苹果种植户技术选择行为研究
|
摘要
推进苹果生产技术创新及推广既是中国政府及苹果优势产区长期关注的重大科学技术问题和战略决策问题,也是新阶段转变中国苹果发展方式、提高苹果技术装备密集化程度和苹果产业效益的关键领域。苹果种植户作为现代苹果产业技术的终端需求者和重要市场主体,其技术选择行为将成为提高苹果产业技术创新及推广效率,促进果园生产管理制度创新的微观基础。国内外农业经济学界对农户市场化技术选择行为的认识还不够深入和全面,尤其是基于经营多年生、高价值农产品的农户技术选择行为的基础研究和定量研究较少。基于这种认识和判断,本文以从事专业化、市场化生产的苹果种植户为研究基本单元,以苹果种植户技术选择行为为研究对象,从苹果产业技术市场供求关系视角,在归纳苹果产业技术市场供求主体行为演变特征的基础上,遵循农户技术选择理论,研究和建立苹果种植户技术选择行为理论体系；采用数理分析方法和计量经济分析方法,及中国苹果优势产区15个苹果重点生产县(市)的苹果种植户调研数据,研究和识别苹果种植户在要素禀赋和苹果产业技术市场影响下,就劳动密集型技术和劳动节约型技术选择过程中面临的技术供给扭曲及成本约束问题,并对苹果种植户技术选择行为的收入效应进行评价,从而为改进苹果产业技术市场效率和优化苹果产业技术政策,诱导和激励苹果种植户果园生产管理制度创新,提供理论和实证依据。
按照“苹果产业技术市场供求主体行为演变特征分析→苹果种植户劳动密集型、劳动节约型技术选择行为分析(技术认知态度、技术决策实施、技术联合采用)→苹果种植户技术选择经济效益评价”的研究逻辑关系,将论文主要研究内容规划为：
第一部分为导言,包括第一章。围绕苹果产业发展方式转变过程中苹果产业技术市场供求主体行为变化特征、趋势,阐明本文的研究背景、研究目的和意义。在国内外农户技术选择行为文献综述和评价的基础上,说明深入研究苹果种植户在苹果产业技术市场影响下的专业化、市场化技术选择行为特征及其经济效益,是农户技术选择及经济评价中值得研究的重要领域。根据本文研究目的与研究价值,构思和设计本文技术线路、研究方法和研究内容,并归纳和提炼本文的创新之处。
第二部分为苹果种植户技术选择行为理论分析,涵盖第二章和第三章。以苹果种植户为研究基本单元,以苹果种植户技术选择行为为研究对象,将苹果生产技术进步的历史变迁规律与农户技术选择理论结合,在归纳苹果产业技术市场中供求主体行为演变特征的基础上,分析苹果产业技术进步的原理；界定苹果种植户技术选择行为的内涵与外延,揭示苹果种植户技术选择行为动机、行为倾向,以及在要素禀赋和苹果产业技术市场约束下呈现的行为特征,建立苹果种植户技术选择行为理论体系。运用规范分析为主的研究方法,凝练、形成本文理论假设：要素稀缺程度是诱导苹果种植户技术选择行为产生偏向的需求因素,苹果产业技术市场中的技术创新及推广供给主体行为是诱导苹果种植户技术选择行为产生偏向的供给因素,进而导致苹果种植户技术选择行为的经济效益具有差异性。
第三部分为苹果种植户技术选择行为实证检验,涉及第四章、第五章、第六章、第七章、第八章。第四章,运用二层次结构模型和全国优势产区苹果重点生产县(市)苹果种植户和村级实地调研数据,就技术创新及推广供给主体行为对苹果种植户劳动密集型和劳动节约型技术认知及技术潜在需求的影响机制进行分析。第五章,构建苹果种植户技术选择行为及其交易制度分析框架,运用分组tobit模型和全国优势产区苹果重点生产县(市)苹果种植户实地调研数据,就苹果产业技术市场中不同技术交易制度安排产生的信息搜寻成本、谈判成本和执行成本,对苹果种植户劳动密集型和劳动节约型技术决策行为的影响进行分析。第六章,运用局部可观察双变量probit模型和全国优势产区苹果重点生产县(市)苹果种植户实地调研数据,就技术创新及推广供给主体行为分别对苹果种植户果园精细经营管理制度中的子技术联合采用和果园简约经营管理制度中的子技术联合采用的影响进行分析。第七章,运用分位回归方法和全国优势产区苹果重点生产县(市)苹果种植户实地调研数据,就苹果产业技术市场影响下,苹果种植户劳动密集型、劳动节约型技术选择对其生产收入个体分布的影响机理和方向、程度进行分析。第八章,构建区域苹果种植户生产收入函数,运用全国优势产区苹果重点生产县(市)苹果种植户和村级实地调研数据,就苹果产业技术市场影响下,苹果种植户劳动密集型、劳动节约型技术选择行为的空间溢出效应对其生产收入的影响方向及程度进行分析。
主要研究结论包括四个方面：
1.苹果产业技术市场对苹果种植户技术认知影响实证分析形成以下观点和结论：-是尽管高度知识集成的劳动密集型技术运用复杂程度高,但相比劳动节约型技术而言,苹果种植户对劳动密集型技术现实效益性的认可度更高,从而对劳动密集型技术表现出刚性的潜在需求偏好。二是技术创新及推广供给主体行为是诱发苹果种植户不同群体,以及同一群体内不同个体对劳动密集型技术和劳动节约型技术的认知产生分化的关键因素。具体而言,国家现代苹果产业技术体系采取的典型示范技术信息扩散制度产生“创新精神与创新需求悖论”,加大了苹果种植户群体间技术共识差距。由于苹果产业技术市场监管缺位,行业技术信息披露规范缺失,加之政府主导的公益型技术创新及推广体系对以涉果企业主导的商业型技术创新及推广体系具有排斥性,利益驱动型的涉果企业倾向于实施机会主义行为,导致其技术信息传播对提升苹果种植户技术认知无实质性帮助。果农专业合作社通过技术信息有效传递与知识技能共享,有利于提升苹果种植户个体的技术认知水平,以及缩小苹果种植户群体的技术共识差距。邻里技术信息传播通过基于熟人信任机制的人际关系渠道产生显著的口碑效应,有助于提升苹果种植户个体的技术认知水平。政府产业扶持机构提供的技术公共服务能够降低苹果种植户技术认知的公共信息搜寻成本,从而有助于提升苹果种植户群体的技术共识。
2.苹果产业技术市场对苹果种植户技术决策影响实证分析形成以下观点和结论：是生产要素价格的相对变动是诱致苹果种植户技术决策产生偏向的市场信号,尤其是遵循公开市场交易制度安排的苹果种植户技术决策偏向对生产要素价格变动更为敏感。二是不同技术交易制度安排产生的交易成本会对苹果种植户劳动密集型、劳动节约型技术决策行为产生差异化影响。具体而言,遵循公开市场交易制度安排的苹果种植户面临的技术交易信息搜寻成本和技术谈判成本越低,越偏向采用劳动节约型技术；遵循准内部交易制度安排和内部交易制度安排的苹果种植户面临的技术交易信息搜寻成本和技术执行成本越低,越偏向采用劳动节约型技术。三是内部交易制度安排下,降低技术交易成本对劳动节约型技术的正向激励,难以突破产品市场需求、苹果种植户经营规模、果园修剪制度和自然环境特征对劳动节约型技术的抑制作用。
3.苹果产业技术市场对苹果种植户技术联合采用影响证分析形成以下观点和结论：一是以劳动密集型技术为支撑的果园精细经营管理制度内部子技术的采用行为,以劳动节约型技术为支撑的果园简约经营管理制度内部子技术的采用行为,均存在显著的互补关系。即遵循果园精细经营管理制度的苹果种植户采用果树疏密改形技术,也会倾向采用土壤有机质提升技术,反之亦然；遵循简约经营管理制度的苹果种植户采用矮砧密植栽培技术,也会倾向采用高光效树形技术,反之亦然。二是地块特征、家庭特征均是苹果种植户采用果园精细经营管理制度和果园简约经营管理制度的重要个体影响因素。三是相比果园精细经营管理制度中的子技术联合采用,技术创新及推广供给主体对果园简约经营管理制度中的子技术联合采用产生更多的技术供给扭曲。其中,国家现代苹果产业技术体系的技术推广培训,苹果种植户内部技术交流,以及政府财政投资扶持、公共投资支持的生产性基础设施建设,是果园精细管理制度的有效扩散渠道,而果农专业合作社和涉果企业技术推广培训对果园精细经营管理制度的影响能力较弱。对果园简约经营管理制度而言,只有国家现代苹果产业技术体系技术推广培训、苹果种植户内部技术交流、以及公共投资支持的生产性基础设施建设具有正效应,果农专业合作社技术推广培训、政府财政投资扶持对果园简约经营管理制度内部子技术的联合采用均产生显著的抑制作用。
4.苹果产业技术市场约束下苹果种植户技术选择对其生产收入个体分布和空间格局影响实证分析形成以下观点和结论：一是从中国苹果优势产区村域层面和苹果种植户个体层面,劳动密集型技术、劳动节约型技术的投入回报率均差异显著。其中,劳动节约型技术与苹果种植户生产收入呈显著负相关,而劳动密集型技术对提高苹果种植户生产收入则具有明显且稳健的促进作用。二是技术创新及推广供给主体中,国家现代苹果产业技术体系的技术活动能使苹果种植户技术选择行为产生外部性,从而对本地及邻近区域苹果种植户生产收入产生显著且稳健的溢出效应,而果农专业合作社和涉果企业由于技术培训服务功能较弱,对邻近区域苹果种植户技术选择行为的辐射带动作用不明显。
本文研究结果验证,要素禀赋和苹果产业技术市场中的技术创新及推广供给主体行为,在苹果种植户就劳动密集型技术和劳动节约型技术进行技术认知、技术决策实施和技术联合采用的过程中产生显著影响,进而导致苹果种植户技术选择行为的经济效益从个体层面和空间层面具有差异性。结论表明,随着要素市场中劳动力价格相对机械价格上升速度加快,劳动力稀缺程度增加,苹果种植户生产技术呈现由劳动密集型向劳动节约型转变的趋势。但是,受到产品市场和苹果产业技术市场的双重限制,当前苹果产业技术界及科技政策制定者主张推进果园机械等劳动节约型技术创新、推广的观点、政策倾向尚不具备成熟的实施条件。以劳动节约型技术为支撑的果园简约经营管理制度创新缓慢,以劳动密集型技术为支撑的果园精细经营管理制度依然是目前中国苹果产业发展的必要条件。造成上述结果的原因为：
(1)从技术需求来看,产品市场中劳动密集型技术的回报率相对高于劳动节约型技术的回报率,诱导利益导向的苹果种植户倾向采用劳动密集型技术,进而造成劳动密集型技术的有效需求具有刚性,劳动节约型技术的有效需求不足。
(2)从技术供给来看,在苹果种植户进行技术认知、技术决策实施、技术联合采用等技术选择阶段,由于苹果产业技术创新管理体制及产业科技政策的不适当干预,使得包括私人部门和公共机构在内的技术创新及推广供给主体在依托技术信息传播、技术交易、技术推广培训、技术辐射进行技术供给过程中,对劳动节约型技术(相比劳动密集型技术而言)产生更大程度的结构性失衡供给、无效供给和扭曲供给,并由此产生较高的技术信息非对称性及技术交易成本,导致劳动节约型技术有效供给不足。
(3)从技术市场供需来看,由于苹果产业科技体制及政策之间,不同技术创新及推广供给主体行为之间,以及苹果种植户技术选择行为与各类技术创新及推广供给主体行为之间存在冲突和矛盾,导致政府行为与苹果产业技术市场调节之间的关系扭曲。因此,苹果产业技术市场缺乏有效性,劳动节约型技术有效供给不足,导致其在成本及价格方面缺乏优势；劳动节约型技术的潜在需求难以转化成有效需求,导致其潜在收益无法充分实现,从而制约了劳动节约型技术进步以及果园简约经营管理制度创新。
Promoting technology innovation and extension has become the key field in transformation of apple industry development patterns with high-tech and high-yield, and also become the critical scientific and strategic issues that the government and dominant production zones concerned about. Apple farmer household is the important demander and participant of technology innovation market in China's apple industry. Hence, the technology choice behaviors of apple farmer household are vital to increasing the efficiency of technology innovation and extension. Current study on farmer households'technology choice behaviors is too general and fails to dig deep into this problem by focusing on high value agricultural industry. This dissertation aims to solve this problem. Using a large set of first-hand household-level survey data from apple farmer households in15apple base counties located in the Bohai Gulf region and the Loess Plateau region which are the China's two main apple farmer regions, this dissertation makes an in depth study of the characteristics of technology choice behaviors of apple farmer household under the influence of factor endowment and apple technology market.
