Environmental Science and Pollution Research

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-10576-8

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Internet can do help in the reduction of pesticide use by farmers:

evidence from rural China
Qiuqian Zhao 1 & Yuhe Pan 1 & Xianli Xia 1

Received: 21 May 2020 / Accepted: 20 August 2020

# Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020

Abstract
Promoting agrochemical reduction is a prerequisite for high-quality development of agriculture. It is still controver-
sial whether Internet use can reduce pesticide use. This study uses the survey data of 670 vegetable growers of two
provinces in China, Shandong and Shaanxi. Probit model and bootstrap method were used to analyze the impact of
Internet use in reduction of pesticide application by farmers. Shallow use and deep use of the Internet were taken
into account. On this basis, multiple mediating effects were tested on the following three aspects: information
acquisition ability, awareness of green production, and e-commerce sales capability. The study found that shallow
use and deep use of the Internet have a significant direct impact on pesticide reduction by farmers. Information
acquisition ability, awareness of green production, and e-commerce sales capability all play a significant positive
mediating role in the deep use of the Internet affecting pesticide reduction. However, in the process of shallow use
of the Internet affecting pesticide reduction, only the mediating effect of green production awareness is significant.
Concurrently, compared with the shallow use of the Internet, the deep use of the Internet has a significant positive
impact on rural groups with weak human capital and weak social capital.

Keywords Internet use . Pesticide reduction . Multiple mediating effects . Bootstrap method

Introduction
The industrial revolution driven by the Internet and dig-
italization is overturning the traditional production mod-
el of the world. Stimulating the transformation of the
agricultural industry towards modernization and devel-
opment patterns of the rural society reflect the charac-
teristics of digitalization (Kovács and Husti 2018). In
2019, a digital report jointly released by We Are
Social and Hootsuite shows that the global population
is 7.68 billion and the netizens are 4.39 billion; the
average Internet users in the world spends 6 h and
42 min online every day; the Internet users who spend
Responsible Editor: Baojing Gu
* Xianli Xia
xnxxli@163.com
1 2
College of Economics and Management, Northwest A&F
University, Yangling 712100, Shaanxi, People’s Republic of China
the most time online are mainly from developing and
middle-income countries.1 As of March 2020, the num-
ber of rural netizens in China reached 255 million, and
the Internet penetration rate in rural areas was 46.2%.2
In China’s “Digital Village Development Strategy
Outline” and “China Digital Village Development
Report (2019),” they clearly stated to promote green
agricultural production, establishing an electronic trace-
ability monitoring system for agricultural inputs, and
taking advantage of the industrial chain of agricultural
e-commerce to force the standardization and branding of
products, and to reduce the cost of production along
with reduction in pesticide use.
Copious studies on the applications of the Internet in the
field of agricultural production have been carried out by inter-
national scholars. However, whether Internet use can promote
green agricultural development, pesticide reduction, and the
impact of dividend effect on farmers remain to be answered
1
Data Source: “Digital in 2019” report jointly released by We Are Social and
Hootsuite in January 2019.
Data Source: “45th Statistical Report on Internet Development in China”
released by China Internet Network Information Center in April 2020.

