies (PFTs). Farmers with larger farms or higher yields were more likely to believe that they observed positive externalities associated with PFTs. Farmers who found PFTs profitable or who believed input reduction was important had higher probabilities whereas those with higher incomes or who were more dependent on farm income were less likely to perceive such benefits. Interestingly, the importance of environmental quality and length of time using PFTs were not found to affect the probability of perceiving an improvement in environmental quality.

Key Words: precision agriculture, site-specific farming, variable rate application

JEL Classifications: C25, Q12, Q24.

Precision farming (also known as precision agriculture) entails the assessment of site-specific land and crop needs to develop management practices that are calibrated to the needs of each site within a field. The adoption of precision farming as a management practice thus involves both the identification of temporal and spatial variation and the subsequent use of the site-specific information to apply inputs at variable rates across a field. The suite of available precision farming technologies (PFTs) has the potential to increase profits, especially for the production of input-intensive crops (Roberts et al. 2004). The profitability of many of these technologies, especially in regard to their use for different crops and in different combinations, has not been categorically proven (Griffin et al.; Lambert and Lowenberg-DeBoer; Swinton and Lowenberg-DeBoer 2001). However, profitability may not be the sole motivation for PFT adoption. Farm managers and society may realize environmental benefits following the adoption of PFT-based crop production. For example, a recent study found that farmers were willing to forsake higher yields (by reducing input use) to avoid the risk of moderate environmental damage (Lohr, Parker, and Higley).

If an improvement in environmental quality from the adoption of precision farming technologies also benefits society and not just the farmer adopting the new production practices, we might expect a suboptimal PFT adoption rate. The adoption (or lack of adoption) of PFT may produce a positive (negative) externality. For example, a farmer who uses excess inputs might have a field with excessive runoff that could contribute to water pollution and impose a cost on society from increased human health problems or increased water treatment costs. Resources used in the production of such crops are being allocated inefficiently; the resulting market failure is causing negative environmental externalities.

What can be done to address these types of externalities? The value of the externality needs to be captured and internalized into the production process. If the use of traditional production practices is considered to cause a negative externality, the "polluter pays principle" supports a tax-based solution. Under this principle, the government sets emission standards that, when exceeded, result in a tax payment by the farmer. If the use of PFTs is considered to produce a positive externality, a subsidy program could be used to increase usage of these technologies, and thus improve environmental quality. If PFTs are not profitable, or the costs to impose the tax and monitor the standard exceed the expected benefits, the latter approach is necessary to solve the market failure problem.

As for the role of policy in this case, if precision farming practices produce socially desirable benefits (as opposed to private benefits) in the form of a cleaner environment (i.e., a positive externality) then policy makers could implement programs to subsidize the use of PFTs or establish credible market-based incentives. The Environmental Quality Incentives Program, the Conservation security Program, and the National Organic Program are examples of federal efforts to promote these types of practices in the United States. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Upgrade your membership to receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad‑free environment

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Upgrade your membership to cite pages or passages in MLA 8, MLA 7, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Note: primary sources have slightly different requirements for citation. Please see these guidelines for more information.

Cited article

Factors Affecting Perceived Improvements in Environmental Quality from Precision Farming
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen
Items saved in your active project from this article
  • Highlights & Notes
  • Citations
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Upgrade your membership to cite pages or passages in MLA 8, MLA 7, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Search by... Author
    Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.