This dissertation consists of four parts, and the main content of each part is as follows:
The first part briefly introduces the main purpose, the theoretical basis, the main research method and the framework. It elaborates the research background, the purpose and the significance of a study on technology choice behaviors of apple farmer household with a brief view of a changing technology karket during the transformation of the China's apple industry development; then it makes a thorough and objective review of studies in this area and specifies the necessity of a quantitative study on technology choice behaviors of apple farmer household; then it summarizes the method and the data, and finally it mentions the originality of this study.
The second part including Chapter2and Chapter3is a theoretical analysis of apple farmer household's technology choice behaviors. Firstly, it summarizes the principle of apple technology progress based on the evaluation of the apple technology market, and gives definitions on terms like apple farmer household, technology market of apple industry. Secondly, it further insights into the motivation, cognition, attitude and behavioral traits under the restriction of the factor endowment as well as the apple technology market. And with that, a theoretical framework of apple farmer household technology choice behaviors can be established. The theoretical analysis shows that the factor endowment and apple technology market are demand factor and supply factor respectively that induce the deviation in technology choice behaviors of apple farmer household, which led to household's economic benefits have dynamic difference.
The third part including Chapter4, Chapter5, Chapter6, Chapter7, and Chapter8is an empirica analysis of the impacts of apple technology market on the apple farmer household's labor-intensive and labor-saving technology choice behaviors based on the apple farmer household-level data. Chapter4is an empirical analysis on the impacts of apple technology market on the apple farmer household's labor-intensive and labor-saving technological perception by the multilevel structural equation modeling. Chapter5is an empirical analysis on the impacts of apple technology market on the apple farmer household's labor-intensive and labor-saving technological implementation based on transaction cost theory. Chapter6is an empirical analysis on the impacts of apple technology market on the apple farmer household's labor-intensive and labor-saving technology systems simultaneity adoption respectively by the bivariate probit model. Chapter7is an empirical analysis on the impacts on the gains of the apple farmer households from labor-intensive and labor-saving technology adoption under the inducement of input and apple technology market based on a nonparametric quantile regression. Chapter8is an empirical analysis on the spatial spillover effects on the gains of the apple farmer households from labor-intensive and labor-saving technologies adoption.
The main empirical results are as follows:
1. The empirical results of the impacts of apple technology market on the apple farmer household's labor-intensive and labor-saving technological perception by the multilevel structural equation modeling show that:households'perception on labor-intensive technology to be better because of its high actual profit. Additionally, the technology suppliers in the apple technology market exert multiple and significant effects on household's technological perception from the individual level and from the group level. To be specific, the extension institution of model demonstration that the China Apple Research System applied leads to a gap among the consensus of apple farmer households'group; the technical information disseminated by opportunistic fruit companies is helpless in improving the apple farmer household's technological perception; apple farmer household cooperatives are beneficial to improve the individual household's technological perception, and close the gap among the consensus of apple farmer households'group; the technical information disseminated by neighbourhoods contribute to enhance the individual household's technological perception; the public technical services supported by government is beneficial to improve the technological consensus of apple farmer households'group by driving the information search cost down.
2. The empirical results of the impacts of apple technology market on the apple farmer household's labor-intensive and labor-saving technological implementation show that:firstly, the relative changes of input prices are the important market signals which induces the deviation in technological implementation of apple farmer household. For the apple farmer household who participates in open market transaction, in particular, it is more sensitive to input prices changing. Secondly, the effects of transactions costs on the apple farmer household's technological implementation are various. Specifically, when the apple farmer household who participates in open market transaction faces lower information cost and negotiation cost, it is more likely to adopt labor-saving technology, while when the apple farmer household who participates in internal and quasi-internal transactions faces lower information cost and monitoring cost, it is more likely to adopt labor-saving technology. Finally, for the apple farmer household who participates in internal transaction, the motivation of reducing transaction costs in inputs markets to labor-saving technology is smaller than the inhibition of product market demand, scale of operation, pruning system and natural environment to labor-saving technology.
3. The empirical results of the impacts of apple technology market on the apple farmer household's labor-intensive and labor-saving technology systems simultaneity adoption respectively show that:firstly, the apple farmer household's decision to improve soil organic significantly and positively depends on whether the same household reduces the orchard density, and the reverse causality is also significant. Meanwhile, the apple farmer household's decision to adopt dwarfed rootstock significantly and positively depends on whether the same household adopts the tree form for high photosynthetic efficiency, and the reverse causality is also significant; secondly, behaviors of the technology suppliers in the apple technology market are significant factors in explaining variations in apple farmer household's technology simultaneity adoption decisions, besides household's orchard and family characteristics. To be specific, the training supplied by China Apple Research System, the internal technology exchange of household, and the infrastructure supported by government are effective ways to diffuse the precision apple orchard technology system and intensive apple orchard technology system. While the training supplied by fruit companied and apple farmer household cooperatives, as well as finance supported by government have not significantly improved the precision apple orchard technology system and intensive apple orchard technology system.
4. The empirical results of the impacts on the gains of the apple farmer households from labor-intensive and labor-saving technologies adoption show that:it is worth noting that the labor-saving technology impacts on the apple farmer households'gains negatively, while the labor-intensive technology impacts positively and robustly, especially on those with high net income. The results also show that the net income of the apple farmer households is positively related to the number of apple growers, as which we interpret evidence that the potential for increasing the gains of the apple farmer households through the labor-intensive technology is substantial. In addition, the household attributes, such as the demographic characteristics of the growers, technical cognition and, scale of operation and ratio of high-grade fruits are found to have influences of different intensity on the net income of the apple farmer households. Moreover, the net income of the apple farmer households is positively related to China Apple Research System, and is negatively related to apple farmer cooperatives.
5. The empirical results of the spatial spillover effects on the gains of the apple farmer households from labor-intensive and labor-saving technologies adoption show that:firstly, there exists spatial autocorrelation to some extent for the regional technology choice behaviors and net income of the apple farmer households; secondly, the adoption of labor-saving technology impacts on the apple farmer households'gains negatively, while the adoption of labor-intensive technology has obvious and robust effects and contribution to raise the gains of the apple farmer households at the village level. Thirdly, the technology choice behaviors of apple farmer household has significantly spillover effects on their gains due to the technical activities of China Apple Research System rather than the technical activities of fruit companies or apple farmer household cooperatives.
Finally, the results of the whole dissertation illustrate that though it is urgently need industrial transformation under the pressure of increased labor cost, the labor-saving technology innovation is lagged, and the labor-intensive technology innovation is still a necessary condition for China's apple industry development. The reasons for the results above are as follows:from the point of technology demand firstly, because the return of labor-intensive technology is relative higher than that of the labor-saving technology, the benefit-oriented apple farmer household is induced to adopt labor-intensive technology to save machinery factor. Hence, the effective demand for labor-intensive technology is rigidity, while the effective demand for labor-saving technology is insufficiency. From the point of technology supply secondly, the improper intervention of the technology innovation system and science and technology policies of apple industry induce all suppliers of technology innovation and extension, including private and public sectors, supply unbalanced, inefficient and distorted labor-saving technology products and services with which high asymmetric information and transactions costs. Consequently, the effective supply for labor-saving technology is insufficiency. From the point of equilibrium between supply and demand for technology market finally, the conflict and contradiction among the science and technology systems and policies, among different suppliers of technology innovation and extension, and among demanders and suppliers of technology innovation and extension, distort the relationship between the government behavior and market regulation. Therefore, the ineffectiveness of apple technology market leads to the deficiency of effective demand and effective supply for labor-saving technology, and thus restricts the labor-saving technical progress and intensive apple orchard technology system innovation.
