پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 161 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,533 |
| تعداد مقالات | 70,506 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 124,127,163 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 97,234,924 |
عوامل مؤثر بر پذیرش فعالیت‌های حفاظت آب وخاک در دشت فیروزآباد | ||
| تحقیقات اقتصاد و توسعه کشاورزی ایران | ||
| دوره 54، شماره 2، تیر 1402، صفحه 383-398 اصل مقاله (1.49 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/ijaedr.2022.326830.669065 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| صغری امیدی1؛ منصور زیبایی2؛ فاطمه فتحی* 1 | ||
| 1گروه اقتصاد کشاورزی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران | ||
| 2گروه اقتصاد کشاورزی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| آب به عنوان به یک منبع کمیاب است و این کمیابی در شرایط تغییر اقلیم، اهمیت بیشتری مییابد. از طرف دیگر، فرسایش خاک نهتنها به این سبب که زیان بهرهوری را بدنبال دارد، بلکه به این دلیل که به کویرزایی و فقر روستایی مرتبط است، نیز یک مسئله چالش برانگیز است. در نتیجه حفاظت از آب و خاک، دو موضوع حیاتی در مناطق با محدودیت آب نظیر دشت فیروزآباد است. این مطالعه، درک کاملتری از چالشهای پیرامون پذیرش اقدامات حفاظت از آب و خاک را فراهم نموده است. برای این منظور اثر متغیرهای مالی، اقتصادی-اجتماعی، انسانی، همراه با ویژگیهای انفرادی زارعین بر بکارگیری اقدامات حفاظت از آب و خاک به‌عنوان یک تصمیم با هم با استفاده از یک مدل رگرسیون پروبیت دو متغیره ظاهراً نامرتبط مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. اطلاعات اقتصادی-اجتماعی و تولیدی از یک نمونه 204 مزرعه بصورت تصادفی از هشت روستا جمعآوری شد. نتایج نشان داد که 6/43 درصد از زارعین حفاظت از آب، 1/44 درصد حفاظت از خاک و 24 درصد هر دو اقدام را بکار گرفتهاند. در معادله آب، تحصیلات، سن، اندازه مزرعه، فعالیت‌های خارج از مزرعه و دسترسی به اعتبار تماماً اثر مثبت و معنیداری بر احتمال بکارگیری اقدامات حفاظتی دارند. در مقابل، تعداد افراد خانوار و تعداد قطعات زمین تأثیر منفی و معنیدار بر حفاظت از آب دارند. در معادله خاک، تحصیلات، تعداد افراد خانوار، نیروی کار خانوار و تناوب زراعی، اثر مثبت و معنیدار و در مقابل تعداد افراد خانوار بر پذیرش اقدامات حفاظتی اثر منفی و معنیدار دارند. نهایتاً اینکه نتیجه بدست آمده از معادله پذیرش باهم اقدامات حفاظتی آب و خاک نشان داد که اندازه مزرعه، تحصیلات، دسترسی به اعتبار، فعالیت‌های خارج از مزرعه و نیروی کار خانوار، متغیرهای مهمی در ارتباط با پذیرش اقدامات حفاظتی هستند. یافتههای این مطالعه میتواند به درک بهتر رفتار زارعین در رابطه با حفاظت کمک کند و در نتیجه به توسعه انگیزهها و ابزارهای متمرکز بر برنامههای آب و خاک مساعدت نماید. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| حفاظت از آب و خاک؛ پذیرش؛ دشت فیروزآباد | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Factors Affecting the Adoption of Water and Soil Conservation Activities in Firoozabad Plain | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Soghra Omidi1؛ Mansour Zibaei2؛ Fatemeh Fathi1 | ||
| 1Department of Information Science, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. | ||
| 2Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Water is a gradually scarce resource. This growing scarcity turns out to be even more substantial in climate change condition. On the other hand, erosion is a challenging problem not only since it leads to productivity losses, but also because it is related to desertification and rural poverty. As a consequence, conserving both water and soil are two of the most vital issues in water-constrained region such as Firoozabad plain. To provide a more comprehensive understanding of challenges surrounding the adoption of soil and water conservation (SWC) practices, this study investigates the impacts of economic, social, human, and financial variables as well as those of the individual properties of farmers on the adoption of SWC as a joint decision, using a Seemingly Unrelated Bivariate Probit Regression (SUBPR) model. Socioeconomic and production information were collected on a sample of 204 farms randomly selected in 8 villages. The result of diagonality test indicated that the residual terms of the two equations are correlated, which leads support to the use of the SUBPR model. In other words, SWC is a joint decision. Result also showed that 43.6% of farmers adopt water