Skip to main content
Log in

Farmers’ intention to reduce pesticide use: the role of perceived risk of loss in the model of the planned behavior theory

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Environmental Science and Pollution Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Numerous studies have examined how farmers are involved and behave in the use of pesticides, but what drives farmers’ intention to diminish pesticide applications is mostly unknown. This study explored farmers’ intention to minimize pesticide use, through the theory of planned behavior (TPB) and an adjusted form of the TPB, with perceived risk of loss as an additional variable to the original model. On a scale from 1 to 5, intention to reduce pesticide use had the lowest score of all variables (2.36), indicating that most farmers did not show intention to reduce pesticide use. Only 15.2% of the farmers were willing to reduce pesticide use, while 8.3% were undecided. Moreover, 58.2% of the farmers had high levels of perceived risk of loss by the reduction of pesticide use, which explained 37.3% of farmers’ intention. From the three variables of the TPB, attitudes had the highest score (3.34), indicating slightly favorable attitudes toward pesticide reduction, while perceived behavior control had the lowest score (2.70), indicating poor control of pesticide reduction. Also, the three basic variables of the TPB were positively correlated (P < 0.01) with farmers’ intention to reduce pesticides, while a negative correlation (P < 0.01) was noted between intention to reduce pesticides and perceived risk of loss. The three basic variables of the TPB were significant predictors of intention, capturing 54.7% of the variation in farmers’ intention. Adding perceived risk of loss as a construct to the TPB improved the predictive ability of the original model. Poor control of pesticide reduction (high-perceived barriers) and high perceived risk of loss drive farmers’ intention to reduce the use of pesticides. Advancing alternative crop protection methods focusing on agro-ecology and integrated pest management should be included in the work of extension services.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  • Abadi B (2018) The determinants of cucumber farmers’ pesticide use behavior in central Iran: implications for the pesticide use management. J Clean Prod 205:1069–1081

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abdollahzadeh G, Damalas CA, Sharifzadeh MS, Ahmadi-Gorgi H (2016) Selecting strategies for rice stem borer management using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Crop Prot 84:27–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 50:179–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen I (2002) Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. J Appl Soc Psychol 32:665–683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allahyari MS, Damalas CA, Ebadattalab M (2017) Farmers’ technical knowledge about Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in olive production. Agriculture 7:101

  • Armitage C, Conner M (2001) Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-analytic review. Br J Soc Psychol 40:471–499

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bagheri A, Emami N, Allahyari MS, Damalas CA (2018) Pesticide handling practices, health risks, and determinants of safety behavior among Iranian apple farmers. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 24:2209–2223

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bagheri A, Bondori A, Allahyari MS, Damalas CA (2019) Modeling farmers’ intention to use pesticides: an expanded version of the theory of planned behavior. J Environ Manag 248:109291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagheri A, Emami N, Damalas CA (2021) Farmers’ behavior towards safe pesticide handling: an analysis with the theory of planned behavior. Sci Total Environ 751:141709

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker L, Sok J, Van der Werf W, Bianchi FJJA (2021) Kicking the habit: what makes and breaks farmers’ intentions to reduce pesticide use? Ecol Econ 180:106868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borges JAR, Oude Lansink AGJM, Marques Ribeiro C, Lutke V (2014) Understanding farmers’ intention to adopt improved natural grassland using the theory of planned behavior. Livest Sci 169:163–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burton RJF (2004) Reconceptualising the “behavioural approach” in agricultural studies: a socio-psychological perspective. J Rural Stud 20:359–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chèze B, David M, Martinet V (2020) Understanding farmers’ reluctance to reduce pesticide use: a choice experiment. Ecol Econ 167:106349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damalas CA (2009) Understanding benefits and risks of pesticide use. Sci Res Essays 4:945–949

    Google Scholar 

  • Damalas CA, Eleftherohorinos IG (2011) Pesticide exposure, safety issues, and risk assessment indicators. Int J Environ Res Public Health 8:1402–1419

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Damalas CA, Khan M (2017) Pesticide use in vegetable crops in Pakistan: insights through an ordered probit model. Crop Prot 99:59–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damalas CA, Koutroubas SD (2016) Farmers’ exposure to pesticides: toxicity types and ways of prevention. Toxics 4:1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damalas CA, Koutroubas SD (2017) Farmers’ training on pesticide use is associated with elevated safety behavior. Toxics 5:19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damalas CA, Koutroubas SD (2018) Farmers’ behaviour in pesticide use: a key concept for improving environmental safety. Curr Opin Environ Sci Health 4:27–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damalas CA, Koutroubas SD, Abdollahzadeh G (2019) Drivers of personal safety in agriculture: a case study with pesticide operators. Agriculture 9:34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daxini A, Ryan M, O’Donoghue C, Barnes AP (2019) Understanding farmers’ intentions to follow a nutrient management plan using the theory of planned behaviour. Land Use Pol 85:428–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Despotović J, Rodić V, Caracciolo F (2019) Factors affecting farmers’ adoption of integrated pest management in Serbia: an application of the theory of planned behavior. J Clean Prod 228:1196–1205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fink A (2015) How to conduct surveys: a step-by-step guide, 6th edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Frisvold G (2019) How low can you go? Estimating impacts of reduced pesticide use. Pest Manag Sci 75:1223–1233