按照“苹果产业技术市场供求主体行为演变特征分析→苹果种植户劳动密集型、劳动节约型技术选择行为分析(技术认知态度、技术决策实施、技术联合采用)→苹果种植户技术选择经济效益评价”的研究逻辑关系,将论文主要研究内容规划为：
第一部分为导言,包括第一章。围绕苹果产业发展方式转变过程中苹果产业技术市场供求主体行为变化特征、趋势,阐明本文的研究背景、研究目的和意义。在国内外农户技术选择行为文献综述和评价的基础上,说明深入研究苹果种植户在苹果产业技术市场影响下的专业化、市场化技术选择行为特征及其经济效益,是农户技术选择及经济评价中值得研究的重要领域。根据本文研究目的与研究价值,构思和设计本文技术线路、研究方法和研究内容,并归纳和提炼本文的创新之处。
第二部分为苹果种植户技术选择行为理论分析,涵盖第二章和第三章。以苹果种植户为研究基本单元,以苹果种植户技术选择行为为研究对象,将苹果生产技术进步的历史变迁规律与农户技术选择理论结合,在归纳苹果产业技术市场中供求主体行为演变特征的基础上,分析苹果产业技术进步的原理；界定苹果种植户技术选择行为的内涵与外延,揭示苹果种植户技术选择行为动机、行为倾向,以及在要素禀赋和苹果产业技术市场约束下呈现的行为特征,建立苹果种植户技术选择行为理论体系。运用规范分析为主的研究方法,凝练、形成本文理论假设：要素稀缺程度是诱导苹果种植户技术选择行为产生偏向的需求因素,苹果产业技术市场中的技术创新及推广供给主体行为是诱导苹果种植户技术选择行为产生偏向的供给因素,进而导致苹果种植户技术选择行为的经济效益具有差异性。
第三部分为苹果种植户技术选择行为实证检验,涉及第四章、第五章、第六章、第七章、第八章。第四章,运用二层次结构模型和全国优势产区苹果重点生产县(市)苹果种植户和村级实地调研数据,就技术创新及推广供给主体行为对苹果种植户劳动密集型和劳动节约型技术认知及技术潜在需求的影响机制进行分析。第五章,构建苹果种植户技术选择行为及其交易制度分析框架,运用分组tobit模型和全国优势产区苹果重点生产县(市)苹果种植户实地调研数据,就苹果产业技术市场中不同技术交易制度安排产生的信息搜寻成本、谈判成本和执行成本,对苹果种植户劳动密集型和劳动节约型技术决策行为的影响进行分析。第六章,运用局部可观察双变量probit模型和全国优势产区苹果重点生产县(市)苹果种植户实地调研数据,就技术创新及推广供给主体行为分别对苹果种植户果园精细经营管理制度中的子技术联合采用和果园简约经营管理制度中的子技术联合采用的影响进行分析。第七章,运用分位回归方法和全国优势产区苹果重点生产县(市)苹果种植户实地调研数据,就苹果产业技术市场影响下,苹果种植户劳动密集型、劳动节约型技术选择对其生产收入个体分布的影响机理和方向、程度进行分析。第八章,构建区域苹果种植户生产收入函数,运用全国优势产区苹果重点生产县(市)苹果种植户和村级实地调研数据,就苹果产业技术市场影响下,苹果种植户劳动密集型、劳动节约型技术选择行为的空间溢出效应对其生产收入的影响方向及程度进行分析。
主要研究结论包括四个方面：
1.苹果产业技术市场对苹果种植户技术认知影响实证分析形成以下观点和结论：-是尽管高度知识集成的劳动密集型技术运用复杂程度高,但相比劳动节约型技术而言,苹果种植户对劳动密集型技术现实效益性的认可度更高,从而对劳动密集型技术表现出刚性的潜在需求偏好。二是技术创新及推广供给主体行为是诱发苹果种植户不同群体,以及同一群体内不同个体对劳动密集型技术和劳动节约型技术的认知产生分化的关键因素。具体而言,国家现代苹果产业技术体系采取的典型示范技术信息扩散制度产生“创新精神与创新需求悖论”,加大了苹果种植户群体间技术共识差距。由于苹果产业技术市场监管缺位,行业技术信息披露规范缺失,加之政府主导的公益型技术创新及推广体系对以涉果企业主导的商业型技术创新及推广体系具有排斥性,利益驱动型的涉果企业倾向于实施机会主义行为,导致其技术信息传播对提升苹果种植户技术认知无实质性帮助。果农专业合作社通过技术信息有效传递与知识技能共享,有利于提升苹果种植户个体的技术认知水平,以及缩小苹果种植户群体的技术共识差距。邻里技术信息传播通过基于熟人信任机制的人际关系渠道产生显著的口碑效应,有助于提升苹果种植户个体的技术认知水平。政府产业扶持机构提供的技术公共服务能够降低苹果种植户技术认知的公共信息搜寻成本,从而有助于提升苹果种植户群体的技术共识。
2.苹果产业技术市场对苹果种植户技术决策影响实证分析形成以下观点和结论：是生产要素价格的相对变动是诱致苹果种植户技术决策产生偏向的市场信号,尤其是遵循公开市场交易制度安排的苹果种植户技术决策偏向对生产要素价格变动更为敏感。二是不同技术交易制度安排产生的交易成本会对苹果种植户劳动密集型、劳动节约型技术决策行为产生差异化影响。具体而言,遵循公开市场交易制度安排的苹果种植户面临的技术交易信息搜寻成本和技术谈判成本越低,越偏向采用劳动节约型技术；遵循准内部交易制度安排和内部交易制度安排的苹果种植户面临的技术交易信息搜寻成本和技术执行成本越低,越偏向采用劳动节约型技术。三是内部交易制度安排下,降低技术交易成本对劳动节约型技术的正向激励,难以突破产品市场需求、苹果种植户经营规模、果园修剪制度和自然环境特征对劳动节约型技术的抑制作用。
3.苹果产业技术市场对苹果种植户技术联合采用影响证分析形成以下观点和结论：一是以劳动密集型技术为支撑的果园精细经营管理制度内部子技术的采用行为,以劳动节约型技术为支撑的果园简约经营管理制度内部子技术的采用行为,均存在显著的互补关系。即遵循果园精细经营管理制度的苹果种植户采用果树疏密改形技术,也会倾向采用土壤有机质提升技术,反之亦然；遵循简约经营管理制度的苹果种植户采用矮砧密植栽培技术,也会倾向采用高光效树形技术,反之亦然。二是地块特征、家庭特征均是苹果种植户采用果园精细经营管理制度和果园简约经营管理制度的重要个体影响因素。三是相比果园精细经营管理制度中的子技术联合采用,技术创新及推广供给主体对果园简约经营管理制度中的子技术联合采用产生更多的技术供给扭曲。其中,国家现代苹果产业技术体系的技术推广培训,苹果种植户内部技术交流,以及政府财政投资扶持、公共投资支持的生产性基础设施建设,是果园精细管理制度的有效扩散渠道,而果农专业合作社和涉果企业技术推广培训对果园精细经营管理制度的影响能力较弱。对果园简约经营管理制度而言,只有国家现代苹果产业技术体系技术推广培训、苹果种植户内部技术交流、以及公共投资支持的生产性基础设施建设具有正效应,果农专业合作社技术推广培训、政府财政投资扶持对果园简约经营管理制度内部子技术的联合采用均产生显著的抑制作用。
4.苹果产业技术市场约束下苹果种植户技术选择对其生产收入个体分布和空间格局影响实证分析形成以下观点和结论：一是从中国苹果优势产区村域层面和苹果种植户个体层面,劳动密集型技术、劳动节约型技术的投入回报率均差异显著。其中,劳动节约型技术与苹果种植户生产收入呈显著负相关,而劳动密集型技术对提高苹果种植户生产收入则具有明显且稳健的促进作用。二是技术创新及推广供给主体中,国家现代苹果产业技术体系的技术活动能使苹果种植户技术选择行为产生外部性,从而对本地及邻近区域苹果种植户生产收入产生显著且稳健的溢出效应,而果农专业合作社和涉果企业由于技术培训服务功能较弱,对邻近区域苹果种植户技术选择行为的辐射带动作用不明显。
本文研究结果验证,要素禀赋和苹果产业技术市场中的技术创新及推广供给主体行为,在苹果种植户就劳动密集型技术和劳动节约型技术进行技术认知、技术决策实施和技术联合采用的过程中产生显著影响,进而导致苹果种植户技术选择行为的经济效益从个体层面和空间层面具有差异性。结论表明,随着要素市场中劳动力价格相对机械价格上升速度加快,劳动力稀缺程度增加,苹果种植户生产技术呈现由劳动密集型向劳动节约型转变的趋势。但是,受到产品市场和苹果产业技术市场的双重限制,当前苹果产业技术界及科技政策制定者主张推进果园机械等劳动节约型技术创新、推广的观点、政策倾向尚不具备成熟的实施条件。以劳动节约型技术为支撑的果园简约经营管理制度创新缓慢,以劳动密集型技术为支撑的果园精细经营管理制度依然是目前中国苹果产业发展的必要条件。造成上述结果的原因为：
(1)从技术需求来看,产品市场中劳动密集型技术的回报率相对高于劳动节约型技术的回报率,诱导利益导向的苹果种植户倾向采用劳动密集型技术,进而造成劳动密集型技术的有效需求具有刚性,劳动节约型技术的有效需求不足。
(2)从技术供给来看,在苹果种植户进行技术认知、技术决策实施、技术联合采用等技术选择阶段,由于苹果产业技术创新管理体制及产业科技政策的不适当干预,使得包括私人部门和公共机构在内的技术创新及推广供给主体在依托技术信息传播、技术交易、技术推广培训、技术辐射进行技术供给过程中,对劳动节约型技术(相比劳动密集型技术而言)产生更大程度的结构性失衡供给、无效供给和扭曲供给,并由此产生较高的技术信息非对称性及技术交易成本,导致劳动节约型技术有效供给不足。
(3)从技术市场供需来看,由于苹果产业科技体制及政策之间,不同技术创新及推广供给主体行为之间,以及苹果种植户技术选择行为与各类技术创新及推广供给主体行为之间存在冲突和矛盾,导致政府行为与苹果产业技术市场调节之间的关系扭曲。因此,苹果产业技术市场缺乏有效性,劳动节约型技术有效供给不足,导致其在成本及价格方面缺乏优势；劳动节约型技术的潜在需求难以转化成有效需求,导致其潜在收益无法充分实现,从而制约了劳动节约型技术进步以及果园简约经营管理制度创新。
Promoting technology innovation and extension has become the key field in transformation of apple industry development patterns with high-tech and high-yield, and also become the critical scientific and strategic issues that the government and dominant production zones concerned about. Apple farmer household is the important demander and participant of technology innovation market in China's apple industry. Hence, the technology choice behaviors of apple farmer household are vital to increasing the efficiency of technology innovation and extension. Current study on farmer households'technology choice behaviors is too general and fails to dig deep into this problem by focusing on high value agricultural industry. This dissertation aims to solve this problem. Using a large set of first-hand household-level survey data from apple farmer households in15apple base counties located in the Bohai Gulf region and the Loess Plateau region which are the China's two main apple farmer regions, this dissertation makes an in depth study of the characteristics of technology choice behaviors of apple farmer household under the influence of factor endowment and apple technology market.
This dissertation consists of four parts, and the main content of each part is as follows:
The first part briefly introduces the main purpose, the theoretical basis, the main research method and the framework. It elaborates the research background, the purpose and the significance of a study on technology choice behaviors of apple farmer household with a brief view of a changing technology karket during the transformation of the China's apple industry development; then it makes a thorough and objective review of studies in this area and specifies the necessity of a quantitative study on technology choice behaviors of apple farmer household; then it summarizes the method and the data, and finally it mentions the originality of this study.