(Aker 2011; Gao et al. 2020). Therefore, to reveal the action
mechanism of the Internet on agricultural production, we have
to explore the relationship between the scenarios of farmer’s
use of the Internet and pesticide reduction.
Presently, the dependence of global agricultural production
on agrochemicals has become the norm, especially in devel-
oping countries. Overall (as shown in Fig. 1), the level of
pesticide consumption in China from 1991 to 2017 has always
been much higher than the world average. In 2017, the unit
consumption of pesticides in China was 9.95 kg/ha, which
was 3.83 times more than the global level in the same period
and 1.94 times the level of China in 1991.3 Overuse of pesti-
cides not only leads to the rise of China’s agricultural produc-
tion cost floor but also causes a series of negative externalities,
such as agrarian pollution and food insecurity. In order to
solve this dilemma, China’s central and local governments
have successively issued various policies, such as “Action
plan for zero growth in pesticide use by 2020” and the
“Action plan for tackling the agricultural and rural pollution
control.” However, these policies have not been appropriately
adopted by farmers.
The existing literatures have pointed out that resource en-
dowment characteristics of farmers, technical information ac-
quisition, ecological environment awareness, and organiza-
tional support have always been important factors affecting
the reduction of pesticide by farmers (Lamichhane 2017; Liu
and Huang 2013; Zadjali et al. 2014). Market failures and
moral hazards caused by asymmetric information and untrace-
able responsibilities are also the culprits of farmers’ pesticide
abuse. For example, fake and shoddy agricultural materials,
low awareness of prohibited pesticides, and little knowledge
of disease information can result to pesticide overuse because
of “ignorance” (Wang et al. 2015; Jallow et al. 2017). Also,
farmers’ awareness of the adverse effects of pesticide overuse
is obviously insufficient, the awareness of green production is
too low, personal norms and moral responsibility have not yet
been formed, and the perception of “a little more drugs will
not kill people” will cause them to be unscrupulous and abuse
pesticides (Monfared et al. 2015). Finally, market organiza-
tion model is also a key factor affecting pesticide use (Zhao
et al. 2018). The traditional Chinese market lacks effective
marketing channels and safety traceability systems for green
products. Farmers can only passively accept the prices quoted
by middlemen, resulting in a paradox of the same price for
green and non-green products. It is difficult to form a standard
mechanism for market incentives and consumer appeals,
which leads to the excessive use of cheap agrochemicals due
to “green food is not profitable” (Zhu et al. 2013). Studies
investigating the relationship between Internet use and reduc-
tion in pesticide usage by farmers are few. However, under the
3
Data Source: China Rural Statistical Yearbook (1992–2018) and FAO
database.
Environ Sci Pollut Res
12
10
8
Dosage 6 China
(Kg/ha)
4 The world
2
0
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
2015
2017
Fig. 1 Trends of pesticide use in China and the world from 1991 to 2017
background of global Big Data, the Internet, as an important
medium for building an upgraded version of Agriculture 4.0,
can not only alleviate information asymmetry constraints, but
also eliminate geographical barriers in traditional business,
form a shared and transparent production model, and reshape
the business model. It also creates an external environment for
farmers to voluntarily apply pesticide reduction and form a
supervision mechanism with the help of data tracking function
to restrict the overuse of pesticides, boost farmers’ green pro-
duction literacy, and change the marketing concept of a prod-
uct (Shimamoto et al. 2015). Therefore, the impact of Internet
use on the pesticide reduction may show different character-
istics depending on different scenarios.
This article intends to investigate the impact of Internet use
on farmers’ pesticide reduction and its mechanism from a
microlevel. The possible contributions are as follows: First,
construct a theoretical framework for Internet use and pesti-
cide reduction by farmers, clarify the inner mechanism of the
Internet effect on farmers’ pesticide use, and analyze the direct
and indirect effects of shallow use of the Internet and deep use
of the Internet on farmers’ pesticide reduction. Second, ana-
lyze the heterogeneity of farmer’s capitals and examine the
impact of Internet use on the pesticide reduction of rural
households with weak capital, thereby expanding the horizon
and depth of relevant research.
Theoretical analysis and research hypothesis
The direct impact of Internet use on farmers’ pesticide
reduction
The existing research analyzes the impact of Internet use on
agricultural production, which mainly focuses on two aspects.
First, it discusses the impact of informatization on the input of
agricultural production factors at the regional level. The use of
the Internet has promoted the diffusion of advanced technol-
ogies in the region, improved the efficiency of agricultural
production, helped farmers to timely understand the
Environ Sci Pollut Res
information about when to conduct pest monitoring and bio-
logical control measures, and effectively reduced the prob-
lems of pesticide pollution and overuse of pesticides (Zhu
et al. 2019). Second, it discusses the impact of Internet use
on farmers’ production from a micro-level perspective, based
on the theory of farmer’s behavior and the assumption of
rational economic man. Research suggests that the Internet
provides an informative platform for farmers’ production
and intuitively conveys ecological concepts to all aspects of
production through mobile phones, tablets, and other media,
to promote farmer’s learning experience about pesticide re-
duction (Wyckhuys et al. 2018). Data surveys in the Great
Plains of the United States showed that farmers’ production
decisions-making and income are related to the time period of
the Internet applied to agricultural production and purpose of
its application, indicating the importance of shallow use of the
Internet (Smith et al. 2004). Furthermore, farmers who fre-
quently access the Internet are more sensitive to external in-
formation and can learn about relevant policies and technolo-
gies in time, so as to actively respond to the national call and
reduce pesticide overuse (Mittal and Tripathi 2009). In terms
of the deep use of the Internet, more and more farmers obtain
information about seed, pesticide, chemical fertilizer, and pest
control technology through the use of relevant software and
information programs on their mobile phones or directly refer
to online opinions for farmland production (Suchiradipta
2018). Some studies also showed that it was much more im-
portant for farmers to learn “how to use the Internet” than
“whether to use the Internet” (Aker and Ksoll 2016).
Farmers who can effectively use Internet resources have a
stronger safety production capacity and are more likely to
reduce pesticide use (Goncalves et al. 2018). Therefore, in
addition to the shallow use of the Internet, the deep use of
the Internet may also be an important factor that affects pesti-
cide reduction by farmers. Based on the above-mentioned
analysis, this article proposes the following hypotheses:
& Hypothesis H0-1: Shallow use of the Internet will posi-
tively affect farmers’ pesticide reduction.
& Hypothesis H0-2: Deep use of the Internet will positively
affect farmers’ pesticide reduction.
The indirect impact of Internet use on farmers’
pesticide reduction
Internet use not only has a direct impact on pesticide reduction
but also has indirect effects by changing farmer’s awareness of
green production, information acquisition ability, e-commerce
sales capability, and market awareness. Studies have shown
that pesticide application and fertilization technology is key
to affecting farmers’ production and investment behavior.
Whether scientific production concepts and agricultural green
production technology can be effectively communicated will
directly affect the operation of pesticide application by farmers
and easily lead to the problem of pesticide overuse (Damalas
and Khan 2016). In the context of “Internet + Agriculture,”
Internet use has broadened farmers’ access to information
and helped farmers to choose production strategies (Baorakis
et al. 2002). Farmers have improved their production through
online data query and video software, such as Douyin and
Kuaishou, to acquire technical information and more knowl-
edge about the scientific selection of pesticides. In production
practice, farmers learn about information through the Internet,
which not only enhances their awareness of production infor-
mation but also changes their traditional concepts, formulates
production plans based on online information, and forms mod-
ern agricultural production literacy (Cole and Fernando 2012).
At the same time, farmers with a high frequency of browsing
information on the Internet, a large amount of information on
food safety and agricultural pollution is disseminated on the
Internet will induce their emotional resonance and crisis aware-
ness, stimulate their sense of responsibility, and form aware-
ness of green production (Kansiime et al. 2019).
Presently, “Internet +” is being continuously applied in the
field of agricultural production. The platform of distance learning
system provides convenience for farmers to learn about pesticide
reduction and technology for pest control, guiding farmers in
scientific input and technology application (Maredia et al.
2017). As a tool for creating a transparent supply chain system
and establishing a traceable system, the Internet not only shortens
the communication chain between producers and consumers but
also enables farmers’ production to meet consumers’ safety de-
mand; it also plays a vital role in generating agricultural produc-
tion files of farmers with the help of big data (Bumblauskas et al.
2019; Liu et al. 2016). With the deep use of the Internet, online
selling ability of farmers has been continuously enhanced, the
efficiency of agricultural product circulation and food safety
awareness have also improved, and the consciousness of pesti-
cide reduction has been continuously formed (Zhong et al.
2015). In e-commerce transactions, farmers purchase agricultural
materials, sell products, and manage supply chain through plat-
forms, such as Taobao and Tmall. Their sense of integrity and
enthusiasm for the construction of quality traceability system is
constantly improved, forming a production logic that stimulates
farmers’ motivation of pesticide reduction with market demand
(Bilali and Allahyari 2018). In addition, Khanal and Mishra
(2016) point out that there have been studies focusing on the
shallow use of the Internet ignoring the application of Internet
functions by farmers, while the farmers who often surf the
Internet do not always collect information or conduct business
activities. Based on this, the following hypotheses are proposed:
& Hypothesis H1-1: Shallow use of the Internet, by improv-
ing the ability of farmers to obtain information, is posi-
tively acting on farmers’ pesticide reduction.

