Farm survey assesses factors affecting soil fertility management practices adoption, indicating profitability benefits for adopters.
Purpose Adopting soil fertility management practices (SFMPs) has become important in developing economies, especially in tackling land degradation, erosion and low soil fertility. This study uses farm survey data from 786 vegetable producers in rural China and analyzes the factors that affect SFMP adoption and its impact on fertilizer profitability. Design/methodology/approach This study applies the multivariate probit model to explore adoption decisions by farm households choosing among multiple SFMPs, and the three-stage least squares method for causal effect analysis on fertilizer profitability of farms. Findings Positive (complementary) correlations are observed between subsoiling adoption and residue returning and soil testing, while adoption of fertigation is negatively correlated (substitutional) with subsoiling and residue returning. The probability of SFMPs adoption primarily depends on factors including the household head's gender, education, farm area, experience with natural disasters, tenure security, access to training, access to the Internet and social capital. Farmers who adopt SFMPs can achieve higher profitability from fertilizer use than non-adopters. Practical implications Policymakers should seek to improve training in adopting SFMPs, increase farmers' education and ecological awareness, strengthen social networks and promote appropriate combinations of SFMPs adoption. Originality/value This study contributes to the literature by examining on the determinants that facilitate or impede multiple combinations of SFMPs adoption by farmers, as well as the impact of adoption on farmers’ fertilizer profitability, based on a well-established theoretical framework, to close the gap in the vegetable sector.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: