[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i23p16280-d993982.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Perception of the National Traceability Platform among Small-Scale Tea Farmers in Typical Agricultural Areas in Central China

Author

Listed:
  • Yatao Huang

    (College of Economics and Management, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China)

  • Hua Liu

    (College of Economics and Management, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China)

  • Xuanxuan Guo

    (College of Geography and Environmental Science, Henan University, Kaifeng 475001, China)

  • Wenxian Jiao

    (College of Geography and Environmental Science, Henan University, Kaifeng 475001, China
    Key Laboratory of Geospatial Technology for the Middle and Lower Yellow River Regions, Henan University, Ministry of Education, Kaifeng 475001, China)

Abstract
As one of the key technologies to ensure the safety of agricultural products, the national traceability platform is being widely promoted in China. However, it has not yet been widely adopted among farmers, especially small-scale farmers. Farmers are both producers and direct participants in the traceability of agricultural products. Their perception directly affects the effectiveness of the promotion of the national traceability platform. This study explores the perception of the national traceability platform among small-scale tea farmers in typical agricultural areas in central China. This research employed Q methodology, an approach that integrates both qualitative and quantitative data allowing individuals’ subjective understandings of a specific topic to be studied. The Q-sort procedure was performed in the field with 16 small-scale tea farmers. Next, Q-factor analyses were conducted using the Ken-Q analysis. The results show that small-scale tea farmers have different perceptions of the national traceability platform. Their main characteristics are active participation, resistant participation, risk aversion, and being driven by pressure. These four categories covered 52% of the perceived variance. Meanwhile, there is also a degree of internal consistency in the perception of small-scale tea farmers. Specifically, they are all concerned that participating in the national traceability platform may increase the cost and risk of cultivation and that it is difficult to obtain support from agricultural technicians. Therefore, understanding the perceptions of tea farmers of the national traceability platform is the premise for formulating effective promotion policies. Our research sheds light on the decision-making mechanisms for small-scale tea farmers to participate in national traceability platforms, further expanding the scope of current research on farmer behavior. This research has reference significance for promoting national traceability platforms in China and other countries around the world.