& Hypothesis H1-2: Shallow use of the Internet, through
enhancing farmers’ awareness of green production, is pos-
itively affecting farmers’ pesticide reduction.
& Hypothesis H1-3: Shallow use of the Internet, through the
improvement of farmers’ e-commerce sales capability, is
positively affecting farmers’ pesticide reduction.
& Hypothesis H2-1: Deep use of the Internet, by improving
the ability of farmers to obtain information, is positively
acting on farmers’ pesticide reduction.
& Hypothesis H2-2: Deep use of the Internet, through en-
hancing farmers’ awareness of green production, is posi-
tively affecting farmers’ pesticide reduction.
& Hypothesis H2-3: Deep use of the Internet, through en-
hancing farmers’ capability of e-commerce sales, is posi-
tively affecting farmers’ pesticide reduction.
& Hypothesis H3-1: The ability to obtain information is pos-
itively promoting farmers’ pesticide reduction.
& Hypothesis H3-2: Awareness of green production is pos-
itively promoting farmers’ pesticide reduction.
& Hypothesis H3-3: E-commerce sales capability is posi-
tively promoting farmers’ pesticide reduction.
This paper builds an analysis framework of Internet use and
pesticide reduction, as shown in Fig. 2.
Data, variable, and model selection
Sample selection
The data used in this article are a field survey conducted by the
research group in Shandong Province and Shaanxi Province
of China from July to August 2019 with the theme of
“Pesticide Reduction for Vegetable Farmers.” The survey
team first selected the typical vegetable production counties
of the two provinces, and then used a combination of stratified
sampling and simple random sampling to select 3–4 town-
ships in each county, and randomly selected 2–4 administra-
tive villages (Some villages and towns are more concentrated
in vegetable cultivation, and some are more scattered. In ac-
tual investigations, we have made some adjustments to the
sample selection of the entire county based on the actual
Fig. 2 Theoretical framework
H1-1
Shallow use
H1-2
Use of the H1-3
Internet
H2-1
H2-2
Deep use
H2-3
Environ Sci Pollut Res
distribution of vegetable growers to ensure the rationality of
sampling.). About 10 sample households (mainly engaged in
agricultural production and operation) were randomly selected
in each sample village for interview. The survey is based on
questionnaires, and in-depth interviews are conducted with
village committee leaders and vegetable growing coopera-
tives. The questionnaire is divided into the following two
levels: village level and household level. The questionnaire
of the village level involves the village’s natural environment,
social environment, and policy implementation. The
household-level questionnaire involves basic information,
such as family characteristics, production, and pesticide use.
At the same time, the selected households are mostly special-
ized vegetable growers who grow fruit vegetables, such as
tomatoes, cucumbers, and eggplants, in order to narrow the
differences caused by vegetable types. Finally, the survey ob-
tained 670 valid samples (see Table 1).
The distribution ratios of the samples in Shandong and
Shaanxi are 52.84 and 47.16%, respectively. Interviewees
are mostly household production and operation decision
makers, mainly men, with an average age of 50.2 years old.
The proportion of the surveyed persons whose educational
level is at the junior high school level is 49.85%, and the
proportions above and below the junior high school education
level are 14.93 and 35.22%, respectively. At the family pro-
duction level, the average value of the sample household’s
vegetable income as a percentage of total income is 76.40%,
indicating vegetable production is the primary source of in-
come; the sample households’ participation in the cooperative
is 24.33%.
Variable selection
Dependent variable
Pesticide reduction refers to the application of pest prevention
and control technology, through the technical path of control,
replacement, precision, and integration. Replace highly toxic
and high-residue chemical pesticides with biological pesti-
cides, use pesticides that are precise and scientific, and pro-
mote the unified control of pest and disease in order to achieve
the goal of reducing the use of chemical pesticide. The
H0-1
Information
acquisition ability
H3-1
Awareness of
H3-2 Pesticide reduction
green production
H3-3
E-commerce sales
capability
H0-2
Environ Sci Pollut Res

