ADOPTION OF A WILDLIFE CONSERVATION PLAN BY CROP AND LIVESTOCK FARMS IN CANADA: WHAT FARMER AND FARM CHARACTERISTICS MAKE A DIFFERENCE?

J.M.U.K. JAYASINGHE, A. WEERSINK

Abstract


Management Survey (2001) conducted by Statistics Canadaand Agriculture and Agri-FoodCanada. The target population consists of 21,000 active farms in Canadawith sales greater than $10,000. The farms responded to the survey (Nt = 16,053 with 76.4% response rate) were classified into three major categories: (1) “crop farms” (Nc= 5,425), (2) “livestock farms” (Nl = 2,250) and (3) “mixed farms” (Nm = 8,378) with both crops and livestock. The results indicate that rate of This paper examines the impact of various farmer and farm characteristics on the adoption of a Wildlife Conservation Plan (WCP) – “a formal written document prepared by an expert that describes the measures to be taken by an agricultural operation to conserve natural land and wildlife habitants adjacent to it” - by crop and livestock farms in Canada. Those characteristics considered in the analysis include: human capital (age, sex), financial (profits, non-farm income, farm assets), farm structure (size, ownership), and social (degree of urbanization, population density).

It uses data collected in the Farm Environmental adoption of WCP is comparatively less (13.9%) as compared to others, including manure, fertilizer, pesticide, water, and grazing management plans. The results from a Logit Regression analyses suggest that age, profitability, farm size, and degree of urbanization affect significantly on this behaviour in all farm types, however with varied size and signs. It highlights the importance of taking into account of voluntarily private-action of the farming community to formulate public-regulation aiming an environmentally friendly and conservative agriculture farm setting.

 


References


Bhattacharyya, A., T. R. Harris, W. G. Kvasnicka, and M. Veserat. (1997). Factors Influencing Rates of Adoption of Trichomoniasis Vaccine by Nevada Range Cattle Producers. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 22(1): 174-190.

Borooach, V. K. (2002). Logit and Probit: Ordered and Multinomial Models. Series: Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences. No. 138. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication.

Buchanan, J. M. (1969). Cost and Choice: An Inquiry in Economic Theory. Markham. Chicago.

D’Souza, G., D. Cyphers, and T. Phipps. (1993). Factors Affecting the Adoption of Sustainable Agricultural Practices. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review (October). 159-165.

Henriques, I. and P. Sadorsky. (1996). “The Determination of an Environmentally Responsive Firm: An Empirical Approach”. J. of Environmental Economics and Management 30(3): 381-395.

Jayasinghe-Mudalige, U. K., and A. Weersink (2004) “Factors Affecting the Adoption of Environmental Management Systems by Crop and Livestock Farms in Canada”, Sri Lankan Journal of Agricultural Economics, 6(1).

Khanna, M. and W. R. Anton. (2002). “Corporate Environmental Management: Regulatory and Market-based Pressures”. Land Economics 78(4): 539-558.

Pampel, F. C. (2000). Logistic Regression: A Primer. Series: Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences. No. 132. Thousands Oaks: Sage Publications.

Rahm, M. R. and W. E. Huffman. (1984). The Adoption of Reduced Tillage: The Role of Human Capital and Other Variables. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66: 405-413.

Smith, B. and J. Smithers. (1992). Adoption of Soil Conservation Practices: An Empirical Analysis in Ontario, Canada. Land Degradation and Rehabilitation 3: 1-14.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.