SMALLHOLDER ADOPTION OF GREEN PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES ON THE NORTH CHINA PLAIN: EVIDENCE FROM SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY BACKYARDS

Highlights

● A systematical technology diffusion mode that can simultaneously achieve smallholders’ technology adoption to different scales was discovered.

● Collaborative, tree-shaped and jump-start modes are the main forms to promote technology diffusion.

● The combination of three modes above facilitates technology diffusion to different scales.

● The STB-based technology diffusion empowered smallholders through technology adoption.

● Trust is the key to promoting technology dependence and adoption among smallholders.

Abstract

Understanding the impact of agricultural socialized services on smallholder adoption of green production technologies and their mechanisms of action is of great importance for sustainability of farming systems. Currently, there were numerous related studies, but it is still unclear how to gradually achieve the diffusion of technological innovations on pilot sites to a regional level. To answer this question, this paper presents the pathways and mechanisms of green production technologies diffusion by comparing international typical service organizations or modes such as agricultural technology extension service centers (ATESC), farmer field schools (FFS), participatory technology innovation (PTI) and integrated colearning approach (ICLA), while taking Wangzhuang Science and Technology Backyard (WZ STB) in Quzhou, Hebei Province, China as an example. This research had three key outcomes. (1) The combination of collaborative, tree-shaped and jump-start diffusion modes promotes the diffusion of participatory technology innovation to different scales, such as farmers, villages and counties. (2) The three diffusion modes combine and expand the advantages of existing international modes. The collaborative diffusion mode not only provides full scope for the advantages of PTI, but also provides smallholders with service supply for the whole production period. The tree-shaped diffusion mode combines the advantages of FFS from point technology innovation to village diffusion, while achieving a full range of technical service support. The jump-start diffusion mode cannot only achieve large-scale technology diffusion like ATESC and ICLA, but also empower smallholders through adaptive technology innovation. (3) Trust is the key to promoting smallholder reliance on the science and technology provided by STB and to promote their adoption of green production technologies. Accordingly, the following policy recommendations were proposed: strengthen the combination of top-down and bottom-up technology innovation and diffusion models, establish an effective service communication platform and evaluation mechanism, and strengthen the linkage mechanism between socialized services providers and smallholders, which will provide a realistic basis for the national policy of targeted socialized services provision and promote smallholder adoption of green production technologies.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

agricultural socialized services / green production technologies / green transformation of agriculture / technology adoption / technology trust

References

[1] ShaoS, FanM T, YangL L. Economic restructuring, green technical progress, and low-carbon transition development in china: an empirical investigation based on the overall technology frontier and spatial spillover effect. Management World, 2022, 2: 46− 69 ( in Chinese)

[2] DengF, JiaS, YeM, LiZ. Coordinated development of high-quality agricultural transformation and technological innovation: a case study of main grain-producing areas, China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 2022, 29( 23): 35150–35164

[3] ZhangY Q, TianY. The impact of agricultural socialized service mode on the farmers’ technical efficiency. Journal of Agrotechnical Economics, 2021, 6: 84− 100 ( in Chinese)

[4] ZhangL X, BaiY L, SunM X, XuX B, HeJ L. Views on agricultural green production from the perspective of system science. Agricultural Economic Issues, 2021, 10: 42− 50 ( in Chinese)

[5] QianL, HongM, GongL, QianZ. Selection of agricultural land transfer contract from the perspective of the pattern of difference sequence and interest orientation. China Population Resources and Environment, 2015, ( 12): 95–104

[6] ChangQ, YanY, LiX, Zhang C, ZhaoM. Why “say one thing and do another”?—A study on the deviation of willingness and behavior of farmers’ ecological production. Journal of Agrotechnical Economics, 2021, (4): 85− 97 ( in Chinese)

[7] FleischerG, WaibelH, Walter-EcholsG. Transforming top-down agricultural extension to a participatory system: a study of costs and prospective benefits in Egypt. Public Administration and Development, 2002, 22( 4): 309–322