The second part including Chapter2and Chapter3is a theoretical analysis of apple farmer household's technology choice behaviors. Firstly, it summarizes the principle of apple technology progress based on the evaluation of the apple technology market, and gives definitions on terms like apple farmer household, technology market of apple industry. Secondly, it further insights into the motivation, cognition, attitude and behavioral traits under the restriction of the factor endowment as well as the apple technology market. And with that, a theoretical framework of apple farmer household technology choice behaviors can be established. The theoretical analysis shows that the factor endowment and apple technology market are demand factor and supply factor respectively that induce the deviation in technology choice behaviors of apple farmer household, which led to household's economic benefits have dynamic difference.
The third part including Chapter4, Chapter5, Chapter6, Chapter7, and Chapter8is an empirica analysis of the impacts of apple technology market on the apple farmer household's labor-intensive and labor-saving technology choice behaviors based on the apple farmer household-level data. Chapter4is an empirical analysis on the impacts of apple technology market on the apple farmer household's labor-intensive and labor-saving technological perception by the multilevel structural equation modeling. Chapter5is an empirical analysis on the impacts of apple technology market on the apple farmer household's labor-intensive and labor-saving technological implementation based on transaction cost theory. Chapter6is an empirical analysis on the impacts of apple technology market on the apple farmer household's labor-intensive and labor-saving technology systems simultaneity adoption respectively by the bivariate probit model. Chapter7is an empirical analysis on the impacts on the gains of the apple farmer households from labor-intensive and labor-saving technology adoption under the inducement of input and apple technology market based on a nonparametric quantile regression. Chapter8is an empirical analysis on the spatial spillover effects on the gains of the apple farmer households from labor-intensive and labor-saving technologies adoption.
The main empirical results are as follows:
1. The empirical results of the impacts of apple technology market on the apple farmer household's labor-intensive and labor-saving technological perception by the multilevel structural equation modeling show that:households'perception on labor-intensive technology to be better because of its high actual profit. Additionally, the technology suppliers in the apple technology market exert multiple and significant effects on household's technological perception from the individual level and from the group level. To be specific, the extension institution of model demonstration that the China Apple Research System applied leads to a gap among the consensus of apple farmer households'group; the technical information disseminated by opportunistic fruit companies is helpless in improving the apple farmer household's technological perception; apple farmer household cooperatives are beneficial to improve the individual household's technological perception, and close the gap among the consensus of apple farmer households'group; the technical information disseminated by neighbourhoods contribute to enhance the individual household's technological perception; the public technical services supported by government is beneficial to improve the technological consensus of apple farmer households'group by driving the information search cost down.
2. The empirical results of the impacts of apple technology market on the apple farmer household's labor-intensive and labor-saving technological implementation show that:firstly, the relative changes of input prices are the important market signals which induces the deviation in technological implementation of apple farmer household. For the apple farmer household who participates in open market transaction, in particular, it is more sensitive to input prices changing. Secondly, the effects of transactions costs on the apple farmer household's technological implementation are various. Specifically, when the apple farmer household who participates in open market transaction faces lower information cost and negotiation cost, it is more likely to adopt labor-saving technology, while when the apple farmer household who participates in internal and quasi-internal transactions faces lower information cost and monitoring cost, it is more likely to adopt labor-saving technology. Finally, for the apple farmer household who participates in internal transaction, the motivation of reducing transaction costs in inputs markets to labor-saving technology is smaller than the inhibition of product market demand, scale of operation, pruning system and natural environment to labor-saving technology.
3. The empirical results of the impacts of apple technology market on the apple farmer household's labor-intensive and labor-saving technology systems simultaneity adoption respectively show that:firstly, the apple farmer household's decision to improve soil organic significantly and positively depends on whether the same household reduces the orchard density, and the reverse causality is also significant. Meanwhile, the apple farmer household's decision to adopt dwarfed rootstock significantly and positively depends on whether the same household adopts the tree form for high photosynthetic efficiency, and the reverse causality is also significant; secondly, behaviors of the technology suppliers in the apple technology market are significant factors in explaining variations in apple farmer household's technology simultaneity adoption decisions, besides household's orchard and family characteristics. To be specific, the training supplied by China Apple Research System, the internal technology exchange of household, and the infrastructure supported by government are effective ways to diffuse the precision apple orchard technology system and intensive apple orchard technology system. While the training supplied by fruit companied and apple farmer household cooperatives, as well as finance supported by government have not significantly improved the precision apple orchard technology system and intensive apple orchard technology system.
4. The empirical results of the impacts on the gains of the apple farmer households from labor-intensive and labor-saving technologies adoption show that:it is worth noting that the labor-saving technology impacts on the apple farmer households'gains negatively, while the labor-intensive technology impacts positively and robustly, especially on those with high net income. The results also show that the net income of the apple farmer households is positively related to the number of apple growers, as which we interpret evidence that the potential for increasing the gains of the apple farmer households through the labor-intensive technology is substantial. In addition, the household attributes, such as the demographic characteristics of the growers, technical cognition and, scale of operation and ratio of high-grade fruits are found to have influences of different intensity on the net income of the apple farmer households. Moreover, the net income of the apple farmer households is positively related to China Apple Research System, and is negatively related to apple farmer cooperatives.
5. The empirical results of the spatial spillover effects on the gains of the apple farmer households from labor-intensive and labor-saving technologies adoption show that:firstly, there exists spatial autocorrelation to some extent for the regional technology choice behaviors and net income of the apple farmer households; secondly, the adoption of labor-saving technology impacts on the apple farmer households'gains negatively, while the adoption of labor-intensive technology has obvious and robust effects and contribution to raise the gains of the apple farmer households at the village level. Thirdly, the technology choice behaviors of apple farmer household has significantly spillover effects on their gains due to the technical activities of China Apple Research System rather than the technical activities of fruit companies or apple farmer household cooperatives.
Finally, the results of the whole dissertation illustrate that though it is urgently need industrial transformation under the pressure of increased labor cost, the labor-saving technology innovation is lagged, and the labor-intensive technology innovation is still a necessary condition for China's apple industry development. The reasons for the results above are as follows:from the point of technology demand firstly, because the return of labor-intensive technology is relative higher than that of the labor-saving technology, the benefit-oriented apple farmer household is induced to adopt labor-intensive technology to save machinery factor. Hence, the effective demand for labor-intensive technology is rigidity, while the effective demand for labor-saving technology is insufficiency. From the point of technology supply secondly, the improper intervention of the technology innovation system and science and technology policies of apple industry induce all suppliers of technology innovation and extension, including private and public sectors, supply unbalanced, inefficient and distorted labor-saving technology products and services with which high asymmetric information and transactions costs. Consequently, the effective supply for labor-saving technology is insufficiency. From the point of equilibrium between supply and demand for technology market finally, the conflict and contradiction among the science and technology systems and policies, among different suppliers of technology innovation and extension, and among demanders and suppliers of technology innovation and extension, distort the relationship between the government behavior and market regulation. Therefore, the ineffectiveness of apple technology market leads to the deficiency of effective demand and effective supply for labor-saving technology, and thus restricts the labor-saving technical progress and intensive apple orchard technology system innovation.
引文
⑦ 数据来源：《国内外苹果产业技术发展报告》,韩明玉冯宝荣.杨凌：西北农林科技大学出版社,2010
安同良.2003.中国企业的技术选择.经济研究,7：76-84
卜范达韩喜平.2003.“农户经营”内涵的探析.当代经济研究,9：37-40
曹建民 胡瑞法 黄季焜.2005.技术推广与农民对新技术的修正采用：农民参与技术培训和采用新技术的意愿及其影响因素分析.中国软科学,6：60-66
曹建民 胡瑞法 黄季焜.2005.农民参与科学研究的意愿及其决定因素.中国农村经济,10：28-35
陈超 周宁.2007.农民文化素质的差异对农业生产和技术选择渠道的影响——基于全国十省农民调查问卷的分析,中国农村经济,9：33-38
常向阳 姚华锋.2005.农业技术选择影响因素的实证分析.中国农村经济,10：36-41
陈利顶 马岩.2007.农户经营行为及其对生态环境的影响.生态环境,2：691-697
范英.2010.中国苹果生产布局变迁研究.[硕士学位论文].杨凌：西北农林科技大学
冯忠泽 李庆江.2007.农户农产品质量安全认知及影响因素分析.农业经济问题,4：22-26
过国南 阎振立 张顺妮.2003.我国建国以来苹果品种选育研究的回顾及今后育种的发展方向.中国果树,20(2)：127-134
国家苹果产业技术研发中心(韩明玉、冯宝荣主编).2011.国内外苹果产业技术发展报告.杨凌：西北农林科技大学出版社：290
郭霞.2008.基于农户生产技术选择的农业技术推广体系研究——以江苏省小麦生产为例.[博士学位论文].南京：南京农业大学.
何雄浪.2012.区域效应与集聚效应：我国地区间实际收入差距成因探究.经济问题研究,11：50-60
胡瑞法 程家安 董守珍等.1998.妇女在农业生产中的决策行为及作用.农业经济问题,3：52-54
黄季焜胡瑞法张林秀Scott Rozelle.2000a.中国农业科技投资经济.北京：中国农业出版社：225
黄季焜 胡瑞法.2000b.中国农业科研投资：效益、利益分配及政策含义.中国软科学,9：21-24
黄季焜 齐亮陈瑞剑.2008.信息知识、风险偏好与农民施用农药.管理世界,5：71-76
黄俊英.1995.多变量分析.台北：中国经济企业研究所：132-144
黄玉祥 韩文霆 周龙等.2012.农户节水灌溉技术认知及其影响因素分析.农业工程学报,28：113-120
黄祖辉 钱峰燕.2003.技术进步对我国农民收入的影响及对策分析.中国农村经济,12：11-17
黄祖辉 张静Kevin Chen.2008.交易费用与农户契约选择——来自浙冀两省15县30个村梨农调查的经验证据.管理世界,9：76-82
郝大江.2009.区域经济增长的空间回归——基于区域性要素禀赋的视角.经济评论,2：127-132
霍学喜,王静,朱玉春.2011.技术选择对苹果种植户生产收入变动影响——以陕西洛川苹果种植户为例.农业技术经济,6：12-21
孔祥智 方松海 庞晓鹏等.2004.西部地区农户禀赋对农业技术采纳的影响分析.经济研究,12：85-95
孔祥智 楼栋.2012.农业技术推广的国际比较、时态举证与中国对策.改革,1：12-23
雷海章.2003.现代农业经济学.北京：中国农业出版社,142.