Table 1 Distribution of sample households

Provinces Counties Townships Villages Households

2 5 15 59 670

Shandong Shenxian Shenting Dujia, Wuzhuang, Fengdong 142

Shiba Lipu Zhang Lilou, Sutang, Gezhuang, Caozhuang, Li Damiao, Ningtang
Hedian Ma Caiyuan, Yanglu
Qingzhou Dongxia Donghuang, Shijia, Gujia, Bukou 93
Gaoliu Lianpo, Nan Malan, Bei Malan, Xi Shuiqu
Shouguang Sun Jiaji Qianyang, San Yuanzhu, Sanjia 119
Daotian Dong Danhe, Xi Danhe, Cuidong, Cuixi
Jitai Caoguan, Yuanshui

Shaanxi Jingyang Yunyang Huama, Huali, Zaoyang, Dali, Baijia, Xiaoli, Fanyao, Zhaijia, Gaojia, Zhangtun 210
Anwu Ganze, Majia, Sujia, Zhongshan, Yaojia, Renhe
Wangqiao Qujia
Zhongzhang Wanghao
Qiaodi Zhai Zigou
Xinglong Fu Jiazhuang
Taibai Jutou Guaili, Tangkou, Beigou, Hongxing, Da Gouyuan, Qi Lichuan, Meiwan, 106
Hu Jiayuan, Hao Gudui

concept of pesticide reduction in this article specifically refers
to the reduction of chemical pesticides, and its measure is
based on whether the average use of chemical pesticide per
mu of farmers has decreased compared with the previous year.
In the actual survey, we first understand the pesticide sales
information from local stores of agricultural supplies, distin-
guished between chemical pesticides and biological pesti-
cides, to increase the accuracy of variable measurement.
Core independent variables
Studies have pointed out that the difference in Internet use is
no longer a question of “whether to get” or “length of use,” but
a gap in ability of application, which can be divided into
frequency of use and degree of use, shallow use, and deep
use (Ho and Tseng 2006). Therefore, this article comprehen-
sively considers the shallow use of the Internet and the deep
use of the Internet. The shallow use of the Internet is repre-
sented by the frequency of farmers’ daily Internet access. The
deep use of the Internet is obtained through in-depth investi-
gation. We design the question, what do you use the Internet
for? (see Table 2). Accumulate the Internet functions involved
and use the cumulative value of 0–9 to indicate the degree of
deep use of theInternet.
source of pesticide use, the sense of responsibility for pesticide
reduction, and the proportion of online sales in the total
amount of agricultural products.
Control variables
In order to avoid other factors from interfering with the test
results, according to the farmer’s behavior theory, relevant
control variables were selected. First, the individual character-
istics of decision-makers of households include age, educa-
tion, awareness of toxicity, risk preference, awareness of safe-
ty product, and awareness of pesticides’ cost. Second, the
characteristics of production mainly include the scale of veg-
etable cultivation, whether to join a cooperative, and the pro-
portion of vegetable income. Third, the characteristics of the
village include the unified services to control disease and pest
and the distance between the village and the demonstration
base of mass production. In addition, taking into account re-
gional differences, the model also introduces dummy vari-
ables to control provincial differences. The definition and de-
scriptive statistical analysis results of each variable are shown
in Table 2.
For the convenience of writing, the variable names in the
table are abbreviated

Mediators Model selection

This paper has selected information acquisition ability, green Regression analysis
production awareness, and e-commerce sales capability as
mediators. The research team obtained relevant data by asking Since the explained variable “whether to reduce the applica-
the interviewed farmers about the degree of information tion of chemical pesticide per mu” is a binomial selection
 Environ Sci Pollut Res

Table 2 Definition and

descriptive statistics Variables Definition Mean SD

Dependent variable In 2018, did the average amount of chemical pesticide per mu decrease 0.60 0.49
compared with the previous year? 1 = Yes, 0 = No
Independent variable
Shallow use How often do you surf the Internet: rarely = 1, less = 2, generally = 3, 2.52 1.22
more = 4, very much = 5
Deep use What do you mainly use the Internet for? 0 = unused, a = 3.42 1.82
communication, b = purchase of agricultural materials, c = access to
agricultural knowledge and technology, d = understanding of news,
e = agricultural sales, f = entertainment, g = education, h = online
shopping for daily necessities, i = other (If the households never use
the Internet, the value is 0; if one of the items is selected, the value is
1; if two of the items are selected, the value is 2; and so on. The
value range for deep use is 0–9.)
Mediators
Information There are many inform sources of production technology, such as 2.22 1.17
acquisition pesticide use: completely disagree = 1, not very agree = 2, generally
ability = 3, relatively agree = 4, very agree = 5
Awareness of green You feel that you are responsible for pesticide reduction: totally 3.26 1.03
production disagree = 1, not very agree = 2, generally = 3, relatively agree = 4,
strongly agree = 5
E-commerce sales The proportion of online sales accounted for your total agricultural 2.57 1.26
capability product sales: 0–20% = 1, 20–40% = 2, 40–60% = 3, 60–80% = 4,
80–100% = 5
Individual characteristics
Age What is the age of the interviewee in 2018? 50.24 9.46
Education How many years did the interviewee go to school? 7.79 2.95
Pesticide toxicity How much do you know about the toxicity of pesticides: completely 3.50 1.11
unclear = 1, not very clear = 2, generally = 3, relatively clear = 4,
very clear = 5
Risk preference How willing are you to try new technologies: very reluctant = 1, not 3.30 1.14
very willing = 2, generally = 3, more willing = 4, very willing = 5
Food safety What is the impact of pesticide overuse on food safety and human 3.74 1.20
health: no impact = 1, little impact = 2, general = 3, greater impact =
4, greatest impact = 5
Pesticides’ cost Excessive application of pesticides will increase costs: very disagree = 3.33 1.18
1, not very agree = 2, generally = 3, relatively agree = 4, very agree
=5
Family characteristics
Planting scale What was your vegetable planting area in 2018? 7.69 13.08
Cooperative Whether your family joins the cooperative: yes = 1, no = 0 0.24 0.43
Vegetable income The proportion of vegetable income in your total income in 2018 0.76 0.27
Village characteristics
Unified services Does the village provide unified services to control pest: yes = 1, no = 0.44 0.50
0
Distance The distance between the village and the nearest demonstration site 4.75 5.09
(km)
Regional variable Shandong = 1, Shaanxi = 0 0.53 0.46

