تعداد نشریات | 161 |
تعداد شمارهها | 6,532 |
تعداد مقالات | 70,501 |
تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 124,097,014 |
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 97,204,541 |
بررسی تأثیر ویژگیهای ادراکشده کودهای زیستی بر مصرف آنها در بین کشاورزان (مورد مطالعه: روستای ینگیجه، شهرستان زنجان) | ||
تحقیقات اقتصاد و توسعه کشاورزی ایران | ||
مقاله 7، دوره 50، شماره 2، تیر 1398، صفحه 333-345 اصل مقاله (619.82 K) | ||
نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/ijaedr.2019.267362.668665 | ||
نویسندگان | ||
رسول لوایی آدریانی* 1؛ حسام الدین غلامی2؛ احسان قلی فر3؛ جواد قاسمی2 | ||
1دکتری توسعه کشاورزی، دانشکده اقتصاد و توسعه کشاورزی، دانشگاه تهران، کرج، ایران | ||
2استادیار سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، تهران، ایران | ||
3دانشآموخته دکتری ترویج و آموزش کشاورزی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران | ||
چکیده | ||
ویژگیهای ادراکشده نوآوری بهعنوان مؤلفههایی محسوب میشوند که پذیرش یک نوآوری را تحت تأثیر قرار میدهند. بر این اساس، پژوهش حاضر با هدف بررسی اثر ویژگیهای ادراکشده کودهای زیستی، بر مصرف این کودها در روستای ینگیجه از بخش مرکزی شهرستان زنجان انجام شد. جامعه آماری این پیمایش شامل تمامی کشاورزان فعال در این روستا (313=N) بود که 161 نفر از آنان به روش نمونهگیری در دسترس انتخاب شدند. معیار تعیین حجم نمونه، متناسب با حجم نمونه مورد نیاز برای استفاده از تکنیکهای چندمتغیری آماری بود که البته بر اساس فرمول کوکران نیز بسندگی حجم نمونه تأیید شد. بهمنظور جمعآوری دادهها از پرسشنامهای استفاده شد که روایی آن توسط صاحبنظران و پایایی آن از طریق محاسبه آلفای کرونباخ (برای بخشهای مختلف بالاتر از 7/0) مورد تأیید قرار گرفت. فن تحلیل تشخیصی به روش گام به گام برای بررسی اثر ویژگیهای نوآوری شامل «سازگاری ادراکشده»، «رؤیتپذیری ادراکشده»، «پیچیدگی ادراکشده»، «آزمونپذیری ادراکشده» و «مزیت نسبی ادراکشده» بر مصرف کودهای زیستی استفاده شد. نتایج حاصل از تحلیل تشخیصی نشان داد که «مزیت نسبی ادراکشده» بهعنوان تنها ویژگی کودهای زیستی است که توانست کشاورزان گروه «مصرفکننده» را از کشاورزانی که این کودها را مصرف نمیکنند، متمایز نماید. سایر متغیرهای وارد شده به تابع تشخیصی فاقد توان تشخیصی قابل قبول برای تفکیک سطوح متغیر «مصرف کود» بودند. ممکن است کشاورزان مختلف بهدلیل تفاوتهایی که از نظر شرایط مالی، فنی و مهارتیشان داشتهاند؛ ادراک متفاوتی از ویژگیهای کودهای زیستی پیدا کرده باشند. بنابراین پیشنهاد میشود در مطالعات آتی اثر ویژگیهای فردی- اجتماعی کشاورزان توأم با ویژگیهای ادراکی آنان از نوآوری مد نظر قرار گیرد. | ||
کلیدواژهها | ||
"ویژگیهای ادراکشده نوآوری"؛ "کودهای زیستی"؛ "مزیت نسبی ادراکشده" | ||
عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
Investigating the Effects of Innovation perceived Characteristics on Bio-fertilizers Consumption among Farmers (Case Study: Yengijeh Village, Zanjan County) | ||
نویسندگان [English] | ||
Rasool Lavaei Adaryani1؛ Hesam Gholami2؛ Ehsan Gholifar3؛ Javad Ghasemi2 | ||
1PhD in Agricultural Development. Faculty of Agricultural Economics and Development. University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran | ||
2Assistant Professor. Agricultural Research. Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran, Iran | ||
3PhD of Agricultural Extension and Education. Tarbiat Modares University, Iran | ||
چکیده [English] | ||
Perceived innovation characteristics are one of the components affecting innovation adoption. Accordingly, present study aimed to investigate the perceived bio-fertilizers characteristics impact on consumption of these bio-fertilizers. Statistical population of this study constituted of all farmers were working in Yengijeh Village in Zanjan county (N= 313) from which 161 farmers were accessed through convenient sampling. Sample size was determined according to appropriate sample size for multivariate statistical techniques. The appropriateness of determined sample size was also confirmed by Cochran formula. Data collected through a questionnaire that its validity and reliability were examined respectively by a panel of experts and Cronbach's alpha (α ≥ 70). Stepwise discriminant analysis was applied to examine the effect of innovation characteristics including "perceived compatibility", "perceived observability", "perceived complexity", "perceived trialability" and "perceived relative advantage" on bio-fertilizers consumption. Discriminant analysis revealed that "perceived relative advantage" was the only bio-fertilizers' characteristic that could distinguish consumer farmers from non- consumer farmers. Other variables entered the discriminant function lacked acceptable discriminant power for separating consumer farmers from non-consumer farmers. In this study farmers' perception of bio-fertilizers may could affected by their financial, technical conditions and skills. Thus, it is suggested that farmers' individual and social characteristics considered, besides, bio-fertilizers perceived characteristics. | ||
کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
Perceived Innovation Characteristics, Bio-Fertilizers and Perceived Relative Advantage | ||
مراجع | ||
10. Eder, J. M., Mutsaerts, C. F., Sriwannawit, P. J. E. R., & Science, S. (2015). Mini-grids and renewable energy in rural Africa: How diffusion theory explains adoption of electricity in Uganda. 5, 45-54. 11. Eshaghi, S., R, Hedjazi, U., Rezvanfar, A., & Alambeigi, A. (2017). Logit analysis of the dimensions of innovation and attitude effects on the environmental behavior of Ardabil province rural in relation to conservation technology. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development Research, 48(1), 79-92. 12. Farajollahi, M., Nemati, A., Khatibzanjani, N., & Vajari, T. (2017). Required characteristics to utilizing of mobile learning in organic agriculture education from farmers’ perspective East Azarbaijan. Journal of Agricultural Education Administration Research, 9(42), 120-135. doi:10.22092/jaear.2017.114986.1418 13. Gatignon, H., & Robertson, T. S. J. J. o. c. r. (1985). A propositional inventory for new diffusion research. 11(4), 849-867. 14. Ghambarali, R., & Zarafshani, K. (2012). Reviewing on the influence of innovation characteristics in adoption process with the use of meta-analysis method. Paper presented at the Fourth Congress of Extension and Education in Agriculture and Natural Resources Management, Iran. 15. Ghane, F., Samah, B. A., Ahmad, A., & Idris, K. (2011). The role of social influence and innovation characteristics in the adoption of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) practices by paddy farmers in Iran. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the International Conference on Social Science and Humanity. 16. Godfray, H. C. J., Beddington, J. R., Crute, I. R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J. F., . . . Toulmin, C. J. s. (2010). Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people. 1185383. 17. Golbaz, S., & Karami Dehkordi, A. (2015). Analysis of innovative features the Reforming and Improving Grape Orchard and its impact on innovation adoption in the Khoramdareh Township. Agricultural Extension and Education Research, 8(30), 1-20. 18. Grote, U. J. F. S. (2014). Can we improve global food security? A socio-economic and political perspective. 6(2), 187-200. 19. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2009). Multivariate Data Analysis (7 ed.): Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice hall. 20. Hasler, K., Olfs, H.-W., Omta, O., & Bröring, S. J. S. (2017). Drivers for the adoption of different eco-innovation types in the fertilizer sector: a review. 9(12), 2216. 21. Heidarieh, S., A, Seyed Hosseini, S., M, & Shahabi, A. (2013). Simulation of technology acceptance model in banking of Iran with emphasis on system dynamics. Journal of Technology Development Management, 1, 67-98. 22. Holak, S. L., & Lehmann, D. (1990). Purchase intentions and the dimensions of innovation: An exploratory model. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 7(1), 59-73. 23. Igiehon, N. O., Babalola, O. O. J. A. m., & biotechnology. (2017). Biofertilizers and sustainable agriculture: exploring arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. 101(12), 4871-4881. 24. Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2008). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches: Sage. 25. Joo, Y., Lim, K., & Lim, E. J. A. J. o. E. T. (2014). Investigating the structural relationship among perceived innovation attributes, intention to use and actual use of mobile learning in an online university in South Korea. 30(4). 26. Karami, E., Rezaei-Moghaddam, K., Ahmadvand, M., & Lari, M. B. (2006). Adoption of Rice- Fish Farming (RFF) in Fars Province Iranain Agricultural Extension and Education Journal, 2(2), 31-44. 27. Lancaster, G., & Taylor, C. J. T. Q. R. o. M. (1986). The diffusion of innovations and their attributes: A critical review. 11(4), 13-19. 28. Läpple, D., Renwick, A., & Thorne, F. J. F. P. (2015). Measuring and understanding the drivers of agricultural innovation: Evidence from Ireland. 51, 1-8. 29. Lee, J., & Allaway, A. J. J. o. S. m. (2002). Effects of personal control on adoption of self-service technology innovations. 16(6), 553-572. 30. Makiabadi, F., Lashkarara, F., & Mirdamadi, S., M. (2016). The Organic Farming's Capabilities in Improving Food Security from the Viewpoint of Agricultural Experts in Agriculture Organization in Tehran province. Agricultural Extension and Education Research, 9(2), 11-20. 