李大胜 李琴.2007.农业技术进步对农户收入差距的影响机理及实证研究.农业技术经济,3：23-27
李仁豪 余民宁.1997.二层次结构方程式模型的应用：以教学心理学为例,师大学报。53(3)：95-122
林毅夫.1994.制度、技术与中国农业发展.上海：上海人民出版社：168-196
林毅夫.2002.发展战略、自生能力和经济收敛.经济学季刊,2：269-300
林毅夫 董先安 殷韦.2004.技术选择、技术扩散与经济收敛.财经问题研究,6：3-10
林毅夫 沈明高 周皓.1996.中国农业科研优先序——我国主要粮食作物研究的需求和供给分析.北京：中国农业出版社：238
凌远云 郭犹焕.1997.农业科研优先序：技术采用角度的探讨.中国农村经济,8：69-73
刘进宝 刘洪.2004.农业技术进步与农民农业收入增长弱相关性分析.中国农村经济,9：26-30
刘军弟 霍学喜 韩明玉 刘天军.2012.中国苹果产业发展现状及趋势分析.北方园艺,20：164-168
刘天军 蔡起华 朱玉春.2012.气候变化对苹果主产区产量的影响——来自陕西省6个苹果生产基地县210户果农的数据.中国农村经济,5：32-40
刘学.2000.技术交易的特征与技术市场研究.中国软科学,3：62-67
陆秋农 贾定贤.1999.中国果树志·苹果卷.北京：中国农业科技出版社；中国林业出版社：110
满明俊 周民良 李同昇.2010.农户采用不同属性技术行为的差异分析——基于陕西、甘肃、宁夏的调查.中国农村经济,2：68-78
木生 田琳.2012.当前国内外苹果主栽品种的构成与发展趋势.烟台果树,1：37
齐振宏 喻宏伟 王培成等.2009.不成熟要素市场下理性农户粮食生产中的技术选择——以湖北省稻农水稻品种的技术选择为例.经济评论,6：93-100
屈小博 霍学喜.2007.交易成本对农户农产品销售行为的影响——基于陕西省6个县27个村果农调查数据的分析.中国农村经济,8：35-46
石建平.2010.中国苹果消费需求特征分析.[硕士学位论文].杨凌：西北农林科技大学
唐博文 罗小锋 秦军.2010.农户采用不同属性技术的影响因素分析——基于9省(区)2110户农户的调查.中国农村经济,6：49-57
陶佩君.2006.社会化小农户的农业技术创新扩散研究.[博士学位论文].天津：天津大学
王韧.2006.中国农村居民收入决定特征及其影响因素变动：1952-2003年.数量经济技术经济研究,4：3-11
王文烂 谢志忠.2002.论我国农业技术市场交易配置的运行机制.云南财贸学院学报(经济管理版), 1(16)：54-56
王益松.2004.农业技术进步对生产者收入影响的理论分析.中南财经政法大学学报,3：75-78
王跃生.1999.家庭责任制、农户行为与农业中的环境生态问题.北京大学学报(哲学社会科学版),30：44-49
王志刚 汪超 许晓源.2010.农户认知和采纳创意农业的机制：基于北京城郊四区果树产业的问卷调查.中国农村观察,4：33-43
吴林海 侯博 高申荣.2011.基于结构方程模型的分散农户农药残留认知与主要影响因素分析.中国农村经济,3：35-48
吴明隆.2009.结构方程模型——AMOS的操作与应用.重庆：重庆大学出版社：277
徐家鹏 闫振宇.2010.农民对转基因技术的认知及转基因主粮的潜在生产意愿分析——以湖北地区种粮农户为考察对象.中国科技论坛,11：142-148
徐世艳 李仕宝.2009.现阶段我国农民的农业技术需求影响因素分析.农业技术经济,4：42-47
杨军玉 刘淑香胡同乐.2010.2009年全国苹果叶部主要病虫害发生及农药使用情况.中国植保导刊,10：25-28
尤小文.1999.农户：一个概念的探讨.中国农村观察,5：17-20
张东辉 司志宾.2007.教育、技术进步与农村收入差距——基于中国农村统计数据的分析.经济评论,5：42-46
庄天慧 余崇媛 刘人瑜.2013.西南民族贫困地区农业技术推广现状及其影响因素研究——基于西南4省1739户农户的调查.科技进步与对策,9：37-40
曾伟忠 何训坤.2002.我国农业技术市场发展的难点与对策.农业经济问题,5：14-17
曾福生 匡远配.2002.论形成完善的农业技术市场促进农业技术进步.科技进步与对策,9：121-122
周波 于冷.2010.国外农户现代农业技术应用问题研究综述.首都经济贸易大学学报,5：94-101
Abdulai A and Huffman W E.2005. The Diffusion of New Agricultural Technologies:The Case of Crossbred-cow Technology in Tanzania. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,87(3):645-659.
Adesina A.A., Zinnah, M.M.1993. Technology Characteristics, Farmer Perceptions and Adoption Decisions:A Tobit Model Application in Sierra Leone. Agricultural Economics,9:297-311
Adesina A.A., Baidu-Forson, J.1995. Farmers'Perceptions and Adoption of New Agricultural Technology: Evidence from Analysis in Burkina Faso and Guinea West Africa. Agricultural Economics,13:1-9
Adrian A.M., Norwood, S.H., Mask, P.L.2005. Producers'perceptions and attitudes toward precision agriculture technologies. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture,48:256-271
Andrew P.1980. The Rich Seeds and the Desire of Seeds:The Social and Economic Effect of Green Revolution. Oxford:Working Paper, Carat Aaron press
Alene A. D.; Manyong, V. M.; Omanya, G.; Mignouna, H. D. Bokanga, M.and Odhiambo, G..2008. Smallholder Market Participation under Transactions Costs:Maize Supply and Fertilizer Demand in Kenya, Food Policy,33(4):318-328
Anselin L, Getis A.1992. Spatial Statistical Analysis and Geographic Information Systems. The Annals of Regional Science,26:19-33
Anselin L., Raymond J.G.M.,Florax, Rey S.J.2004. Advances in Spatial Econometrics:Methodology, Tools and Applications. Berlin:Springer-Verlag
Barkley A P and Porter L L.1996. The Determinants of Wheat Variety Choice in Kansans,1974-1993. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Feb (78):202-211
Batte M.T.and Arnholt, M.W.2003. Precision Arming Adoption and Use in Ohio:Case Studies of Six Leading-edge Adopters. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture,38:125-139
Binswanger H P.1974. A Microeconomic Approach to Induced Innovation. Economic Journal,84(12):940-958
Byerlee D and de Polanco E.1986. Farmers'Stepwise Adoption of Technological Packages:Evidence from the Mexican Altiplano. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,68(3):519-527
Caniels M. C. J.2000. Knowledge Spillovers and Economic Growth:Regional Growth Differentials Across Europe. Cheltenham, Uk; Northampton, MA:Edward Elgar.
Chan D.1998. Functional Relations among Constructs in the Same Content Domain at Different Levels of Analysis:A Typology of Composition Models. Journal of Applied Psychology,83(2):234-246
Chang H H.2012. Does the use of eco-labels affect income distribution and income inequality of aquaculture producers in Taiwan? Ecological Economics,80:101-108
Chen L, Heerink N, van den Berg M.2006. Energy Consumption in Rural China:A household model for three villages in Jiangxi Province. Ecological Economics,58(2):407-420
Cheung M.W.L. and Au K.2005. Applications of multilevel structural equation modeling to cross-national research. Structural Equation Modeling,12(4):598-619
Cohen J, Cohen P, West S G, Aiken L S.2003. Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (3 rd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum
Conley Timothy G., and Christopher R. Udry.2010. Learning about a New Technology:Pineapple in Ghana. American Economic Review,100(1):35-69
D'Antonia J.M., Mishrab, A.K., Powellc, R., Martin, S.2012. Farmers'Perception of Precision Technology:The Case of Autosteer Adoption by Cotton Farmers. The Southern Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Birmingham, AL:4-7
Davis F.D.1989. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Q.,13:319-339
Davis F.D.1993. User Acceptance of Information Technology:System Characteristics, User Perceptions, and Behavioral Impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies,38 (3):475-487
de Janvry A and Sadoulet E.2000. Rural Poverty in Latin America Determinants and Exit Paths. Food Policy, 25:389-409
de Janvry A and Sadoulet E.2001. World Poverty and the Role of Agricultural Technology:Direct and Indirect Effects. Journal of Development Studies,38:1-26
Doss C R.2001. Designing Agricultural Technology for African Women Farmers:Lessons from 25 Years of Experience. World Development,29(12):2075-2092
Edward, S. M.2004. Fanners' Knowledge and Perception towards a Sustainable Adoption of Sugar Beet in Kenya. LUND UNIVERSITY:40
Ersado L, Amacher G, Alwang J.2004. Productivity and Land Enhancing Technologies in Northern Ethiopia: Health, Public Investments, and Sequential Adoption. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,86(2): 321-331
Evenson R. and Westphal L.1995. Technological Change and Technology Strategy. Handbook of Development
Economics J. Behrman and T. N. Srinivasan. Amsterdam, North-Holland.3A:2209-2300
Feder G, Just R E, Zilberman D.1985. Adoption of Agricultural Innovations in Developing Countries:A Survey. Economic Development and Cultural Change,33(2):255-298
Fishbein M. and Ajzen I.1975. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior:An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading. MA:Addison-Wesley:15.
Foster A. D. and Rosenzweig M.R.1995. Learning by Doing and Learning from Others:Human Capital and Technical Change in Agriculture. Journal of Political Economy,103:1176-1209
Foster A. D. and Rosenzweig M. R.2010. Microeconomics of Technology Adoption. Annual Reviews Economics, 2(1):395-424
Freebairn D K.1995. Did the Green Revolution Concentrate Incomes? A Quantitative Study of Research Reports. World Development,23(2):265-279
Gauchan D,Van Dusen M E, Smale M.2005. On Farm Conservation of Rice Biodiversity in Nepal:A simultaneous Estimation Approach. EPTD discussion papers 144, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)
Graff G, Roland-Holst D, Zilberman D.2006. Agricultural Biotechnology and Poverty Reduction in Low-income Countries. World Development,34(8):1430-1445
Greene W.2000. Econometric Analysis.4th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice Hall
Goetz S.J.1992. A Selectivity Model of Household Food Marketing Behavior in Sub-Sahara Africa, American Journal of Agricultural Economics,74:444-452
Gine X. and Klonner S.2006. Credit Constraints as A Barrier to Technology Adoption by the Poor:Lessons from South-Indian Small-scale Fishery. Research Paper, UNU-WIDER, United Nations University (UNU):1-35
Griliches Z.1957. Hybrid Corn:An Exploration in the Economics of Technological Change. Econometrica,25: 501-522
Griffin K.1974. The Political Economics of Land Reform:The essay of the Green Revolution. Cambridge: Harvard University press:25
Hayami Y.1981. Induced Innovation, Green Revolution, and Income Distribution:Comment [The Implications of an Induced Innovation Model, Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press,30(1):169-176
Hayami Y and Ruttan V W.1985. Agricultural Development:An International Perspective. Baltimore:The Johns Hopkins University Press. USA:1-610
Hicks J R.1932.2nd ed,1963. The Theory of Wages. London, Macmillan Press:124-125
Jaffe A R, Newell R G, Stavins R N.2005. A Tale of Two Market Failures:Technology and Environmental Policy. Ecological Economics,54:164-174.