behavior, this study uses the Probit model for regression anal-
ysis. The basic model is:
yi ¼ X i α þ þZ i η þ εi
In formula 1, yi represents pesticide reduction: yes = 1, no =
0; Xi represents Internet use; α is its coefficient vector to be
estimated; Zi represents control variables that affect farmers’
pesticide reduction; η is the coefficient vector to be estimated;
εi is the random disturbance term; i represents the ith farmer.
ð1Þ
The test method of mediating effect
The Bootstrap method is used to test the mediating effect of
information acquisition ability, awareness of green
Environ Sci Pollut Res
production, and e-commerce sales ability in the process of
pesticide reduction impacted by the Internet use. Compared
with the stepwise regression method, the Bootstrap method
does not require the distribution of the mediating effect. It
can test the mediating effect of the dependent variable as a
dichotomous variable, overcome the limitations of stepwise
regression, and improve the effectiveness of the regression
coefficient of the mediating variable. At the same time, the
Bootstrap test does not require the independent variable to
have a significant effect on the dependent variable but directly
tests the significance of the mediating effect coefficient, which
can effectively avoid the impact of the “shading effect” on the
test results. The specific conceptual model is designed as fol-
lows:
M g ¼ aX j þ e1 ð2Þ
Y ¼ cX j þ e2 ð3Þ
0 fact that ordinary growers rely on vegetables as their main
Y ¼ c X j þ bM g þ e3 ð4Þ
In formula 2, 3 and 4, Xj represents Internet use, including
shallow use of the Internet and deep use of the Internet, Mg
represents the mediators, and Y represents the dependent var-
iable pesticide reduction. a, b, c, and c′ are coefficients to be
estimated, and e1, e2, and e3 are random error terms. The basic
procedure of Bootstrap’s mediation effect is to check c′ after
determining whether the a × b mediating path is significant. If
c′ is not significant, it means that the mediator assumed by the
model is the only one; if c′ is significant, it indicates that there
may still be other mediating paths. If a × b × c′ > 0, it means
that there may be other mediators in the same direction; if a ×
b × c′ < 0, it means that there may be other mediators in the
opposite direction.
Empirical results and analysis
The direct effect test of Internet use directly affecting
farmers’ pesticide reduction
With the help of stepwise regression, explanatory variables are
gradually introduced to carry out benchmark regression.
Models 1 and 2 in Table 3 only include shallow use of the
Internet and deep use of the Internet, and models 3 and 4
introduce individual characteristics, family characteristics,
and village characteristics. The LR statistics of these four
models all pass the 1% significance test, indicating the overall
model fits well. All the four models show that shallow use of
the Internet has a significant positive effect on farmers’ pesti-
cide reduction, and the coefficient is significant at the 1%
level; deep use of the Internet has a significant positive effect
on farmers’ pesticide reduction, and the coefficient is signifi-
cant at the 1% level. Therefore, hypotheses H0-1 and H0-2
have been verified. According to models 3 and model 4, the
marginal effect value used by the shallow use of the Internet is
0.047, and the marginal effect value used by the deep use of
the Internet is 0.052.
In terms of control variables at the individual level, the
respondents’ level of education, awareness of pesticide toxic-
ity, risk awareness, awareness of food safety, and awareness
of pesticide cost all have a significant positive impact on the
pesticide reduction. At the level of households’ production,
joining farmers’ cooperatives can help farmers to reduce pes-
ticide use. As an informal organization among farmers, coop-
eratives have the advantages of standardized constraints and
technology exchange platforms. They can encourage farmers
to reduce the amount of pesticides from the aspects of standard
requirements, information provision, and effective communi-
cation. The proportion of vegetable income has no significant
effect on pesticide reduction. This may be explained by the
source of income, are highly dependent on production, and
sacrifice safety to obtain economic benefits, which is still the
usual production method for small households. However, the
effect of vegetable production area on pesticide reduction is
significant and the coefficient was negative. This shows that
planting scale does not necessarily bring safe and efficient
production. The survey objects of this article are mostly ordi-
nary vegetable growers, and small households are deeply in-
fluenced by the traditional production concept of intensive
cultivation. The smaller the scale, the more precise the culti-
vation is, and the reduction of agrochemicals input. At the
same time, the smaller the scale of production, the lower the
expected returns of scale for farmers. Considering the cost and
benefit, the amount of pesticide input will be reduced accord-
ingly. At the village-level characteristic, the closer to the dem-
onstration site of mass production, the easier it is to encourage
farmers to reduce pesticides, indicating spatial effects and
demonstration effects have a significant impact on farmers’
production. At present, a unified system to control pest in
villages has not been fully formed, and the resource endow-
ment of farmers is different. Therefore, the impact of unified
services on farmers’ pesticide reduction is not apparent. In
addition, the results show that the regional differences are
not significant.
The internal mechanism of Internet use affecting
pesticide reduction by farmers
This article uses the SPSS macroprocess program developed
by Preacher et al. (2007). The Bootstrap method was used to
test the significance of the mediating role of information ac-
quisition ability, awareness of green production, and e-
commerce sales ability and to further analyze the impact
mechanism of the Internet use on pesticide reduction. From
the test results of the mediating effect in Table 4, we can see
 Environ Sci Pollut Res