Suggested Citation

  • Yatao Huang & Hua Liu & Xuanxuan Guo & Wenxian Jiao, 2022. "The Perception of the National Traceability Platform among Small-Scale Tea Farmers in Typical Agricultural Areas in Central China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-20, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:23:p:16280-:d:993982
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/23/16280/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/23/16280/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rezaei, Rohollah & Ghofranfarid, Marjan, 2018. "Rural households' renewable energy usage intention in Iran: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 382-391.
    2. F. Füsun Tatlıdil & İsmet Boz & Hasan Tatlidil, 2009. "Farmers’ perception of sustainable agriculture and its determinants: a case study in Kahramanmaras province of Turkey," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 11(6), pages 1091-1106, December.
    3. Liao, Pei-An & Chang, Hung-Hao & Chang, Chun-Yen, 2011. "Why is the food traceability system unsuccessful in Taiwan? Empirical evidence from a national survey of fruit and vegetable farmers," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 686-693.
    4. Alexander, Kim S. & Parry, Lucy & Thammavong, Phomma & Sacklokham, Silinthone & Pasouvang, Somphanh & Connell, John G. & Jovanovic, Tom & Moglia, Magnus & Larson, Silva & Case, Peter, 2018. "Rice farming systems in Southern Lao PDR: Interpreting farmers’ agricultural production decisions using Q methodology," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 1-10.
    5. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    6. Sandra Hoffmann & Lydia Ashton & Jae‐Wan Ahn, 2021. "Food safety: A policy history and introduction to avenues for economic research," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(2), pages 680-700, June.
    7. Pereira, Mariana A. & Fairweather, John R. & Woodford, Keith B. & Nuthall, Peter L., 2016. "Assessing the diversity of values and goals amongst Brazilian commercial-scale progressive beef farmers using Q-methodology," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 1-8.
    8. Krabbenborg, Lizet & Molin, Eric & Annema, Jan Anne & van Wee, Bert, 2020. "Public frames in the road pricing debate: A Q-methodology study," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 46-53.
    9. Ha-Yeon Jang & Young-Min Lee, 2020. "Investigating the perception of the elderly on the future of labour market," International Journal of Trade and Global Markets, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 13(1), pages 71-80.
    10. Zhou, Jiehong & Jin, Yu & Liang, Qiao, 2022. "Effects of regulatory policy mixes on traceability adoption in wholesale markets: Food safety inspection and information disclosure," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    11. Li, Fuduo & Zhang, Kangjie & Ren, Jing & Yin, Changbin & Zhang, Yang & Nie, Jun, 2021. "Driving mechanism for farmers to adopt improved agricultural systems in China: The case of rice-green manure crops rotation system," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    12. Shamsheer Haq & Ismet Boz, 2020. "Measuring environmental, economic, and social sustainability index of tea farms in Rize Province, Turkey," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 2545-2567, March.
    13. Milakis, Dimitris & Kroesen, Maarten & van Wee, Bert, 2018. "Implications of automated vehicles for accessibility and location choices: Evidence from an expert-based experiment," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 142-148.
    14. Mohan, Sarah, 2020. "Risk aversion and certification: Evidence from the Nepali tea fields," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    15. Dilshad Ahmad & Muhammad Afzal & Abdur Rauf, 2019. "Analysis of wheat farmers’ risk perceptions and attitudes: evidence from Punjab, Pakistan," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 95(3), pages 845-861, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fu, Shaoling & Huang, Yatao, 2024. "Exploring farmers' perceptions of the technological characteristics of traceability systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nketiah, Emmanuel & Song, Huaming & Cai, Xiang & Adjei, Mavis & Adu-Gyamfi, Gibbson & Obuobi, Bright, 2022. "Citizens’ intention to invest in municipal solid waste to energy projects in Ghana: The impact of direct and indirect effects," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 254(PC).
    2. Mingyue Li & Jingjing Wang & Kai Chen & Lianbei Wu, 2020. "Willingness and Behaviors of Farmers’ Green Disposal of Pesticide Packaging Waste in Henan, China: A Perceived Value Formation Mechanism Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-18, May.
    3. Yadav, Rambalak & Giri, Arunangshu & Chatterjee, Satakshi, 2022. "Understanding the users' motivation and barriers in adopting healthcare apps: A mixed-method approach using behavioral reasoning theory," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    4. Riffat Ara Zannat Tama & Md Mahmudul Hoque & Ying Liu & Mohammad Jahangir Alam & Mark Yu, 2023. "An Application of Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) to Examining Farmers’ Behavioral Attitude and Intention towards Conservation Agriculture in Bangladesh," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-22, February.
    5. Muhammad Yaseen Bhutto & Yasir Ali Soomro & Hailan Yang, 2022. "Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior: Predicting Young Consumer Purchase Behavior of Energy-Efficient Appliances (Evidence From Developing Economy)," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, February.
    6. Yu Hao & Yingting Wang & Qiuwei Wu & Shiwei Sun & Weilu Wang & Menglin Cui, 2020. "What affects residents' participation in the circular economy for sustainable development? Evidence from China," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(5), pages 1251-1268, September.
    7. Zhiwei Liu & Jianrong Liu, 2023. "Shared Autonomous Vehicles as Last-Mile Public Transport of Metro Trips," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-15, October.
    8. S. S. Ganji & A. N. Ahangar & Samaneh Jamshidi Bandari, 2022. "Evaluation of vehicular emissions reduction strategies using a novel hybrid method integrating BWM, Q methodology and ER approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(10), pages 11576-11614, October.
    9. Han, Guang & Arbuckle, J. Gordon & Grudens-Schuck, Nancy, 2021. "Motivations, goals, and benefits associated with organic grain farming by producers in Iowa, U.S," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    10. Liobikienė, Genovaitė & Miceikienė, Astrida, 2022. "The role of financial, social and informational mechanisms on willingness to use bioenergy," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 21-27.
    11. Veronika Hannus & Johannes Sauer, 2021. "Understanding Farmers’ Intention to Use a Sustainability Standard: The Role of Economic Rewards, Knowledge, and Ease of Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-21, September.
    12. Moglia, Magnus & Alexander, Kim S. & Thephavanh, Manithaythip & Thammavong, Phomma & Sodahak, Viengkham & Khounsy, Bountom & Vorlasan, Sysavanh & Larson, Silva & Connell, John & Case, Peter, 2018. "A Bayesian network model to explore practice change by smallholder rice farmers in Lao PDR," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 84-94.
    13. Rafay Waseem & Gershom Endelani Mwalupaso & Faria Waseem & Humayoon Khan & Ghulam Mustafa Panhwar & Yangyan Shi, 2020. "Adoption of Sustainable Agriculture Practices in Banana Farm Production: A Study from the Sindh Region of Pakistan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-14, May.
    14. Ganji, S.S. & Ahangar, A.N. & Awasthi, Anjali & Jamshidi Bandari, Smaneh, 2021. "Psychological analysis of intercity bus passenger satisfaction using Q methodology," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 345-363.
    15. David Weisberger & Melissa Ann Ray & Nicholas T. Basinger & Jennifer Jo Thompson, 2024. "Chemical, ecological, other? Identifying weed management typologies within industrialized cropping systems in Georgia (U.S.)," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 41(3), pages 935-953, September.
    16. Leonhardt, Heidi & Braito, Michael & Uehleke, Reinhard, 2021. "Who participates in agri-environmental schemes? A mixed-methods approach to investigate the role of farmer archetypes in scheme uptake and participation level," FORLand Working Papers 27 (2021), Humboldt University Berlin, DFG Research Unit 2569 FORLand "Agricultural Land Markets – Efficiency and Regulation".
    17. Nketiah, Emmanuel & Song, Huaming & Adu-Gyamfi, Gibbson & Obuobi, Bright & Adjei, Mavis & Cudjoe, Dan, 2022. "Does government involvement and awareness of benefit affect Ghanaian's willingness to pay for renewable green electricity?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 683-694.
    18. Lairez, Juliette & Lopez-Ridaura, Santiago & Jourdain, Damien & Falconnier, Gatien N. & Lienhard, Pascal & Striffler, Bruno & Syfongxay, Chanthaly & Affholder, François, 2020. "Context matters: Agronomic field monitoring and participatory research to identify criteria of farming system sustainability in South-East Asia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    19. Yunis Ali Ahmed & Ammar Rashid & Muhammad Mahboob Khurshid, 2022. "Investigating the Determinants of the Adoption of Solar Photovoltaic Systems—Citizen’s Perspectives of Two Developing Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-25, September.
    20. Westbrooke, Victoria & Nuthall, Peter, 2017. "Why small farms persist? The influence of farmers’ characteristics on farm growth and development. The case of smaller dairy farmers in NZ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 61(4), October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:23:p:16280-:d:993982. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.