Irz X, Thirtle C, Lin L, Wiggins S.2001. Agricultural Productivity Growth and Poverty Alleviation. Development Policy Review,19(4):449-466
Jamnick S F, Klindt T H.1985. An Analysis of'No-tillage' Practice Decisions. Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, University of Tennessee, USA:1-22
Julian, M.W.2001. The consequences of ignoring multilevel data structures in nonhierarchical covariance modeling. Structural Equation Modeling,8(3):325-352
Kaliba A, Featherstone A M, Norman D W.1997. A Stall-feeding Management for Improved Cattle in Semiarid Central Tanzania:Factors Influencing Adoption. Elsevier Science Publishers,17(23):133-146
Kebede Y.1992. Risk Behavior and New Agricultural Technologies:the Case of Producers in the Central Highlands of Ethiopia. Quarterly Journal of International Agricultural,31:269-284
Key, N.; Sadoulet, E. and De Janvry, A.2000. Transactions Costs and Agricultural Household Supply Response, American Journal of Agricultural Economics,82(2):245-259
Koenker R., G. Bassett.1982. Robust Tests for Heteroscedasticity Based on Regression Quantiles. Econometrica,50:43-61
Khan H A, Thorbecke E.1988. Macroeconomic Effects and Diffusion of Alternative Technologies within a Social Accounting Matrix Framework:the Case of Indonesia. Gower Publication, Co., Aldershot, UK:151-152
Khanna M.2001. Sequential Adoption of Site-specific Technologies and its Implications for Nitrogen Productivity:A Double Selectivity Model. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,83(1):35-51
Knipscheer, H.C., Menz, K.M., Verinumbe, I.1983. The Evaluation of Puliminary Farming Systems Technologies:Zero-tillagr Systems in West Africa.Agricultural System,11:95-103
Kurgman P.1991. Geography and Trade. MIT Press, Cambridgen MA
Kurgman P.1993. First Nature, Second Nature and Metropolitan Location. Journal of Reginal Science,33(2):129-144
Ky-Hyang,Y.1991.Growth and Distribution:A Test of the Induced Innovation Hypothesis for the Korean Economy, Applied Economics,23(3):543-552
Lucas Robert E B Jr.1988. On the Mechanics of Economic Development. Journal of Monetary Economics,22: 3-42
Lucas Robert E B.1993. Making a Miracle. Econometrica,61(2):251-272
Maddala, G.S.1983. Limited Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Mahmud Y, Gunnar K.2009. Market Imperfections and Farm Technology Adoption Decisions:A Case Study from the Highlands of Ethiopia. Working Papers in Economics 403, Goteborg University, Department of Economics
Mann C K.1978. Packages of Practices:A Step at a Time with Clusters. Middle East Technical Institule:Studies in Development,21:73-82
Mariano M J, Villano R, Fleming E.2012. Factors Influencing Farmers'Adoption of Modern Rice Technologies and Good Management Practices in the Philippines. Agricultural Systems,110:41-53
Martins,M.B.and Marques,C.2006. Is Agricultural Policy Promoting a New Role for Farmers? A Case Study. Journal of Policy Modeling,28:847-860
Martin P.and Ottaviano G.I.P.2001. Growth and Agglomeration. International Economic Review,42:947-968
Mendola M.2007. Agricultural Technology Adoption and Poverty Reduction:A Propensity-score Matching Analysis for Rural Bangladesh. Food Policy,32:372-393
Md. Golam Farouque.2007. Farmers' Perception of Integrated Soil Fertility and Nutrient Management for Sustainable Crop Production:A Study of Rural Areas in Bangladesh. Journal of Agricultural Education, 48(3):111-122
Moser C M and Barrett C B.2006.The Complex Dynamics of Smallholder Technology Adoption:The Case of SRI in Madagascar. Agricultural Economics,35(3):373-388.
Muthen, B. O.1991. Multilevel Factor Analysis of Class and Student Achievement Components. Journal of Educational Measurement,28(4),338-354
Muthen, B. O.1994. Multilevel Covariance Structure Analysis. Sociological Methods and Research,22, 376-398
Nkhori, P.2004.The Impact of Transaction Costs on the Choice of Cattle Markets in Mahalapye District, Botswana, M.Sc. dissertation, University of Pretoria
Nkonya, E., Schroeder, T., Norman, D.1997. Factors Affecting Adoption of Improved Seeds and Fertilizer in Northern Tanzania. Journal of Agricultural Economics,48(1):1-12
Nonaka R.1994. A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation. Organization Science,5(1):14-37
Olale, E. and Cranfield, J. A.2009. The Role of Income Diversification, Transaction Cost and Production Risk in Fertilizer Market Participation, Working papers 49929, International Association of Agricultural Economists:16-22
Pierre, D and Tomislav, V.2004. Grower Risk Aversion and the Cost of Moral Hazard in Livestock Production Contract, American Journal of Agricultural Economics,86:835-841
Pitt M M and Sumodiningrat G.1991. Risk, Schooling and the Choice of Seed Technology in Developing Countries:A Meta-profit Function Approach. International Review of Economics,32(2):457-473
Rogers E.M.1983. Diffusion of Innovation's.3rd ed. The Free Press, New York, USA:146
Rogers E. M.2004. A Prospective and Retrospective Look at Diffusion Model. Journal of Health Communication,9(1):13-19
Romer P M.1986. Increasing Returns and Long-run Growth. Journal of Political Economy,94(5):1002-1037
Saha A, Love H A, Schwart R.1994. Adoption of Emerging Technologies under Output Uncertainty. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,76(4):836-46
Salazar L. and Winters P.2012. The Impact of Seed Market Access and Transaction Costs on Potato Biodiversity and Yields in Bolivia. Environment and Development Economics,1(1):1-29
Schmookler J.1966. Invention and Economic Growth. Cambridg. Havard University Press,62-74.
Schreinemachersa P, Thomas B, Aune J B.2007. Simulating Soil Fertility and Poverty Dynamics in Uganda:A Bio-economic Mmulti-agent Systems Approach. Ecological economics,64(2):387-401
Schultz T W.1964. Transforming Traditional Agriculture. New Haven, CT:Yale University Press:32-175
Sheikh T, Rehman C M, Yates A D.2003. Logit Models for Identifying the Factors that Influence the Uptake of New 'No-tillage'Technologies by Farmers in the Rice-wheat and the Cotton-wheat Farming Systems of Pakistan's Punjab A.D. Agricultural Systems,75:79-95
Shortle J S and Miranowski J A.1986. Effect of Risk Perceptions and other Characteristics of Farmers and Farm Operations on the Adoption of Conservation Tillage Practices. Dept. Agricultural Economics, Penn St Univ, USA:85-90
Subramanian A and Qaim M.2009. Village-wide Effects of Agricultural Biotechnology:The Case of Bt Cotton in India, World Development,37 (1):256-267.
Thangata P H and Alavalapati J R R.2003. Agroforestry Adoption in Southern Malawi:the Case of Mixed Intercropping of Gliricidia Sepium and Maize Agric. System,78:57-71
Thirtle C G and Ruttan V W.1987. The Role of Demand and Supply in the Generation and Diffusion of Technical Change. New York:Harwood Academic Publishers
Veblen T B.1898. Why is Economics not an Evolutionary Science? Quarterly Journal of Economics,1(12): 373-376
Winter-Nelson.A. and Temu,A.2002. Institutional Adjustment and Transaction Costs:Product and Inputs Markets in the Tanzanian Coffee System, World Development,30(4):561-574
Winter-Nelson, A. and Temu, A.2005. Impacts of Prices and Transactions Costs on Input Usage in A Liberalizing Economy:Evidence from Tanzanian Coffee Growers. Agricultural Economics,33(3),243-253
Wozaniak G D.1987. Human Capital, Information, and the Early Adoption of New Technology. Journal of Human Resources,22:101-112
Young A.1991. Learning by Doing and the Dynamic Effects of International Trade. Quarterly Journal of Economics,106 (2):369-405
Yeong, S.T. and Mark, B.2012. Factors Influencing the Adoption of Precision Agricultural Technologies:A Review for Policy Implications. Precision Agriculture,13:713-730
Yuhn K.1991. Economic Growth, Technical Change Biases, and the Elasticity of Substitution:A Test of the De La Grandville Hypothesis. Review of Economics and Statistics,73(2):340-346
安同良.2003.中国企业的技术选择.经济研究,7：76-84
卜范达韩喜平.2003.“农户经营”内涵的探析.当代经济研究,9：37-40
曹建民 胡瑞法 黄季焜.2005.技术推广与农民对新技术的修正采用：农民参与技术培训和采用新技术的意愿及其影响因素分析.中国软科学,6：60-66
曹建民 胡瑞法 黄季焜.2005.农民参与科学研究的意愿及其决定因素.中国农村经济,10：28-35
陈超 周宁.2007.农民文化素质的差异对农业生产和技术选择渠道的影响——基于全国十省农民调查问卷的分析,中国农村经济,9：33-38
常向阳 姚华锋.2005.农业技术选择影响因素的实证分析.中国农村经济,10：36-41
陈利顶 马岩.2007.农户经营行为及其对生态环境的影响.生态环境,2：691-697
范英.2010.中国苹果生产布局变迁研究.[硕士学位论文].杨凌：西北农林科技大学
冯忠泽 李庆江.2007.农户农产品质量安全认知及影响因素分析.农业经济问题,4：22-26
过国南 阎振立 张顺妮.2003.我国建国以来苹果品种选育研究的回顾及今后育种的发展方向.中国果树,20(2)：127-134
国家苹果产业技术研发中心(韩明玉、冯宝荣主编).2011.国内外苹果产业技术发展报告.杨凌：西北农林科技大学出版社：290
郭霞.2008.基于农户生产技术选择的农业技术推广体系研究——以江苏省小麦生产为例.[博士学位论文].南京：南京农业大学.