Table 3 The direct impact of

Internet use on farmer’s pesticide Variables Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
reduction
Coefficient SE Coefficient SE Coefficient SE Coefficient SE

Shallow use 0.24*** 0.04 0.12*** 0.05

***
Deep use 0.21 0.03 0.14*** 0.03
Individual characteristics
Age 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01
Education 0.08*** 0.02 0.07*** 0.02
Pesticide toxicity 0.16*** 0.05 0.16*** 0.05
Risk preference 0.22*** 0.05 0.22*** 0.05
Food safety 0.31*** 0.05 0.30*** 0.05
Pesticides’ cost 0.13*** 0.05 0.14*** 0.05
Family characteristics
Planting scale − 0.01* 0.00 − 0.01* 0.00
Cooperative 0.40*** 0.14 0.38*** 0.14
Vegetable income 0.32 0.22 0.27 0.22
Village characteristics
Unified services 0.10 0.12 0.07 0.12
Distance − 0.03*** 0.01 − 0.03*** 0.01
Regional variable − 0.02 0.12 − 0.07 0.12
cons − 0.35*** 0.11 − 0.45*** 0.11 − 3.61*** 0.56 − 3.78*** 0.57
Obs. 670 670 670 670
LR chi2 35.70*** 55.33*** 207.86*** 217.84***
Pseudo R2 0.04 0.06 0.23 0.24

*p < 0.10
**p < 0.05
***p < 0.01

that only awareness of green production has passed the signif-
icance test at the 1% level in the process of shallow use of the
Internet affecting farmers’ pesticide reduction. That is to say,
hypotheses H1-1, H1-2, and H1-3 are partially verified.
Specifically, the mediation interval of the mediation variable
of green production awareness is (LLCI = 0.24, ULCI = 0.63),
the mediation effect is a×b = 0.08 , and it accounts for 51.40%
of the direct effect c′. The possible explanations to why the
mediating effects of information acquisition ability and e-
commerce sales ability were not significant are as follows:
First, in the era of information explosion, farmers always use
the Internet for entertainment and leisure activities and lack of
collection of useful information. Therefore, the shallow use of
the Internet has no significant impact on farmers’ capability of
information acquisition and capability of e-commerce sales.
Second, the formation of green production awareness requires
farmers to accumulate over time. In particular, current tech-
nology learning videos and mass media reports on advocacy
for greening and the dangers of overdose are often inter-
spersed with webpages that people browse in their daily lives
rather than professional APPs or websites, and these depend
on the length of time farmers spend online. However, the
cultivation of rural households’ e-commerce sales capability
and information acquisition ability requires professional and
technical foundations, and it is more about differences in
farmer’s motivations than timing. The shallow use of the
Internet only reflects the frequency and online time of rural
households, and it is difficult to characterize the online deep
learning of rural households. Furthermore, it shows that the
potential of farmers to effectively use the Internet needs to be
tapped.
In the process of deep use of the Internet affecting pesticide
reduction, information on acquisition ability, green production
awareness, and e-commerce sales ability have all passed the
significance test at 1% level, playing an obvious mediating
role, that is, hypotheses H2-1, H2-2, H2-3, H3-1, H3-2, and
H3-3 are verified. Specifically, in the process of the deep use
of the Internet affecting pesticide reduction, the mediating
intervals of the information acquisition ability, green produc-
tion awareness, and e-commerce sales ability are (LLCI =
0.53, ULCI = 0.94), (LLCI = 0.25, ULCI = 0.64), and
(LLCI = 0.49, ULCI = 0.84). The mediating effects are 0.05,
0.02, and 0.10, and the proportions in the direct effects are
20.12, 10.10, and 55.25%, respectively. It can be seen that
Environ Sci Pollut Res

Table 4 Test results of mediation effect using bootstrap

Mediation effect a b Mediation effect Direct Proportion of Test result

effect mediation effect (%)

Shallow use—Information acquisition ability—Pesticide reduction 0.01 0.76*** 0.01 0.24*** – No

Shallow use—Awareness of green production—Pesticide reduction 0.18*** 0.43*** 0.08 0.15* 51.40 Yes
Shallow use—E-commerce sales capability—Pesticide reduction 0.01 0.71*** 0.01 0.24*** – No
Deep use—Information acquisition ability—Pesticide reduction 0.06** 0.74*** 0.05 0.23*** 20.12 Yes
Deep use—Awareness of green production —Pesticide reduction 0.05** 0.44*** 0.02 0.22*** 10.10 Yes
Deep use—E-commerce sales capability—Pesticide reduction 0.15*** 0.67*** 0.10 0.18*** 55.25 Yes

