Targeting the farmer decision making process: A pathway to increased adoption of integrated weed management

Wilson, Robyn S.; Hooker, Neal H.; Tucker, Mark; LeJeune, Jeff; Doohan, Douglas

doi:10.1016/j.cropro.2009.05.013

Cited by 54 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Farmers are known to have particular decisionmaking tendencies that differ from other agriculture stakeholders like scientists and extension agents (Wilson et al 2009). Many farmers demonstrate particularly risk-averse decision-making.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Linking Farmer Weed Management Behavior with Weed Pressure: More than Just Technology

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most studies on weed population dynamics in farming systems have focused on the effects of different weed control strategies. Those studies usually assume that farmers, operating within a particular system, have a uniform management style. However, it is likely that weed management decision making also varies between farmers that operate within a system. In this study, the relationship between weed management behavior and the outcome of that behavior within an organic farming system is studied. It is hypothesized that differences in weed pressure between organic farms can be related to differences in farmers' weed management behavior. We explore which weed and general management factors are of main influence on the weed pressure, and investigate the influence of farmer's beliefs and knowledge on weed control techniques and the observed weed pressure. Preventive measures and timing of main soil tillage operation were identified as the weed management factors most influential for weed pressure. With the increasing number of preventive measures applied, weed pressure decreased, with a stale seedbed being the most important preventive measure. The weed pressure increased with the number of days after September 1st on which the main tillage operation was carried out. Because of this postponement of the tillage treatments, the growing season of weeds was extended and more species were able to reproduce before winter, thereby enhancing weed pressure. Field size, rather than weed pressure, determined the number of hand-weeding hours per ha; with increasing field size the amount of hand weeding per surface area was reduced. On farms with lower weed pressures a higher percentage of competitive crops were grown than on farms with higher weed pressures. The farmer's beliefs and knowledge on weed control techniques differed between farmers with different weed pressures. Market-oriented growers had a higher on-farm weed pressure than crop-growth–oriented growers. It was concluded that studies on weed management behavior and the effect of that behavior can lead to a better understanding of farming systems and to more effective weed management in those systems.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Linking Farmer Weed Management Behavior with Weed Pressure: More than Just Technology

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Wilson et al [92] in a study to compare the Ohio farmer model to a weed scientist decision model about management of weeds, concluded that farmers understand but do not practice IWM. The failure to adopt may be attributed to gaps in their understanding of the human role in weed dispersal, their focus on the risks associated with weeds without recognition of their ecological benefits, and the tendency to overlook risks associated with management.…”

Section: Principles Of Integrated Weed Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The IWM approaches incorporate multiple tactics of prevention, avoidance, monitoring and suppression of weeds, undergirded by the knowledge of the agroecosystem biology [3]. The development of IWM was motivated by a desire to provide farmers with systematic approaches to reduce reliance upon herbicides [4] and, consequently, retard the selection of herbicide-resistant biotypes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Weed Management in the Soybean Crop

Silva¹,

Galon²,

Aspiazú³

et al. 2013

Soybean - Pest Resistance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…La adopción e implementación de nuevas estrategias de cultivo o de manejo del agroecosistema por parte de productores agrícolas, puede resultar lenta o incluso nula si la información generada a través de investigación aplicada no es transmitida de manera efectiva y por los canales adecuados (Leeuwis, 2004). Por ejemplo, en un estudio realizado para identificar las razones de la pobre adopción del manejo integrado de malezas (MIM) en Ohio, Estados Unidos, se encontró que los productores tenían conocimiento del tema, pero lo subestimaban en comparación con otros factores de manejo del cultivo (Wilson et al, 2009). También se determinó que los educadores fallaron en promover el MIM dentro indicator.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Conocimiento sobre coberturas vivas y disposición a utilizarlas por productores de varios cultivos

Gómez¹,

Lutz²,

Alvarado³

et al. 2017

Mesoam. Agron.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

© 2017 Agronomía Mesoamericana es desarrollada en la Universidad de Costa Rica y se encuentra licenciada con Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 3.0 Costa Rica. Para más información escríbanos a pccmca@ucr.ac.cr ResumenEl objetivo de este trabajo fue realizar un diagnóstico sobre el conocimiento que tienen agricultores de papaya, palma aceitera y banano de Costa Rica, sobre coberturas vivas y la disposición a implementarlas. Se construyó un instrumento de evaluación que consistió de veintiocho preguntas para contestar falso o verdadero, con las cuales se creó un indicador de conocimiento. Además, se incluyeron siete preguntas con las respuestas en una escala de cinco puntos, para explorar la disposición del productor a implementar coberturas vivas en su finca. Este instrumento se aplicó en el año 2014 a 36 productores de papaya, 30 de palma aceitera y 57 bananeros. El análisis de ítemes, para determinar confiabilidad, produjo valores alfa de Cronbach superiores al 90%. Se realizó también un análisis de factores para asegurar que el instrumento medía un único rasgo: conocimiento sobre coberturas vivas. El comportamiento de los puntajes globales de conocimiento varió de manera considerable de un grupo de productores a otro. El promedio más alto y con menor variabilidad se obtuvo en los instrumentos aplicados a productores de banano, mientras que el promedio menor y con mayor variabilidad se determinó de los productores de papaya. Las respuestas a cada una de las preguntas variaron considerablemente de un grupo de productores a otro. La mayoría de los productores de los tres cultivos estuvo dispuesto a utilizar coberturas vivas y a recibir capacitación.Palabras clave: cultivos de cobertura, leguminosas, cobertura verde. AbstractThe objective of this study was to assess the knowledge on cover crops and native vegetation mulches and the willingness to implement them by papaya, oil palm, and banana producers in Costa Rica. An evaluation instrument with twenty eight questions to be answered as true or false was developed, and it was used to yield a knowledge

show abstract

Targeting the farmer decision making process: A pathway to increased adoption of integrated weed management

Cited by 54 publications

References 24 publications

Linking Farmer Weed Management Behavior with Weed Pressure: More than Just Technology

Linking Farmer Weed Management Behavior with Weed Pressure: More than Just Technology

Weed Management in the Soybean Crop

Conocimiento sobre coberturas vivas y disposición a utilizarlas por productores de varios cultivos

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About