Technology Development and Consumer Acceptance of Innovation in Fruit Production

Precision Agriculture (PA) and the more specific branch of Precision Horticulture are two very promising sectors. They focus on the use of technologies in agriculture to optimize the use of inputs, so to reach a better efficiency, and minimize waste of resources. This important objective motivated many researchers and companies to search new technology solutions. Sometimes the effort proved to be a good seed, but sometimes an unfeasible idea. So that PA, from its birth more or less 25 years ago, is still a “new” management, interesting for the future, but an actual low adoption rate is still reported by experts and researchers. This work aims to give a contribution in finding the causes of this low adoption rate and proposing a methodological solution to this problem. The first step was to examine prior research about Precision Agriculture adoption, by ex ante and ex post approach. It was supposed as important to find connections between these two phases of a purchase experience. In fact, the ex ante studies dealt with potential consumer’s perceptions before a usage experience occurred, therefore before purchasing a technology, while the ex post studies described the drivers which made a farmer become an end-user of PA technology. Then, an example of consumer research is presented. This was an ex ante research focused on pre-prototype technology for fruit production. This kind of research could give precious information about consumer acceptance before reaching an advanced development phase of the technology, and so to have the possibility to change something with the least financial impact. The final step was to develop the pre-prototype technology that was the subject of the consumer acceptance research and test its technical characteristics.

Innovation and economic performance of the firms in the service sector: relevant issues and open problems

This thesis is a collection of essays related to the topic of innovation in the service sector. The choice of this structure is functional to the purpose of single out some of the relevant issues and try to tackle them, revising first the state of the literature and then proposing a way forward. Three relevant issues has been therefore selected: (i) the definition of innovation in the service sector and the connected question of measurement of innovation; (ii) the issue of productivity in services; (iii) the classification of innovative firms in the service sector. Facing the first issue, chapter II shows how the initial width of the original Schumpeterian definition of innovation has been narrowed and then passed to the service sector form the manufacturing one in a reduce technological form. Chapter III tackle the issue of productivity in services, discussing the difficulties for measuring productivity in a context where the output is often immaterial. We reconstruct the dispute on the Baumol’s cost disease argument and propose two different ways to go forward in the research on productivity in services: redefining the output along the line of a characteristic approach; and redefining the inputs, particularly analysing which kind of input it’s worth saving. Chapter IV derives an integrated taxonomy of innovative service and manufacturing firms, using data coming from the 2008 CIS survey for Italy. This taxonomy is based on the enlarged definition of “innovative firm” deriving from the Schumpeterian definition of innovation and classify firms using a cluster analysis techniques. The result is the emergence of a four cluster solution, where firms are differentiated by the breadth of the innovation activities in which they are involved. Chapter 5 reports some of the main conclusions of each singular previous chapter and the points worth of further research in the future.