*p < 0.10
**p < 0.05
***p < 0.01

how to use Internet resources to enhance the deep use of the
Internet is of great significance to farmers’ pesticide reduction.
a and b are the estimated coefficients of the explanatory
variable and the mediators
Robustness test
In order to test the robustness of the benchmark regression
results, and at the same time taking into account the accessi-
bility of some farmers to the Internet, we removed the sample
of farmers whose deep use of the Internet is zero and again
conducted regression test on 646 households to estimates the
impact of shallow use and deep use of the Internet on pesticide
reduction. Table 5 shows that regardless of the direction of
action or the significance, the shallow use and deep use of the
Internet are more consistent with the results in Table 3, indi-
cating the results of the benchmark regression are robust.
Further discussion: households with different
capital
considered as vulnerable groups and assigned a value of 1.
The cross-terms of human capital and the Internet use and the
cross-terms of social capital and the Internet use are intro-
duced into the model. If the influence of a cross-term variable
of a certain capital and Internet use is significant and the co-
efficient is negative, it means that Internet use has a more
significant impact on pesticide reduction in vulnerable house-
holds of this capital, that is, Internet use can promote the
pesticide reduction in vulnerable households. The results in
Table 6 show that in pesticide reduction, the deep use of the
Internet has a significant impact on households with weak
human capital and weak social capital, while the shallow use
of the Internet has no significant impact. This shows that the
deep use of the Internet can make up for the weaknesses of
households’ human capital and social capital, thereby improv-
ing the resource endowment structure of vulnerable groups
and improving their efficiency, greenness, and safe produc-
tion. If the popularization of the deep use of the Internet
among the vulnerable groups is strengthened, then the
Internet will become an effective medium to enhance the abil-
ity of vulnerable households to reduce pesticide use. The

With the continuous development of Internet technology,

Table 5 Results of robustness test
whether it will produce a digital divide effect or a dividend
effect for the majority of agricultural producers still needs Variables Model 5 Model 6
further investigation. This paper mainly focuses on the impact
Coefficient SE Coefficient SE
of Internet use on pesticide reduction of vulnerable house-
holds and selects two variables, human capital and social cap- Shallow use 0.13*** 0.05
ital, to reflect the resource ownership of rural households. Deep use 0.15*** 0.04
Referring to Zhang et al. (2019), the number of rural house- Control variables Controlled Controlled
holds receiving extension services for agricultural technology Obs 646 646
in the past three years for pesticide application is used to LR chi2 188.53*** 198.32***
measure the level of human capital; the number of households Pseudo R2 0.22 0.23
who can seek help when farmers encounter difficulties is used
to measure the level of social capital. If the corresponding *p < 0.10
observation values in human capital and social capital are **p < 0.05
lower than the average capital level of the sample, they are ***p < 0.01