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer PM, Sheeran P (2006) Implementation intentions and goal achievement: a meta-analysis of effects and processes. Adv Exp Soc Psychol 38:69–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hashemi SM, Damalas CA (2010) Farmers’ perceptions of pesticide efficacy: reflections on the importance of pest management practices adoption. J Sustain Agric 35:69–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jayaraj R, Megha P, Sreedev P (2016) Organochlorine pesticides, their toxic effects on living organisms and their fate in the environment. Interdiscip Toxicol 9:90–100

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jin S, Bluemling B, Mol APJ (2015) Information, trust and pesticide overuse: interactions between retailers and cotton farmers in China. NJAS Wagen J Life Sci 72–73:23–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan M, Damalas CA (2015a) Factors preventing the adoption of alternatives to chemical pest control among Pakistani cotton farmers. Int J Pest Manag 61:9–16

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Khan M, Damalas CA (2015b) Farmers’ knowledge about common pests and pesticide safety in conventional cotton production in Pakistan. Crop Prot 77:45–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krejcie RV, Morgan DW (1970) Determining sample size for research activities. Educ Psychol Meas 30:607–610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lambert D, Sullivan P, Claassen R, Foreman L (2006) A report from the economic research service practices and programs: who participates? Economic Research Report 14, Economic Research Service, USDA, Washington, DC

  • Lamichhane JR, Dachbrodt-Saaydeh S, Kudsk P, Messéan A (2016) Toward a reduced reliance on conventional pesticides in European agriculture. Plant Dis 100:10–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lechenet M, Dessaint F, Py G, Makowski D, Munier-Jolain N (2017) Reducing pesticide use while preserving crop productivity and profitability on arable farms. Nat Plants 3:17008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meissle M, Mouron P, Musa T, Bigler F, Pons X, Vasileiadis VP, Otto S, Antichi D, Kiss J, Pálinkás Z, Dorner Z, Van der Weide R, Groten J, Czembor E, Adamczyk J, Thibord J-B, Melander B, Nielsen GC, Poulsen RT, Zimmermann O, Verschwele A, Oldenburg E (2010) Pests, pesticide use and alternative options in European maize production: current status and future prospects. J Appl Entomol 134:357–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menapace L, Colson G, Raffaelli R (2013) Risk aversion, subjective beliefs, and farmer risk management strategies. Am J Agric Econ 95:384–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monfared N, Yazdanpanah M, Tavakoli K (2015) Why do they continue to use pesticides? The case of tomato growers in Boushehr Province in Southern Iran. J Agric Sci Technol 17:577–588

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulgan T (2014) Understanding utilitarianism. Rutledge, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nicolopoulou-Stamati P, Maipas S, Kotampasi C, Stamatis P, Hens L (2016) Chemical pesticides and human health: the urgent need for a new concept in agriculture. Front Public Health 4:148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen AB, Nielsen HØ, Christensen T, Hasler B (2012) Optimising the effect of policy instruments: a study of farmers’ decision rationales and how they match the incentives in Danish pesticide policy. J Environ Plan Manag 55:1094–1110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pretty JN (2018) Intensification for redesigned and sustainable agricultural systems. Science 362:aav0294

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rahelizatovo NC, Gillespie DJ (2004) The adoption of best-management practices by Louisiana dairy producers. J Agric Appl Econ 36:229–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rezaei R, Damalas CA, Abdollahzadeh G (2017) Understanding farmers’ safety behaviour towards pesticide exposure and other occupational risks: the case of Zanjan, Iran. Sci Total Environ 616-617:1190–1198

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rezaei R, Safa L, Damalas CA, Ganjkhanloo MM (2019) Drivers of farmers’ intention to use integrated pest management: integrating theory of planned behavior and norm activation model. J Environ Manag 236:328–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savari M, Gharechaee H (2020) Application of the extended theory of planned behavior to predict Iranian farmers’ intention for safe use of chemical fertilizers. J Clean Prod 263:121512

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Senger I, Borges JAR, Machado JAD (2017) Using the theory of planned behavior to understand the intention of small farmers in diversifying their agricultural production. J Rural Stud 49:32–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharifzadeh MS, Abdollahzadeh G, Damalas CA, Rezaei R, Ahmadyousefi M (2019) Determinants of pesticide safety behaviour among Iranian rice farmers. Sci Total Environ 651:2953–2960

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sheeran P, Webb TL (2016) The intention–behavior gap. Soc Personal Psychol Compass 10:503–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman J, Gent DH (2014) Concepts of sustainability, motivations for pest management approaches, and implications for communicating change. Plant Dis 98:1024–1035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skevas T, Oude Lansink A (2014) Reducing pesticide use and pesticide impact by productivity growth: the case of Dutch arable farming. J Agric Econ 65:191–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb TL, Sheeran P (2006) Does changing behavioral intentions engender behavior change? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychol Bull 132:249–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson C, Tisdell C (2001) Why farmers continue to use pesticides despite environmental, health and sustainability costs. Ecol Econ 39:49–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yazdanpanah M, Hayati D, Hochrainer-Stigler S, Zamani GH (2014) Understanding farmers’ intention and behavior regarding water conservation in the Middle-East and North Africa: a case study in Iran. J Environ Manag 135:63–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

CAD: conceptualization, methodology, field data collection, statistical data analysis, validation, writing, reviewing and editing, and preparing final draft

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christos A. Damalas.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

A research article following the ethical standard of the institution.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent to publish

Not applicable.

Conflict of interest

The author declares that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Philippe Garrigues

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Damalas, C.A. Farmers’ intention to reduce pesticide use: the role of perceived risk of loss in the model of the planned behavior theory. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28, 35278–35285 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13183-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13183-3

Keywords

Navigation