何雄浪.2012.区域效应与集聚效应：我国地区间实际收入差距成因探究.经济问题研究,11：50-60
胡瑞法 程家安 董守珍等.1998.妇女在农业生产中的决策行为及作用.农业经济问题,3：52-54
黄季焜胡瑞法张林秀Scott Rozelle.2000a.中国农业科技投资经济.北京：中国农业出版社：225
黄季焜 胡瑞法.2000b.中国农业科研投资：效益、利益分配及政策含义.中国软科学,9：21-24
黄季焜 齐亮陈瑞剑.2008.信息知识、风险偏好与农民施用农药.管理世界,5：71-76
黄俊英.1995.多变量分析.台北：中国经济企业研究所：132-144
黄玉祥 韩文霆 周龙等.2012.农户节水灌溉技术认知及其影响因素分析.农业工程学报,28：113-120
黄祖辉 钱峰燕.2003.技术进步对我国农民收入的影响及对策分析.中国农村经济,12：11-17
黄祖辉 张静Kevin Chen.2008.交易费用与农户契约选择——来自浙冀两省15县30个村梨农调查的经验证据.管理世界,9：76-82
郝大江.2009.区域经济增长的空间回归——基于区域性要素禀赋的视角.经济评论,2：127-132
霍学喜,王静,朱玉春.2011.技术选择对苹果种植户生产收入变动影响——以陕西洛川苹果种植户为例.农业技术经济,6：12-21
孔祥智 方松海 庞晓鹏等.2004.西部地区农户禀赋对农业技术采纳的影响分析.经济研究,12：85-95
孔祥智 楼栋.2012.农业技术推广的国际比较、时态举证与中国对策.改革,1：12-23
雷海章.2003.现代农业经济学.北京：中国农业出版社,142.
李大胜 李琴.2007.农业技术进步对农户收入差距的影响机理及实证研究.农业技术经济,3：23-27
李仁豪 余民宁.1997.二层次结构方程式模型的应用：以教学心理学为例,师大学报。53(3)：95-122
林毅夫.1994.制度、技术与中国农业发展.上海：上海人民出版社：168-196
林毅夫.2002.发展战略、自生能力和经济收敛.经济学季刊,2：269-300
林毅夫 董先安 殷韦.2004.技术选择、技术扩散与经济收敛.财经问题研究,6：3-10
林毅夫 沈明高 周皓.1996.中国农业科研优先序——我国主要粮食作物研究的需求和供给分析.北京：中国农业出版社：238
凌远云 郭犹焕.1997.农业科研优先序：技术采用角度的探讨.中国农村经济,8：69-73
刘进宝 刘洪.2004.农业技术进步与农民农业收入增长弱相关性分析.中国农村经济,9：26-30
刘军弟 霍学喜 韩明玉 刘天军.2012.中国苹果产业发展现状及趋势分析.北方园艺,20：164-168
刘天军 蔡起华 朱玉春.2012.气候变化对苹果主产区产量的影响——来自陕西省6个苹果生产基地县210户果农的数据.中国农村经济,5：32-40
刘学.2000.技术交易的特征与技术市场研究.中国软科学,3：62-67
陆秋农 贾定贤.1999.中国果树志·苹果卷.北京：中国农业科技出版社；中国林业出版社：110
满明俊 周民良 李同昇.2010.农户采用不同属性技术行为的差异分析——基于陕西、甘肃、宁夏的调查.中国农村经济,2：68-78
木生 田琳.2012.当前国内外苹果主栽品种的构成与发展趋势.烟台果树,1：37
齐振宏 喻宏伟 王培成等.2009.不成熟要素市场下理性农户粮食生产中的技术选择——以湖北省稻农水稻品种的技术选择为例.经济评论,6：93-100
屈小博 霍学喜.2007.交易成本对农户农产品销售行为的影响——基于陕西省6个县27个村果农调查数据的分析.中国农村经济,8：35-46
石建平.2010.中国苹果消费需求特征分析.[硕士学位论文].杨凌：西北农林科技大学
唐博文 罗小锋 秦军.2010.农户采用不同属性技术的影响因素分析——基于9省(区)2110户农户的调查.中国农村经济,6：49-57
陶佩君.2006.社会化小农户的农业技术创新扩散研究.[博士学位论文].天津：天津大学
王韧.2006.中国农村居民收入决定特征及其影响因素变动：1952-2003年.数量经济技术经济研究,4：3-11
王文烂 谢志忠.2002.论我国农业技术市场交易配置的运行机制.云南财贸学院学报(经济管理版), 1(16)：54-56
王益松.2004.农业技术进步对生产者收入影响的理论分析.中南财经政法大学学报,3：75-78
王跃生.1999.家庭责任制、农户行为与农业中的环境生态问题.北京大学学报(哲学社会科学版),30：44-49
王志刚 汪超 许晓源.2010.农户认知和采纳创意农业的机制：基于北京城郊四区果树产业的问卷调查.中国农村观察,4：33-43
吴林海 侯博 高申荣.2011.基于结构方程模型的分散农户农药残留认知与主要影响因素分析.中国农村经济,3：35-48
吴明隆.2009.结构方程模型——AMOS的操作与应用.重庆：重庆大学出版社：277
徐家鹏 闫振宇.2010.农民对转基因技术的认知及转基因主粮的潜在生产意愿分析——以湖北地区种粮农户为考察对象.中国科技论坛,11：142-148
徐世艳 李仕宝.2009.现阶段我国农民的农业技术需求影响因素分析.农业技术经济,4：42-47
杨军玉 刘淑香胡同乐.2010.2009年全国苹果叶部主要病虫害发生及农药使用情况.中国植保导刊,10：25-28
尤小文.1999.农户：一个概念的探讨.中国农村观察,5：17-20
张东辉 司志宾.2007.教育、技术进步与农村收入差距——基于中国农村统计数据的分析.经济评论,5：42-46
庄天慧 余崇媛 刘人瑜.2013.西南民族贫困地区农业技术推广现状及其影响因素研究——基于西南4省1739户农户的调查.科技进步与对策,9：37-40
曾伟忠 何训坤.2002.我国农业技术市场发展的难点与对策.农业经济问题,5：14-17
曾福生 匡远配.2002.论形成完善的农业技术市场促进农业技术进步.科技进步与对策,9：121-122
周波 于冷.2010.国外农户现代农业技术应用问题研究综述.首都经济贸易大学学报,5：94-101
Abdulai A and Huffman W E.2005. The Diffusion of New Agricultural Technologies:The Case of Crossbred-cow Technology in Tanzania. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,87(3):645-659.
Adesina A.A., Zinnah, M.M.1993. Technology Characteristics, Farmer Perceptions and Adoption Decisions:A Tobit Model Application in Sierra Leone. Agricultural Economics,9:297-311
Adesina A.A., Baidu-Forson, J.1995. Farmers'Perceptions and Adoption of New Agricultural Technology: Evidence from Analysis in Burkina Faso and Guinea West Africa. Agricultural Economics,13:1-9
Adrian A.M., Norwood, S.H., Mask, P.L.2005. Producers'perceptions and attitudes toward precision agriculture technologies. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture,48:256-271
Andrew P.1980. The Rich Seeds and the Desire of Seeds:The Social and Economic Effect of Green Revolution. Oxford:Working Paper, Carat Aaron press
Alene A. D.; Manyong, V. M.; Omanya, G.; Mignouna, H. D. Bokanga, M.and Odhiambo, G..2008. Smallholder Market Participation under Transactions Costs:Maize Supply and Fertilizer Demand in Kenya, Food Policy,33(4):318-328
Anselin L, Getis A.1992. Spatial Statistical Analysis and Geographic Information Systems. The Annals of Regional Science,26:19-33
Anselin L., Raymond J.G.M.,Florax, Rey S.J.2004. Advances in Spatial Econometrics:Methodology, Tools and Applications. Berlin:Springer-Verlag
Barkley A P and Porter L L.1996. The Determinants of Wheat Variety Choice in Kansans,1974-1993. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Feb (78):202-211
Batte M.T.and Arnholt, M.W.2003. Precision Arming Adoption and Use in Ohio:Case Studies of Six Leading-edge Adopters. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture,38:125-139
Binswanger H P.1974. A Microeconomic Approach to Induced Innovation. Economic Journal,84(12):940-958
Byerlee D and de Polanco E.1986. Farmers'Stepwise Adoption of Technological Packages:Evidence from the Mexican Altiplano. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,68(3):519-527
Caniels M. C. J.2000. Knowledge Spillovers and Economic Growth:Regional Growth Differentials Across Europe. Cheltenham, Uk; Northampton, MA:Edward Elgar.
Chan D.1998. Functional Relations among Constructs in the Same Content Domain at Different Levels of Analysis:A Typology of Composition Models. Journal of Applied Psychology,83(2):234-246
Chang H H.2012. Does the use of eco-labels affect income distribution and income inequality of aquaculture producers in Taiwan? Ecological Economics,80:101-108
Chen L, Heerink N, van den Berg M.2006. Energy Consumption in Rural China:A household model for three villages in Jiangxi Province. Ecological Economics,58(2):407-420
Cheung M.W.L. and Au K.2005. Applications of multilevel structural equation modeling to cross-national research. Structural Equation Modeling,12(4):598-619
Cohen J, Cohen P, West S G, Aiken L S.2003. Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (3 rd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum
Conley Timothy G., and Christopher R. Udry.2010. Learning about a New Technology:Pineapple in Ghana. American Economic Review,100(1):35-69
D'Antonia J.M., Mishrab, A.K., Powellc, R., Martin, S.2012. Farmers'Perception of Precision Technology:The Case of Autosteer Adoption by Cotton Farmers. The Southern Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Birmingham, AL:4-7
Davis F.D.1989. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Q.,13:319-339
Davis F.D.1993. User Acceptance of Information Technology:System Characteristics, User Perceptions, and Behavioral Impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies,38 (3):475-487
de Janvry A and Sadoulet E.2000. Rural Poverty in Latin America Determinants and Exit Paths. Food Policy, 25:389-409
de Janvry A and Sadoulet E.2001. World Poverty and the Role of Agricultural Technology:Direct and Indirect Effects. Journal of Development Studies,38:1-26
Doss C R.2001. Designing Agricultural Technology for African Women Farmers:Lessons from 25 Years of Experience. World Development,29(12):2075-2092
Edward, S. M.2004. Fanners' Knowledge and Perception towards a Sustainable Adoption of Sugar Beet in Kenya. LUND UNIVERSITY:40
Ersado L, Amacher G, Alwang J.2004. Productivity and Land Enhancing Technologies in Northern Ethiopia: Health, Public Investments, and Sequential Adoption. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,86(2): 321-331
Evenson R. and Westphal L.1995. Technological Change and Technology Strategy. Handbook of Development
Economics J. Behrman and T. N. Srinivasan. Amsterdam, North-Holland.3A:2209-2300
Feder G, Just R E, Zilberman D.1985. Adoption of Agricultural Innovations in Developing Countries:A Survey. Economic Development and Cultural Change,33(2):255-298
Fishbein M. and Ajzen I.1975. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior:An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading. MA:Addison-Wesley:15.