Table 6 The impact of Internet use on pesticide reduction of
households with different capitals
Variables Coefficient SE
Shallow use × Human capital − 0.21 0.15
Deep use × Human capital − 0.29*** 0.10
Shallow use × Social capital − 0.23 0.19
Deep use × Social capital − 0.38** 0.17
*p < 0.10
**p < 0.05
***p < 0.01
reason why the interactive items used in the shallow use of the
Internet are not significant may be the capacity of weak house-
holds is limited, and their online activities are single and sim-
ple. Therefore, they cannot effectively obtain useful informa-
tion, and it is difficult to accumulate into real human capital
and social capital.
Conclusion and policy implications
This paper uses the survey data of 670 vegetable growers of
two provinces in China, Shandong and Shaanxi. This paper
uses Probit model and Bootstrap method to study the mecha-
nism of the Internet use on farmer’s pesticide reduction. The
results show the following: First, the shallow use and deep use
of the Internet have a significant positive impact on pesticide
reduction by farmers and will promote pesticide reduction. In
the process of reducing pesticide use, the marginal effect
values of the shallow use of the Internet and the deep use of
the Internet are 0.047 and 0.052, respectively. Second, infor-
mation acquisition ability, green production awareness, and e-
commerce sales ability all play a significant mediating role in
the process of the deep use of the Internet affecting pesticide
reduction. However, in the process of the shallow use of the
Internet affecting pesticide reduction, only green production
awareness has a significant mediating effect, while the coeffi-
cients of the other two mediators are not significant. It can be
seen that there is a difference in information acquisition abil-
ity, green production awareness, and e-commerce sales ability
between the shallow use of the Internet and the deep use of the
Internet in pesticide reduction. That is to say, the increase in
the shallow use of the Internet cannot enhance farmers’ infor-
mation acquisition ability and e-commerce sales ability but
only promote the farmers’ awareness of green production.
Third, by distinguishing different capital endowments of
households, it can be concluded that the deep use of the
Internet can make up for the weakness of the rural family’s
human capital and social capital, but shallow use of the
Internet does not have this effect.
Environ Sci Pollut Res
Conclusively, the following policy implications can be
drawn: First, in order to promote the reduction in pesticide
use by farmers, the government should make full use of the
Internet, build a network service platform and information
system, and create innovative learning methods of agricultural
technology and online sales models to improve the rate of
pesticide reduction. Second, release news on pesticide reduc-
tion and green production with the help of online platforms to
enhance farmers’ awareness of green production. Third, in the
process of digital village construction, it is necessary not only
to strengthen the hardware construction of the Internet and
other information infrastructure but also to pay attention to
the deep use of the Internet by farmers. It would strengthen
the ability of farmers to use professional software, following
the general principle that says “it is better to teach a man to
fish rather than giving him a fish.” Fourth, special attention
should be paid to policy support for the use of the Internet by
vulnerable households, such as training and educating farmers
through online programs, thus encouraging vulnerable house-
holds to try digital technology, make up for their own capital
disadvantages, release the digital dividend effect, and guide
farmers to reduce the use of chemical pesticides.
Acknowledgment The authors are grateful to the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (71933005) and the Research Project of
Major Theoretical and Practical Issues in the Social Sciences
Community of Shaanxi Province (2020Z028).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.
References
Aker JC (2011) Dial ‘A’ for agriculture: a review of information and
communication technologies for agricultural extension in develop-
ing countries. Agric Econ 42(6):631–647
Aker JC, Ksoll C (2016) Can mobile phones improve agricultural out-
comes? Evidence from a randomized experiment in Niger. Food
Policy 60(4):44–51
Baorakis G, Kourgiantakis M, Migdalas A (2002) The impact of E-
commerce on agro-food marketing: the case of agricultural cooper-
atives, firms and consumers in Crete. Br Food J 104(8):580–590
Bilali HE, Allahyari MS (2018) Transition towards sustainability in ag-
riculture and food systems: role of information and communication
technologies. Inf Process Agric 5(4):456–464
Bumblauskas D, Mann A, Dugan B, Rittmer J (2019) A block chain use
case in food distribution: do you know where your food has been?
Int J Inf Manag 52:102008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.
2019.09.004
Cole S, Fernando AN (2012) The value of advice: evidence from mobile
phone-based agricultural extension. Harvard Business School
Working Paper
Damalas AD, Khan M (2016) Farmers’ attitudes towards pesticide labels:
implications for personal and environmental safety. Int J Pest Manag
62(4):319–325
Environ Sci Pollut Res
Gao Y, Zhao D, Yu L, Yang H (2020) Influence of a new agricultural
technology extension mode on farmers’ technology adoption behav-
ior in China. J Rural Stud 76:173–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jrurstud.2020.04.016
Goncalves G, Oliveira T, Cruz-Jesus F (2018) Understanding individual-
level digital divide: evidence of an African country. Comput Hum
Behav 87:276–291
Ho CC, Tseng SF (2006) From digital divide to digital inequality: the
global perspective. Int J Int Enterp Manag 4(3):215–227
Jallow M, Awadh DG, Albaho MS, Devi VY, Binson M Thomas (2017)
Pesticide risk behaviors and factors influencing pesticide use among
farmers in Kuwait. Sci Total Environ 574:490–498
Kansiime MK, Alawy A, Allen C, Subharwal M, Jadhav A, Parr M
(2019) Effectiveness of mobile agri-advisory service extension
model: evidence from Direct2Farm program in India. World Dev
Perspect 13:25–33
Khanal AR, Mishra AK (2016) Financial performance of small farm
business households: the role of internet. China Agric Econ Rev
8(4):553–571
Kovács I, Husti I (2018) The role of digitalization in the agricultural 4.0—
how to connect the industry 4.0 to agriculture? Hung Agric Eng 33:
38–42
Lamichhane JR (2017) Pesticide use and risk reduction in European
farming systems with IPM: an introduction to the special issue.
Crop Prot 97:1–6
Liu E, Huang J (2013) Risk preferences and pesticide use by cotton
farmers in China. J Dev Econ 103:202–215
Liu Y, Han W, Zhang Y, Li L, Wang J, Zheng L (2016) An Internet-of-
Things solution for food safety and quality control: a pilot project in
China. J Ind Inf Integr 3:1–7
Maredia MK, Reyes B, Ba MN, Dabire CL, Pittendrigh B, Bello-Bravo J
(2017) Can mobile phone-based animated videos induce learning
and technology adoption among low-literate farmers? A field exper-
iment in Burkina Faso. Inf Technol Dev 24(3):429–460
Mittal S, Tripathi G (2009) Role of mobile phone technology in improv-
ing small farm productivity. Agric Econ Res Rev 22:451–459
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
Preacher KJ, Rucker DD, Hayes AF (2007) Addressing moderated me-
diation hypotheses: theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivar
Behav Res 42(1):185–227
Shimamoto D, Yamada H, Gummert M (2015) Mobile phones and mar-
ket information: evidence from rural Cambodia. Food Policy 57:
135–141
Smith A, Goe WR, Kenney M, Paul C (2004) Computer and Internet use
by Great Plains farmers. J Agric Resour Econ 29(3):481–500
Suchiradipta B (2018) Raj S (2018) The online culture of agriculture:
exploring social media readiness of agricultural professionals. CSI
Trans ICT 6(3–4):289–299
Wang Y, Wang Y, Huo X, Zhu Y (2015) Why some restricted pesticides
are still chosen by some farmers in China? Empirical evidence from
a survey of vegetable and apple growers. Food Control 51:417–424
Wyckhuys K, Bentley J, Lie R, Nghiem L, Fredrix M (2018) Maximizing
farm-level uptake and diffusion of biological control innovations in
today’s digital era. BioControl 63(1):133–148
Zadjali S, Morse S, Chenoweth J, Deadman M (2014) Factors determin-
ing pesticide use practices by farmers in the Sultanate of Oman. Sci
Total Environ 476–477:505–512
Zhang X, Wan G, Zhang J (2019) Digital economy, inclusive finance and
inclusive growth. Econ Res 8:71–86 (In Chinese)
Zhao L, Wang C, Gu H, Yue C (2018) Market incentive, government
regulation and the behavior of pesticide application of vegetable
farmers in China. Food Control 85:308–317
Zhong B, Yang F, Chen Y (2015) Information empowers vegetable sup-
ply chain: a study of information needs and sharing strategies among
farmers and vendors. Comput Electron Agric 117:81–90
Zhu Q, Li Y, Geng Y, Qi Y (2013) Green food consumption intention,
behaviors and influencing factors among Chinese consumers. Food
Qual Prefer 28:279–286
Zhu Q, Bai J, Peng C, Zhu C (2019) Has informatization increased agri-
cultural productivity? Chin Rural Econ 4:22–40 (In Chinese)
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic-
tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.