31. Mannan, S., Nordin, S. M., Rafik-Galea, S. J. G. B., & Research, M. (2017). Innovation Diffusion Attributes as Predictors to Adoption of Green Fertilizer Technology among Paddy Farmers in Perak State. 9. 32. Meijer, S. S., Catacutan, D., Ajayi, O. C., Sileshi, G. W., & Nieuwenhuis, M. J. I. J. o. A. S. (2015). The role of knowledge, attitudes and perceptions in the uptake of agricultural and agroforestry innovations among smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. 13(1), 40-54. 33. Mirzaei, N., & Alibeigi, A., H. (2016). Agricultural Paradigmatic Preferences of Agricultural and Natural Resources Faculty Members in west of Iran. Journal of Agricultural Education Administration Research, 8(36), 106-118. doi:10.22092/jaear.2016.106618 34. Movahedi, R., Izadi, N., & Vahdat Adab, R. (2017). Investigating Factors Affecting Farmers’Adoption of Pressurized Irrigation Tchnology in Asadabad County, Hamedan Province. Journal of Water Research in Agriculture, 31.2(2), 287-300. doi:10.22092/jwra.2017.113172 35. Naeemi, A., Najafloo, P., & sobhani, S., M, J. (2015). Role of Education, Extension and Information in Development of Agricultural Biotechnology from the Viewpoint of the Subject Specialists. Agricultural Education Administration Research, 7(33), 97-110. doi:10.22092/jaear.2015.105841 36. Nazeri, P., Kashani, A., Khavazi, K., Ardakani, M., R, & Mirakhoondi, M. (2012). Effect of Use Microbial Zinc Granulated Phosphorous Bio fertilizer on Growth Indices of Bean. Scientific Journal Management System, 8(42), 1-16. 37. Ostlund, L. E. J. J. o. c. r. (1974). Perceived innovation attributes as predictors of innovativeness. 1(2), 23-29. 38. Rajabi, A., Shabanali Fami, H., & Pooratashi, M. (2013). Investigating adoption component of agricultural organic products from the viewpoints of consumers (A case study in Karaj County). Journal of Food Science and Technology, 38(10), 33-43. 39. Rajendran, K., Devaraj, P. J. B., & bioenergy. (2004). Biomass and nutrient distribution and their return of Casuarina equisetifolia inoculated with biofertilizers in farm land. 26(3), 235-249. 40. Rezaei-Moghaddam, K., & Salehi, S. J. A. J. o. A. R. (2010). Agricultural specialists intention toward precision agriculture technologies: Integrating innovation characteristics to technology acceptance model. 5(11), 1191-1199. 41. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press, Simon and Schuster. 42. Savita, V. (2007). Knowledge and adoption of bio-fertilizers in horticultural and other crops in rural communities of Haryana. Haryana Journal of Horticultural Sciences, 36(1/2), 86-88. 43. Soleymani, S. (2008). Factors effecting the sustainable agricultural acceptance by wheatgreens coveraged by wheat core plans (Marvdasht Area). Journal of Agricultural Extention and Economics, 1(2), 69-80. 44. Sturz, A., & Christie, B. R. (2003). Beneficial microbial allelopathies in the root zone: the management of soil quality and plant disease with rhizobacteria. 72(2), 107-123. 45. Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S. J. N. H., MA: Allyn, & Bacon. (2007). Using multivariate statistics, 5th. 46. Talape, Y., Kale, S., Gawande, V., Nagalwade, L. J. J. o. S., & Crops. (2011). Adoption of farmers towards biofertilizers and its determinants in Nagpur district. 21(1), 113-115. 47. Tey, Y. S., & Brindal, M. J. P. A. (2012). Factors influencing the adoption of precision agricultural technologies: a review for policy implications. 13(6), 713-730. 48. Thakur, N. (2017). Organic Farming, Food Quality, and Human Health: A Trisection of Sustainability and a Move from Pesticides to Eco-friendly Biofertilizers. In Probiotics in Agroecosystem (pp. 491-515): Springer. 49. Vessey, J. K. (2003). Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria as biofertilizers. 255(2), 571-586. 50. von Meyer-Höfer, M., von der Wense, V., Padilla Bravo, C., & Spiller, A. (2013). Mature and emerging organic markets: Modelling consumer attitude and behaviour with Partial Least Square Approach. Retrieved from 51. Wangi, M., & Kariuki, S. (2015). Factors determining adoption of new agricultural technology by smallholder farmers in developing countries. Journal of Economics Sustainable Development, 6(5). Zolkepli, I. A., & Kamarulzaman, Y. (2015). Social media adoption: The role of media needs and innovation characteristics. Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 189-209 | ||
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 542 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 368 |