Foster A. D. and Rosenzweig M.R.1995. Learning by Doing and Learning from Others:Human Capital and Technical Change in Agriculture. Journal of Political Economy,103:1176-1209
Foster A. D. and Rosenzweig M. R.2010. Microeconomics of Technology Adoption. Annual Reviews Economics, 2(1):395-424
Freebairn D K.1995. Did the Green Revolution Concentrate Incomes? A Quantitative Study of Research Reports. World Development,23(2):265-279
Gauchan D,Van Dusen M E, Smale M.2005. On Farm Conservation of Rice Biodiversity in Nepal:A simultaneous Estimation Approach. EPTD discussion papers 144, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)
Graff G, Roland-Holst D, Zilberman D.2006. Agricultural Biotechnology and Poverty Reduction in Low-income Countries. World Development,34(8):1430-1445
Greene W.2000. Econometric Analysis.4th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice Hall
Goetz S.J.1992. A Selectivity Model of Household Food Marketing Behavior in Sub-Sahara Africa, American Journal of Agricultural Economics,74:444-452
Gine X. and Klonner S.2006. Credit Constraints as A Barrier to Technology Adoption by the Poor:Lessons from South-Indian Small-scale Fishery. Research Paper, UNU-WIDER, United Nations University (UNU):1-35
Griliches Z.1957. Hybrid Corn:An Exploration in the Economics of Technological Change. Econometrica,25: 501-522
Griffin K.1974. The Political Economics of Land Reform:The essay of the Green Revolution. Cambridge: Harvard University press:25
Hayami Y.1981. Induced Innovation, Green Revolution, and Income Distribution:Comment [The Implications of an Induced Innovation Model, Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press,30(1):169-176
Hayami Y and Ruttan V W.1985. Agricultural Development:An International Perspective. Baltimore:The Johns Hopkins University Press. USA:1-610
Hicks J R.1932.2nd ed,1963. The Theory of Wages. London, Macmillan Press:124-125
Jaffe A R, Newell R G, Stavins R N.2005. A Tale of Two Market Failures:Technology and Environmental Policy. Ecological Economics,54:164-174.
Irz X, Thirtle C, Lin L, Wiggins S.2001. Agricultural Productivity Growth and Poverty Alleviation. Development Policy Review,19(4):449-466
Jamnick S F, Klindt T H.1985. An Analysis of'No-tillage' Practice Decisions. Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, University of Tennessee, USA:1-22
Julian, M.W.2001. The consequences of ignoring multilevel data structures in nonhierarchical covariance modeling. Structural Equation Modeling,8(3):325-352
Kaliba A, Featherstone A M, Norman D W.1997. A Stall-feeding Management for Improved Cattle in Semiarid Central Tanzania:Factors Influencing Adoption. Elsevier Science Publishers,17(23):133-146
Kebede Y.1992. Risk Behavior and New Agricultural Technologies:the Case of Producers in the Central Highlands of Ethiopia. Quarterly Journal of International Agricultural,31:269-284
Key, N.; Sadoulet, E. and De Janvry, A.2000. Transactions Costs and Agricultural Household Supply Response, American Journal of Agricultural Economics,82(2):245-259
Koenker R., G. Bassett.1982. Robust Tests for Heteroscedasticity Based on Regression Quantiles. Econometrica,50:43-61
Khan H A, Thorbecke E.1988. Macroeconomic Effects and Diffusion of Alternative Technologies within a Social Accounting Matrix Framework:the Case of Indonesia. Gower Publication, Co., Aldershot, UK:151-152
Khanna M.2001. Sequential Adoption of Site-specific Technologies and its Implications for Nitrogen Productivity:A Double Selectivity Model. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,83(1):35-51
Knipscheer, H.C., Menz, K.M., Verinumbe, I.1983. The Evaluation of Puliminary Farming Systems Technologies:Zero-tillagr Systems in West Africa.Agricultural System,11:95-103
Kurgman P.1991. Geography and Trade. MIT Press, Cambridgen MA
Kurgman P.1993. First Nature, Second Nature and Metropolitan Location. Journal of Reginal Science,33(2):129-144
Ky-Hyang,Y.1991.Growth and Distribution:A Test of the Induced Innovation Hypothesis for the Korean Economy, Applied Economics,23(3):543-552
Lucas Robert E B Jr.1988. On the Mechanics of Economic Development. Journal of Monetary Economics,22: 3-42
Lucas Robert E B.1993. Making a Miracle. Econometrica,61(2):251-272
Maddala, G.S.1983. Limited Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Mahmud Y, Gunnar K.2009. Market Imperfections and Farm Technology Adoption Decisions:A Case Study from the Highlands of Ethiopia. Working Papers in Economics 403, Goteborg University, Department of Economics
Mann C K.1978. Packages of Practices:A Step at a Time with Clusters. Middle East Technical Institule:Studies in Development,21:73-82
Mariano M J, Villano R, Fleming E.2012. Factors Influencing Farmers'Adoption of Modern Rice Technologies and Good Management Practices in the Philippines. Agricultural Systems,110:41-53
Martins,M.B.and Marques,C.2006. Is Agricultural Policy Promoting a New Role for Farmers? A Case Study. Journal of Policy Modeling,28:847-860
Martin P.and Ottaviano G.I.P.2001. Growth and Agglomeration. International Economic Review,42:947-968
Mendola M.2007. Agricultural Technology Adoption and Poverty Reduction:A Propensity-score Matching Analysis for Rural Bangladesh. Food Policy,32:372-393
Md. Golam Farouque.2007. Farmers' Perception of Integrated Soil Fertility and Nutrient Management for Sustainable Crop Production:A Study of Rural Areas in Bangladesh. Journal of Agricultural Education, 48(3):111-122
Moser C M and Barrett C B.2006.The Complex Dynamics of Smallholder Technology Adoption:The Case of SRI in Madagascar. Agricultural Economics,35(3):373-388.
Muthen, B. O.1991. Multilevel Factor Analysis of Class and Student Achievement Components. Journal of Educational Measurement,28(4),338-354
Muthen, B. O.1994. Multilevel Covariance Structure Analysis. Sociological Methods and Research,22, 376-398
Nkhori, P.2004.The Impact of Transaction Costs on the Choice of Cattle Markets in Mahalapye District, Botswana, M.Sc. dissertation, University of Pretoria
Nkonya, E., Schroeder, T., Norman, D.1997. Factors Affecting Adoption of Improved Seeds and Fertilizer in Northern Tanzania. Journal of Agricultural Economics,48(1):1-12
Nonaka R.1994. A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation. Organization Science,5(1):14-37
Olale, E. and Cranfield, J. A.2009. The Role of Income Diversification, Transaction Cost and Production Risk in Fertilizer Market Participation, Working papers 49929, International Association of Agricultural Economists:16-22
Pierre, D and Tomislav, V.2004. Grower Risk Aversion and the Cost of Moral Hazard in Livestock Production Contract, American Journal of Agricultural Economics,86:835-841
Pitt M M and Sumodiningrat G.1991. Risk, Schooling and the Choice of Seed Technology in Developing Countries:A Meta-profit Function Approach. International Review of Economics,32(2):457-473
Rogers E.M.1983. Diffusion of Innovation's.3rd ed. The Free Press, New York, USA:146
Rogers E. M.2004. A Prospective and Retrospective Look at Diffusion Model. Journal of Health Communication,9(1):13-19
Romer P M.1986. Increasing Returns and Long-run Growth. Journal of Political Economy,94(5):1002-1037
Saha A, Love H A, Schwart R.1994. Adoption of Emerging Technologies under Output Uncertainty. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,76(4):836-46
Salazar L. and Winters P.2012. The Impact of Seed Market Access and Transaction Costs on Potato Biodiversity and Yields in Bolivia. Environment and Development Economics,1(1):1-29
Schmookler J.1966. Invention and Economic Growth. Cambridg. Havard University Press,62-74.
Schreinemachersa P, Thomas B, Aune J B.2007. Simulating Soil Fertility and Poverty Dynamics in Uganda:A Bio-economic Mmulti-agent Systems Approach. Ecological economics,64(2):387-401
Schultz T W.1964. Transforming Traditional Agriculture. New Haven, CT:Yale University Press:32-175
Sheikh T, Rehman C M, Yates A D.2003. Logit Models for Identifying the Factors that Influence the Uptake of New 'No-tillage'Technologies by Farmers in the Rice-wheat and the Cotton-wheat Farming Systems of Pakistan's Punjab A.D. Agricultural Systems,75:79-95
Shortle J S and Miranowski J A.1986. Effect of Risk Perceptions and other Characteristics of Farmers and Farm Operations on the Adoption of Conservation Tillage Practices. Dept. Agricultural Economics, Penn St Univ, USA:85-90
Subramanian A and Qaim M.2009. Village-wide Effects of Agricultural Biotechnology:The Case of Bt Cotton in India, World Development,37 (1):256-267.
Thangata P H and Alavalapati J R R.2003. Agroforestry Adoption in Southern Malawi:the Case of Mixed Intercropping of Gliricidia Sepium and Maize Agric. System,78:57-71
Thirtle C G and Ruttan V W.1987. The Role of Demand and Supply in the Generation and Diffusion of Technical Change. New York:Harwood Academic Publishers
Veblen T B.1898. Why is Economics not an Evolutionary Science? Quarterly Journal of Economics,1(12): 373-376
Winter-Nelson.A. and Temu,A.2002. Institutional Adjustment and Transaction Costs:Product and Inputs Markets in the Tanzanian Coffee System, World Development,30(4):561-574
Winter-Nelson, A. and Temu, A.2005. Impacts of Prices and Transactions Costs on Input Usage in A Liberalizing Economy:Evidence from Tanzanian Coffee Growers. Agricultural Economics,33(3),243-253
Wozaniak G D.1987. Human Capital, Information, and the Early Adoption of New Technology. Journal of Human Resources,22:101-112
Young A.1991. Learning by Doing and the Dynamic Effects of International Trade. Quarterly Journal of Economics,106 (2):369-405
Yeong, S.T. and Mark, B.2012. Factors Influencing the Adoption of Precision Agricultural Technologies:A Review for Policy Implications. Precision Agriculture,13:713-730
Yuhn K.1991. Economic Growth, Technical Change Biases, and the Elasticity of Substitution:A Test of the De La Grandville Hypothesis. Review of Economics and Statistics,73(2):340-346
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |