The Effects of Individual Variables, Farming System Characteristics and Perceived Barriers on Actual Use of Smart Farming Technologies: Evidence from the Piedmont Region, Northwestern Italy

Smart Farming Technologies (SFTs) have a real potential to deliver more productive and sustainable agricultural production. However, limited empirical research is available on the role played by objective and subjective factors in the adoption of such disruptive innovations, especially in the Italian context. This study investigated the role of education, farm size, being a sole farmer, and perceived barriers in affecting the use of SFTs in a sample of Italian farmers from the Piedmont region (North-West Italy). Three hundred and ten farming operators were questioned via a paper-and-pencil questionnaire. The analyses showed that low levels of education and working on-farm alone were positively associated with perceived economic barriers, which in turn were negatively associated with the adoption of SFTs. Farm size had a positive direct effect on SFT adoption. The results pointed out the need for targeted policies and training interventions to encourage the use of SFTs.

[1]  Tom R. Wielicki,et al.  A knowledge-driven shift in perception of ICT implementation barriers: Comparative study of US and European SMEs , 2010, J. Inf. Sci..

[2]  Anne Collins McLaughlin,et al.  Aging farmers are at high risk for injuries and fatalities: how human-factors research and application can help. , 2011, North Carolina medical journal.

[3]  Mario Coccia,et al.  Likely Technological Trajectories in Agricultural Tractors by Analysing Innovative Attitudes of Farmers , 2015 .

[4]  M. van Persie,et al.  Spatio-temporal Analysis of Remote Sensing and Field Measurements for Smart Farming , 2015 .

[5]  R. Grout,et al.  Non-adoption of environmental innovations in wine growing , 2013 .

[6]  I. Sturgess.  The Future of the Common Agricultural Policy , 1990 .

[7]  K. V. D. Klauw.  ALLIANCE FOR INTERNET OF THINGS INNOVATION , 2015 .

[8]  M. Bavorova,et al.  Adoption of Agri-Environmental Measures by Organic Farmers: The Role of Interpersonal Communication , 2015 .

[9]  Gregory M. P. O'Hare,et al.  Modelling the smart farm , 2017 .

[10]  Eugenio Cavallo,et al.  Machinery-Related Perceived Risks and Safety Attitudes in Senior Swedish Farmers , 2017, Journal of agromedicine.

[11]  S. Wolfert,et al.  Big Data in Smart Farming – A review , 2017 .

[12]  Peter Gluchowski,et al.  Data Warehouse , 1997, Informatik-Spektrum.

[13]  Yeong Sheng Tey,et al.  Factors influencing the adoption of precision agricultural technologies: a review for policy implications , 2012, Precision Agriculture.

[14]  E. Giannakis,et al.  Off-Farm Employment and Economic Crisis: Evidence from Cyprus , 2018 .

[15]  P. Bentler,et al.  Comparative fit indexes in structural models. , 1990, Psychological bulletin.

[16]  Giacomo Carli,et al.  6 th International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies in Agriculture, Food and Environment (HAICTA 2013) Drivers of Precision Agriculture Technologies Adoption: A Literature Review , 2013 .

[17]  J. Manyika,et al.  Disruptive technologies: Advances that will transform life, business, and the global economy , 2013 .

[18]  Keith F Widaman,et al.  Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. , 1993, Psychological bulletin.

[19]  Peter Lundqvist,et al.  Health and safety strategy in Swedish agriculture. , 2012, Work.

[20]  Stan G. Daberkow,et al.  Farm and Operator Characteristics Affecting the Awareness and Adoption of Precision Agriculture Technologies in the US , 2003, Precision Agriculture.

[21]  Andreas Ritter,et al.  Structural Equations With Latent Variables , 2016 .

[22]  V. Corte,et al.  Scientific development of smart farming technologies and their application in Brazil , 2017 .

[23]  M. Coccia,et al.  Attitudes and Behaviour of Adopters of Technological Innovations in Agricultural Tractors: A Case Study in Italian Agricultural System , 2014 .

[24]  X. Phạm,et al.  How data analytics is transforming agriculture , 2018 .

[25]  A. Adrian,et al.  Producers' perceptions and attitudes toward precision agriculture technologies , 2005 .

[26]  Margarita Genius,et al.  Information Transmission in Irrigation Technology Adoption and Diffusion: Social Learning, Extension Services, and Spatial Effects , 2014 .

[27]  Andrea Knierim,et al.  Experience versus expectation: farmers’ perceptions of smart farming technologies for cropping systems across Europe , 2019, Precision Agriculture.

[28]  R. Gasson,et al.  THE FARM AS A FAMILY BUSINESS: A REVIEW , 1988 .

[29]  G. Brunori,et al.  Knowledge networks and their role in shaping the relations within the Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System in the agroenergy sector. The case of biogas in Tuscany (Italy) , 2017 .

[30]  Dorit Kerret,et al.  Food for Hope: The Role of Personal Resources in Farmers’ Adoption of Green Technology , 2018 .

[31]  Mário Otávio Batalha,et al.  Factors influencing the adoption of Farm Management Information Systems (FMIS) by Brazilian citrus farmers , 2017, Comput. Electron. Agric..

[32]  Achim Walter,et al.  Opinion: Smart farming is key to developing sustainable agriculture , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[33]  J. H. Steiger.  Structural Model Evaluation and Modification: An Interval Estimation Approach. , 1990, Multivariate behavioral research.

[34]  Adriana Bruggeman,et al.  Water pricing and irrigation across Europe: opportunities and constraints for adopting irrigation scheduling decision support systems , 2016 .

[35]  F. Magnotti,et al.  The innovation capacity of small food firms in Italy , 2017 .

[36]  S. Wheeler.  What influences agricultural professionals' views towards organic agriculture? , 2008 .

[37]  S. Presser,et al.  Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys: Experiments on Question Form, Wording, and Context , 1996 .

[38]  M. Reichardt,et al.  Adoption and future perspective of precision farming in Germany: results of several surveys among different agricultural target groups , 2009, Precision Agriculture.

[39]  Stan G. Daberkow,et al.  Socioeconomic Profiles of Early Adopters of Precision Agriculture Technologies , 1998 .

[40]  E. Cavallo,et al.  An ergonomic approach to sustainable development: The role of information environment and social‐psychological variables in the adoption of agri‐environmental innovations , 2019, Sustainable Development.

[41]  A. Hayes.  Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical Mediation Analysis in the New Millennium , 2009 .

[42]  Thomas B. Long,et al.  Barriers to the adoption and diffusion of technological innovations for climate-smart agriculture in Europe: evidence from the Netherlands, France, Switzerland and Italy , 2016 .

[43]  OECD Science, Technology and Innovation Outlook 2020 , 2018, OECD Science, Technology and Innovation Outlook.

[44]  Claire Massey,et al.  The technology acceptance model and use of technology in New Zealand dairy farming , 2004 .

[45]  Eugenio Cavallo,et al.  Falls From Agricultural Machinery: Risk Factors Related to Work Experience, Worked Hours, and Operators’ Behavior , 2018, Hum. Factors.

[46]  E. Cavallo,et al.  It does not occur by chance: a mediation model of the influence of workers’ characteristics, work environment factors, and near misses on agricultural machinery-related accidents , 2017, International journal of occupational and environmental health.

[47]  Mauro Villarini,et al.  Smart Machines, Remote Sensing, Precision Farming, Processes, Mechatronic, Materials and Policies for Safety and Health Aspects , 2018 .

[48]  Knowledge integration and the adoption of new agricultural technologies: Kenyan perspectives , 2012, Food Security.

[49]  Joanne Sneddon,et al.  Modelling the faddish, fashionable and efficient diffusion of agricultural technologies: A case study of the diffusion of wool testing technology in Australia , 2011 .