[8] LiY J, MaJ. Analysis of income effect differences of scientific fertilization technology: an empirical estimation based on farmers’ initial endowment. Journal of Agrotechnical Economics, 2021, 7: 18− 32 ( in Chinese)

[9] CuiY F, CaoN N. Moderating effect of social trust on the correlation between environmental intention and pro-environmental behavior. Areal Research and Development, 2021, 40(4): 136− 140 ( in Chinese)

[10] KoyenikanM, KoyenikanE, IlekendiB. Bottom-up agricultural extension services delivery in Nigerian local government councils: an assessment of Delta State. Ontario International Development Agency International Journal of Sustainable Development, 2012, 5( 2): 87–96

[11] GillerK E, TittonellP, RufinoM C, vanWijk M T, ZingoreS, MapfumoP, Adjei-NsiahS, HerreroM, ChikowoR, CorbeelsM, RoweE C, BaijukyaF, MwijageA, SmithJ, YeboahE, vander Burg W J, SanogoO M, MisikoM, deRidder N, KaranjaS, KaizziC, KunguJ, MwaleM, NwagaD, PaciniC, VanlauweB. Communicating complexity: integrated assessment of trade-offs concerning soil fertility management within African farming systems to support innovation and development. Agricultural Systems, 2011, 104( 2): 191–203

[12] MarinusW, DescheemaekerK K E, vande Ven G W J, WaswaW, MukalamaJ, VanlauweB, GillerK E. “That is my farm”: an integrated co-learning approach for whole-farm sustainable intensification in smallholder farming. Agricultural Systems, 2021, 188 : 103041

[13] KoutsouS, PartalidouM, RagkosA. Young farmers’ social capital in Greece: trust levels and collective actions. Journal of Rural Studies, 2014, 34 : 204–211

[14] ZhaoX F. Trust construction, institutional change and the development of farmers’ cooperative organizations: the strategy and practice of one organization. China Rural Survey 2018, 1: 14− 27 ( in Chinese)

[15] LuoJ Q, JiangY W, LiH B. Socialized agricultural machinery service ecosystems: institutional analysis and realization mechanism: based on the perspective of new institutional economics. Issues in Agricultural Economy, 2021, 6: 34− 46 ( in Chinese)

[16] ZhangW, CaoG, LiX, ZhangH, WangC, LiuQ, ChenX, CuiZ, ShenJ, JiangR, MiG, MiaoY, ZhangF, DouZ. Closing yield gaps in China by empowering smallholder farmers. Nature, 2016, 537( 7622): 671–674

[17] DaiH, MischkeP, XieX, XieY, MasuiT. Closing the gap? Top-down versus bottom-up projections of China’s regional energy use and CO₂ emissions. Applied Energy, 2016, 162 : 1355–1373

[18] ParodaR. Reorienting agricultural research for development to address emerging challenges in agriculture. Journal of Research, 2012, 3( 49): 134–138

[19] ZafarullahKhan M. Improving extension efficiency through bottom-up approach: an evidence from remote areas of Northern Pakistan. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 2003, 19( 4): 591–594

[20] BraunA, JigginsJ, RölingN, vanden Berg H, SnijdersP. A global survey and review of farmer field school experiences. Wageningen: International Livestock Research Institute, 2006, 1: 1–120

[21] ChengF, ChenQ X, GuM M, PengD H. Current status of agricultural extension in China. HortTechnology, 2016, 26( 6): 846–851

[22] YuanW M, ZhaoZ Y. The “involution” in transformation of agricultural scientific and technological achievements: predicament features and solution countermeasures. Journal of Northwest A&F University (Social Science Edition), 2022, 22(2): 104–113 ( in Chinese)

[23] SassenrathG F, HeilmanP, LuscheiE, BennettG L, FitzgeraldG, KlesiusP, TracyW, WillifordJ R, ZimbaP V. Technology, complexity and change in agricultural production systems. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 2008, 23( 4): 285–295

