There is increased interest in cover crops on farms; those planted during the fallow period or in place of a cash crop to improve soil and water quality. Despite extensive research suggesting that the practice can enhance on-farm resilience, cover crop use is not widespread, especially across the dryland wheat-growing region of the USA inland Pacific Northwest. Cover crops are being promoted across this region as a means to improve agronomic conditions and farmer livelihoods. Yet, there is limited producer-centered social science research to understand the regional and field-level challenges associated with the practice. To address this gap, we draw from the diffusion of innovations theory to examine the perceived relative advantage (the degree to which cover crops are compatible with the current agricultural system), and trialability of cover crops. Trialability encompasses the relative complexity and observability of the practice. Interviews (n = 28) were conducted with producers to better understand perceptions on relative advantage and how cover crop characteristics may contribute to barriers to adoption. Based on the results from interviews, focus groups (n = 48) were conducted to explore potential avenues for improving the integration of cover crops into existing cropping systems. Analysis of interviews with dryland crop and livestock producers suggested that perceptions of low relative advantage, including low compatibility with common regional management systems, perceived lack of profitability and increased cost of inputs act as deterrents to cover crop integration. Low trialability was associated with the complexity of experimentation, a lack of directly observable results and inflexible regional policies. These perceptions were compounded by a lack of region-specific agronomic and economic information on cover crops. Analysis of focus groups with crop and livestock producers and agricultural stakeholders suggested that there are several opportunities to improve potential adoption strategies and improve perceptions of relative advantage and trialability. Understanding the unique management goals of producers within the environmental, social and economic context in which they operate will better inform regional policies, outreach and future adoption strategies.

Controversy over the use of genetically engineered (GE) crops may have induced some farmers to disadopt these seeds, making a traditional diffusion model inappropriate. In this study, we develop and estimate a dynamic diffusion model, examine the diffusion paths of GE corn, soybeans, and cotton, predict the adoption of those crops over the next two years, and explore the main determinants of the diffusion rate. Our estimates indicate that future growth of Bt crops will be slower or negative, depending mainly on the infestation levels of the target pests. Adoption of herbicide-tolerant soybeans and cotton will continue to increase, unless consumer sentiment in the United States changes radically.

Factors influencing the adoption of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) techniques are studied using survey data from individual vegetable producers from Florida, Michigan, and Texas. Farmers who adopt IPM tend to be less risk averse and use more managerial time on farm activities than nonadopters. Adopters are also more likely to operate large, irrigated farms and use more family labor. Locational factors and the type of crop grown are also influential in IPM adoption. The analysis uses a logit framework and introduces adopter categories first conceptualized by rural sociologists.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to present and illustrate an instrument to measure the level of innovation at country level.

Methods: The data used are the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) health data 2009, in particular the information on use of medical technology. Two composite scales expressing a relative level of adoption of innovations in health care are regressed, using multilevel regression analysis, on country characteristics. The country characteristics are selected as proxies on availability or scarcity of resources in a country. We expect that scarcity will promote adoption of innovations that enhance efficiency, and that availability of resources will promote advanced, expensive innovations.

Results: Two scales were constructed. One scale indicates the use of efficiency-enhancing innovations (day case treatment), and the other scale indicates availability of advanced technical innovations. The application of day case treatment is significantly associated with education level (+), the ratio of people aged 15–64 versus younger and older people (+) and the number of hospital beds (−). Availability of advanced medical devices are associated with the expenditure on health (+), demographic dependency (−), number of hospital beds (+), and the annual reduction of hospital beds (−).

Conclusions: Diffusion of innovations is influenced by characteristics of the country and of the healthcare system; fewer resources encourage diffusion of innovations that enhance efficiency and more resources encourage diffusion of complex, expensive devices. This indicates that decisions by healthcare professionals on which innovation to adopt is embedded in a context that is influenced and shaped by the availability of resources on macro level.

Objective: To determine the extent to which systematic reviews of public health interventions influenced public health decisions and which factors were associated with influencing these decisions.

Methods: This cross-sectional follow-up survey evaluated the use of five systematic reviews in public health decision making. Independent variables included characteristics of the innovation, organization, environment, and individual. Primary data were collected using a telephone survey and a self-administered organizational demographics questionnaire. Public health decision makers in all 41 public health units in Ontario were invited to participate in the study. Multiple linear regression analyses on the five program decisions were conducted.

Results: The systematic reviews were perceived as having the greatest amount of influence on decisions related to program justification and program planning, and the least influence on program evaluation decisions. The greater the perception that one's organization valued the use of research evidence for decision making and that ongoing training in the critical appraisal of research literature was provided, the greater the perception of the influence the systematic review had on public health decisions.

Conclusions: Organizational characteristics are important predictors of the use of systematic reviews in public health decision making. Future dissemination strategies need to promote the value of using systematic reviews for program decision making as well as promote ongoing training in critical appraisal among intended users in Ontario.

Objective: To determine the extent to which public health decision makers used five systematic reviews to make policy decisions, and to determine which characteristics predict their use.

Methods: This cross-sectional follow-up study of public health decision makers in Ontario collected primary data using a telephone survey and a short, self-administered organizational demographics questionnaire completed by the administrative assistant for each Medical Officer of Health. Independent variables included characteristics of the innovation, organization, environment, and individual. Data were entered into a computerized database developed specifically for this study, and multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted.

Results: The participation rate was very high, with 85% of public health units and 96% of available decision makers completing the survey. In addition, 63% of respondents stated they had used at least one of the systematic reviews in the previous 2 years to make a decision. The most important predictors of use were one's position, expecting to use a review in the future, and perceptions that the reviews were easy to use and that they overcame the barrier of limited critical appraisal skills.

Conclusions: Utilization of the systematic reviews in Ontario was very high. The utilization rates found in this study were significantly higher than those reported in previous utilization studies. One's position was found to be the strongest predictor of use, identifying program managers and directors as the most appropriate audience for systematic reviews.