Loading...

A Framework to Study Farmers Decisions on Adoption of Agromet Advisories Services for Risk Management: Insights from Theory of Planned Behavior

DOI: 10.18805/BKAP381    | Article Id: BKAP381 | Page : 66-70
Citation :- A Framework to Study Farmers Decisions on Adoption of Agromet Advisories Services for Risk Management: Insights from Theory of Planned Behavior.Bhartiya Krishi Anusandhan Patrika.2022.(37): 66-70
Jagriti Rohit, C.N. Anshida Beevi jags.rohit@gmail.com
Address : ICAR- Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture, Santoshnagar, Hyderabad-500 059, Telangana, India.
Submitted Date : 30-09-2021
Accepted Date : 24-02-2022

Abstract

Background: Climate change is emerging as a major threat on agriculture, food security and livelihood of millions of people in many places of the world. Agromet advisories services is such a climate resilient technology which provides the valuable information about all agricultural operations from land preparation sowing to harvest based on weather forecasting. There have been plenty of studies investigating farmers’ decision to adopt an innovation but a lot of more segregated studies exist, highlighting the importance of individual factors affecting adoption. Most of the theoretical models on adoption of innovation have tended to present discipline guided explanations to the adoption decision, although adoption is subject to a combination of social, economic, psychological, as well as cultural factors.
Methods: The aim of the paper is to present a framework to study farmer’s decision with respect to adoption of AAS. Under aegis of NICRA, Agromet Advisories are provided to the farmers through its 121 Krishi Vigyan Kendra located in India. The agromet advsiories along with weather data gives crop specific recommendations. Generally, these advisories ae given to farmers two times in a week. The developed framework will be used to study their intention to adopt these AAS. Extensive review of literature on the adoption of innovation in agriculture that was based on TPB or theory of reasoned change (TRA) was carried out.
Result: Various factors were taken into consideration like the demographic variables, socio- psychological constructs for explaining the adoption decisions. The framework developed for the study is an extended version of ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). In addition to the traditional construct i.e intention, perceived behavioural control and subjective norms, perceived usefulness was added to the extended version of TPB to study the adoption of Agromet Advisories Services (AAS). The framework will help the academician, policy makers and other stakeholder to develop different perspectives of farmer’s decision making in adoption of AAS.

Keywords

​Agromet advisories services (AAS) Attitude toward the behavior (ATT) Attitude Construct Perceived behavioral control (PBC) Subjective norm (SN) Subjective norms Theory of planned behavior (TPB)