[24] FederG, MurgaiR, QuizonJ B. The acquisition and diffusion of knowledge: the case of pest management training in farmer field schools, Indonesia. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2004, 55( 2): 221–243

[25] MuilermanS, WigboldusS, LeeuwisC. Scaling and institutionalization within agricultural innovation systems: the case of cocoa farmer field schools in Cameroon. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 2018, 16( 2): 167–186

[26] KabirH, UphoffN. Results of disseminating the system of rice intensification with farmer field school methods in Northern Myanmar. Experimental Agriculture, 2007, 43( 4): 463–476

[27] ChambersR. Paradigm shifts and the practice of participatory research and development. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies (IDS), 1995

[28] RusikeJ, SnappS, TwomlowS J. Mother-baby trial approach for developing soil water and fertility management technologies. In: Gonsalves J, Becker T, Braun A, Campilan D, de Chavez H, eds. Participatory Research and Development for Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resource Management. A Sourcebook, Volume 3: Doing Participatory Research and Development, 2005, 3: 102–109

[29] SuvediM, GhimireR, KaplowitzM. Farmers’ participation in extension programs and technology adoption in rural Nepal: a logistic regression analysis. Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 2017, 23( 4): 351–371

[30] CoeR, SinclairF, BarriosE. Scaling up agroforestry requires research “in” rather than “for” development. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 2014, 6 : 73–77

[31] ShiY C. Comprehensive reclamation of salt-affected soils in China’s Huang-Huai-Hai Plain. Journal of Crop Production, 2003, 7( 1–2): 163–179

[32] CuiZ, ChenX, ZhangF. Current nitrogen management status and measures to improve the intensive wheat-maize system in China. Ambio, 2010, 39( 5–6): 376–384

[33] KaurK, KaurP. Agricultural extension approaches to enhance the knowledge of farmers. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 2018, 7( 2): 2367–2376

[34] MengQ F, YueS C, HouP, CuiZ L, ChenX P. Improving yield and nitrogen use efficiency simultaneously for maize and wheat in China: a review. Pedosphere, 2016, 26( 2): 137–147

[35] SangK. Embed technology in rural areas: the transmutation of agricultural technology and farmers. Journal of China Agricultural University (Social Sciences), 2020, 37(1): 25− 37 ( in Chinese)

[36] Villarroel-MolinaO, De-Pablos-HerederoC, RangelJ, VitaleM P, GarciaA. Usefulness of network analysis to characterize technology leaders in small dual-purpose cattle farms in Mexico. Sustainability, 2021, 13( 4): 2291

[37] SchmitzA, WangZ, KimnJ H. A jump diffusion model for agricultural commodities with Bayesian analysis. Journal of Futures Markets, 2014, 34( 3): 235–260

[38] ZhaoP F, CaoG X, ZhaoY, ZhangH Y, ChenX P, LiX L, CuiZ L. Training and organization programs increases maize yield and nitrogen-use efficiency in smallholder agriculture in China. Agronomy Journal, 2016, 108( 5): 1944–1950

[39] ZhuQ C, LiY J, ShenJ B, XuJ L, HouY, TongB X, XuW, Zhang F S. Green development of agricultural whole industry chain: pathway and countermeasures. Strategic Study of Chinese Academy of Engineering, 2022, 24(1): 73− 82 ( in Chinese)

[40] SchneiderF, DonA, HenningsI, SchmittmannO, SeidelS J. The effect of deep tillage on crop yield—What do we really know. Soil & Tillage Research, 2017, 174 : 193–204

[41] WangC, LiX L, GongT T, ZhangH Y. Life cycle assessment of wheat-maize rotation system emphasizing high crop yield and high resource use efficiency in Quzhou County. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2014, 68 : 56–63

Compliance with ethics guidelines

Yajuan Li and Qianni Huang declare that they have no conflict of interest or financial conflicts to disclose. All applicable institutional and national guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

The Author(s) 2022. Published by Higher Education Press. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)