The Relationship between Child Rearing Burden and Farmers’ Adoption of Climate Adaptive Technology: Taking Water-Saving Irrigation Technology as an Example

Abstract

Exploring the relationship between child rearing burden and farmers’ adoption of climate adaptation technologies can be used to improve farmers’ adoption of these technologies, thus reducing the impact of climate change on agricultural production and increasing agricultural output. However, with the full implementation of the Chinese three-child policy, the number of children in families will continue to increase and the cost of raising children will rise, which will have a crowding out effect on the adoption of climate adaptive technologies. In this context, we analyzed the impact and mechanism of child rearing burden on farmers’ adoption of climate adaptive technology by Probit model and discussed its heterogeneity based on family life cycle theory. Cross-sectional survey data were collected from 511 farm households in the 3 provinces of China to produce the findings. We found that the child rearing burden had a significant negative impact on farmers’ adoption of climate adaptive technology. The impact mechanism analysis showed that the child rearing burden mainly affected farmers’ adoption of climate adaptive technology through three paths: risk appetite, economic capital and non-agricultural employment, with non-agricultural employment having the largest impact, followed by risk appetite and finally, economic capital. Furthermore, the effect of child rearing burden on the adoption of climate adaptive technology was heterogeneous amid different family life cycles: In the upbringing and burden period, the child support burden had a significant negative impact on the adoption of climate adaptive technology and the impact was greater in the upbringing period, while in the stable period, the child support burden had a significant positive impact on the adoption of climate adaptive technology. The influence mechanism was also heterogeneous in different family life cycles. This paper not only provides research evidence on the relationship between child rearing burden and farmers’ adoption of climate adaptive technology, but also has certain empirical value for the formulation and implementation of supportive measures for improving fertility policies.

Optimization of chemical fertilizer use was modified by smallholders’ livelihood differentiation through mediating effects of agricultural socialized services

“…On the other hand, as consumers of agricultural products, smallholders' awareness of agricultural products' quality and safety will increase with the deepening of livelihood differentiation. Accordingly, they will reduce the chemical fertilizer application and increase the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices [13,14,15] . In addition, off-farm employment enhanced smallholders' social capital, which helped them optimize chemical fertilizer application through more accurate production activities [16,17] (see Figure 1).…”

“…Specifically, in this study, the wage rate was used as an instrumental variable and analyzed using IV-2SLS, and the above model was replaced as follows: [29] provides the basis for our study on the mechanism of the effect of smallholders' livelihood differentiation on optimal chemical fertilizer application, which mainly applies the principle of three-stage stepwise regression. Drawing on Cui et al [15] , we developed an effects model as follows:…”

The Impact of Technical Training on Farmers Adopting Water-Saving Irrigation Technology: An Empirical Evidence from China

“…Regarding internal factors, it mainly analyses the effects of family demographic characteristics, economic endowment characteristics, differences in socioeconomic status, social capital and production risks on farmers' adoption of water-saving irrigation technology [22,23]. Regarding the external environment, the impact of technical attributes, market environment, natural environment, policy environment and land property rights may be crucial to the adoption behaviour of farmers' water-saving irrigation technology [24].…”