conservation, 44.1% adopt soil conservation and 24% adopt both. In the water equation, age, farm size, off-farm activities and access to credit, have positive and significant effects on the likelihood of adopting conservation. In contrast, family size and the number of land plots have negative and significant influences on adoption. In the soil equation, educations, farm size, family numbers working on farm and crop rotation have positive and significant effects on adoption. In contrast, Family size has a negative and significant influence. Finally, the result obtained from the equation for the case of joint adoption showed that farm size, education, access to credit, off-farm activities and family members working on-farm are important variables associated with the adoption of conservation measures. The findings of this study could help to improve the understanding of farmers’ behavior regarding conservation, and thus help the development of incentives and instruments focusing on soil and water programs. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Water and Soil Conservation, Adoption, Firoozabad Plain | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Abebe, Z. D., & Sewnet, M. A. (2014). Adoption of soil conservation practices in north Achefer district, northwest Ethiopia. Chinese Journal of Population Resources and Environment, 12(3), 261-268. Amsalu, A., & De Graaff, J. (2007). Determinants of adoption and continued use of stone terraces for soil and water conservation in an Ethiopian highland watershed. Ecological Economics, 61(2), 294-302. Asfaw, D., & Neka, M. (2017). Factors affecting adoption of soil and water conservation practices: the case of Wereillu Woreda (District), South Wollo Zone, Amhara Region, Ethiopia. International Soil and Water Conservation Research, 5(4), 273-279. Azizi, J. (2001). Agricultural water sustainability. Agricultural Economics and Development,9 (36), 113-136. Baradi, N. K. (2009). Factors affecting the adoption of tillage systems in Kansas (Doctoral dissertation, Kansas State University). Baryan, R. B. (2000). Soil erosion and processes of water erosion on hill slope. Geomorphic, 32(4), 285-415. Bayard, B., Jolly, C. M., & Shannon, D. A. (2006). The adoption and management of soil conservation practices in Haiti: The case of rock walls. Agricultural Economics Review, 7(2), 28-43. Bayat, N., Rastegar, A. and Azizi, F. (2011). Environmental protection and management of rural soil resources in Iran. Quarterly Journal of Regional Planning,1 (2), 63-87. Bayramin, I., Dengiz, O., Baskan, O., & Parlak, M. (2003). Soil erosion risk assessment with ICONA model; Case study: Beypazarı area. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 27(2), 105-116. Borimnejad, V. & Peykani, Gh. (2004). The effect of improving irrigation efficiency in the agricultural sector on increasing groundwater levels. Agricultural Economics and Development,47 (12), 69-95. Bravo‐Ureta, B. E., Solis, D., Cocchi, H., & Quiroga, R. E. (2006). The impact of soil conservation and output diversification on farm income in Central American hillside farming. Agricultural Economics, 35(3), 267-276. Cameron, T. A., & Quiggin, J. (1994). Estimation using contingent valuation data from a" dichotomous choice with follow-up" questionnaire. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 27(3), 218-234. Caviglia‐Harris, J. L. (2003). Sustainable agricultural practices in Rondonia, Brazil: Do local farmer organizations affect adoption rates? Economic Development and Cultural Change, 52(1), 23-49. Caviglia-Harris, J. L. (2004). Household production and forest clearing: The role of farming in the development of the Amazon. Environment and Development Economics, 9(02), 181-202. Chizari, M., Karimi, S., & Pezeshki Rad, G. (2003). Perception of soil conservation competencies among farmers in Markazi Province, Iran. Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education, 10(3), 13-19. Cramb, R. A., Catacutan, D., Culasero-Arellano, Z., & Mariano, K. (2007). The'Landcare'approach to soil conservation in the Philippines: An assessment of farm-level impacts. Animal Production Science, 47(6), 721-726. Daneshvar, M. (2011). Effects of sprinkler irrigation systems on reducing rural poverty and coping with drought in Fars province. Master Thesis in Agricultural Economics. Shiraz university. Dungumaro, E. W., & Madulu, N. F. (2003). Public participation in integrated water resources management: The case of Tanzania. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 28(20), 1009-1014. Erfanifar, S. (2012). Economic evaluation of conventional and conservation tillage systems and determining the factors affecting the acceptance of conservation tillage in Darab region. Master Thesis in Agricultural Economics. Shiraz university. Gerrard, J. (2000). Fundamentals of soils. Rutledge Fundamentals of Physical Geography. London and New York, pp: 113. Greene, W.H. (2008). Econometric Analysis. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 24, 25-26. Hayati, B. (2005). Investigation of effective factors on conservation measures of soils under dryland wheat cultivation. Case study of Chara and Simaq counties of East Azerbaijan province. Ph.D. Thesis in Agricultural Economics. Jara-Rojas, R., Bravo-Ureta, B. E., & Díaz, J. (2012). Adoption of water conservation practices: A socioeconomic analysis of small-scale farmers in Central Chile. Agricultural Systems, 110(5), 54-62. Karidjo, B. Y., Wang, Z., Boubacar, Y., & Wei, C. (2018). Factors influencing farmers’ Adoption of Soil and Water Control Technology (SWCT) in Keita valley, a semi-arid Area of Niger. Sustainability, 10(2), 288. Lichtenberg, E. (2001). Adoption of soil conservation practices: A revealed preference approach. Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics. The University of Maryland, College Park. Marenya, P. P., & Barrett, C. B. (2007). Household-level determinants of adoption of improved natural resources management practices among smallholder farmers in western Kenya. Food Policy, 32(4), 515-536. Mohammadjani, I., & Yazdanian, N. (2014). Analysis of water crisis in the country and its management requirements, Trend (Economic Research Trend), 21 (66); 117-144. Najafi, B., Ghaemi, A., Tarazkar, M. & Rahmati, D. (2008). Economic study of drip irrigation system in Fars province. Agricultural Economics, 2 (1), 87-102. Piro, T., Moghim, H. and Rahmani, A. (2008). Investigating socio-economic influence factors on rural participation in watershed PRA projection (Fars province). National conference of sciences and Watershed engineering in Iran, Watershed Management. Ruben, R., Pender, J. & Kuyvenhoven, A., (2004). Editorial: Development strategies for less favoured areas. Food Policy, 29(1), 295–302. Saremi, A. (1993). A Study of Socio-Cultural Factors Affecting the Acceptance of Agricultural Innovations by Different Accepting Groups, a Axis Wheat Project in the North of Fars Province. Master Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tehran Shi, C., Zhou, Y., Fan, X., & Shao, W. (2013). A study on the annual runoff changes and its relationship with water and soil conservation practices and climate change in the middle Yellow River basin. Catena, 100, 31-41. Sidibé, A. (2005). Farm-level adoption of soil and water conservation techniques in northern Burkina Faso. Agricultural Water Management, 71(3), 211-224. Soltani, G., & Zibaei, M. (2011). Agricultural Water Consumption Management Challenges to Drought. Conference on Water Consumption Optimization in the Country. Academy of Sciences, Iran. Soule, M. J., Tegene, A., & Wiebe, K. D. (2000). Land tenure and the adoption of conservation practices. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 82(4), 993-1005. Staal, S. J., Baltenweck, I., Waithaka, M. M., DeWolff, T., & Njoroge, L. (2002). Location and uptake: Integrated household and GIS analysis of technology adoption and land use, with application to smallholder dairy farms in Kenya. Agricultural Economics, 27(3), 295-315. Tenge, A. J., De Graaff, J., & Hella, J. P. (2004). Social and economic factors affecting the adoption of soil and water conservation in West Usambara highlands, Tanzania. Land Degradation & Development, 15(2), 99-114. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 356 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 248 |
||