References

  1. Abbasi, M.S., Shah, F., Doudpota, S.M., Channa, N. and Kandhro, S. (2013). Theories and models of technology acceptance behaviour: A critical review of literature. Sindh University Research Journal-SURJ (Science Series). 45(1): 163-170.
  2. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes. 50: 179-211. 
  3. Ajzen, I. (1985). From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior. In Action Control; [KuhlJürgen, J., Beckmann, J., Eds.]; Springer: Berlin, German; ISBN 978-3-642-69746-3. pp. 11-39.
  4. Ajzen, I. (2001). Nature and operations of attitudes. Annual Review of Psychology. 52: 27-58.
  5. Ajzen, I. and Driver, B.L. (1992). Application of the theory of planned behaviour to leisure choice. Journal of Leisure Research. 24(3): 185-204.
  6. Allport, G.W. (1967). Attitudes in Attitude Theory and Measurement; John Willey Sons: New York, NY, USA, ISBN 978-0471 260554.
  7. Arunrat, N., Wang, C., Pumijumnong, N., Sereenonchai, S. and Cai, W. (2017). Farmers’ intention and decision to adapt to climate change: A case study in the Yom and Nan basins, Phichit province of Thailand. Journal of Cleaner Production. 143: 672-685.
  8. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action.  Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
  9. Boahene, K., Snijders, T.A., Folmer, H. (1999). An integrated socioeconomic analysis of innovation adoption: The case of hybrid cocoa in Ghana. J. Policy Model. 21: 167-184.
  10. Borges, J.A.R., Foletto, L. and Xavier, V.T. (2015). An interdisciplinary framework to study farmers decisions on adoption of innovation: Insights from Expected Utility Theory and Theory of Planned Behavior. African Journal of Agricultural Research. 10(29): 2814-2825.
  11. Chiou, J.S. (1998). The Effects of Attitude, Subjective Norm and Perceived Behavioral Control on Consumers’ Purchase Intentions: The Moderating Effects of Product Knowledge and Attention to Social Comparison Information. Proc. Natl. Sci. Counc. ROC (C). 9(2): 298-308.
  12. Cialdini, R.B., Reno, R.R. and Kallgren, C.A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 58: 1015-1026.
  13. Cigdem, H. and Topcu, A. (2015). Predictors of instructors’ behavioral intention to use learning management system: A Turkish vocational college example. Computers in Human Behavior. 52: 22-28.
  14. Crano, W.D. and Prislin, R. (2006). Attitudes and Persuasion. Annual Review of Psychology. 57(1): 345-374.
  15. Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 13: 319-340.
  16. Dulany, D.E. (1968). Awareness, Rules and Propositional Control: A Confrontation with S-R Behavior Theory. New York: Prentice Hall.
  17. Edwards-Jones, G. (2006). Modelling farmer decision-making: Concepts, progress and challenges. Animal Science.  82(6): 783-790.
  18. Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (2010). Predicting and Changing Behavior: The Reasoned Action Approach. Psychology Press, New York.
  19. Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (2010). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. New York: Psychology Press (Taylor and Francis).
  20. Hansen, J.W. (2002). Applying seasonal climate prediction to agricul-tural production. Agric. Syst. 74(3): 305-307.
  21. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). (2014). Climate Change 2014, Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects, Working Group II Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
  22. Jiang, L., Zhang, J., Wang, H.H., Zhang, L. and He, K. (2018). The impact of psychological factors on farmers’ intentions to reuse agricultural biomass waste for carbon emission abatement. Journal of Cleaner Production. 189: 797-804.
  23. Li, P., Chen, Y., Hu, W., Li, X., Yu, Z. and Liu, Y. (2019). Possibilities and requirements for introducing agri-environment measures in land consolidation projects in China, evidence from ecosystem services and farmers’ attitudes. Science of the Total Environment. 650: 3145-3155.
  24. Nguyen, N. and Drakou, E.G. (2021). Farmers intention to adopt sustainable agriculture hinges on climate awareness: The case of Vietnamese coffee. Journal of Cleaner Production.  303: 126828.
  25. Renita, D. and Anindita, R. (2017). Farmer’s intention on climate change adaptation. Agricultural Socio-Economics Journal.  17(3): 105-111.
  26. Roesch-Mcnally, G.E. (2016). Agricultural transformations: Climate change adaptation and farmer decision making, Graduate Theses and Dissertations. p. Paper 15051.
  27. Rosenberg, M.J. and Hovland, C.I. (1960). Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Components of Attitudes. In: Attitude Organization and Change: [C.I. Hovland and M.J. Rosenberg (Eds.)], An Analysis of Consistency Among Attitude Components. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. pp. 1-14.
  28. Taylor, S. and Todd, P.A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research. 6(2): 144-76.
  29. Trafimow, D. and Fishbein, M. (1994). The moderating effect of behavior type on the subjective norm-behavior relationship.  The Journal of Social Psychology. 134(6): 755-763.
  30. Triandis, H.C. and Brislin, R.W (1980). Handbook of Cross-Cultural- Psychology; Allyn and Bacon: Boston, MA, USA; ISBN 978-0-20-5065011.
  31. Venkataraman, S. (2004). Climatic characterization of crop productivity and input-needs for agrometeorological advisory services.  Journal of Agrometeorology. 6(1): 98-105.
  32. Warshaw, P. and Davis, F. (1985). Disentangling behavioral intention and behavioral expectation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 21: 213-228. doi: 10.1016/0022- 1031(85)90017-4.
  33. Wauters, E. and Mathijs, E. (2013). An investigation into the socio- psychological determinants of farmers’ conservation decisions: Method and implications for policy, extension and research. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension. 19(1): 53-72.
  34. Webb, T.L. and Sheeran, P. (2006). Does changing behavioral intentions engender behavior change? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychological Bulletin. 132(2): 249-268.

Global Footprints