Smart farming in mountain areas: Investigating livestock farmers’ technophobia and technophilia and their perception of innovation

Marescotti, Maria Elena; Demartini, Eugenio; Filippini, Rosalia; Gaviglio, Anna

doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.07.015

Cited by 38 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These farmers assessed all megatrends to have a negative impact on their business, including digitalization and technological development. This result differs from the findings by [49], who found the largest farms in their study to have the most positive expectation of smart farming technologies, which are manifestations of digitalization and technological development.…”

Section: Cluster III Production Oriented Farmerscontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…Megatrends related to digitalization and technological development were resources for the dairy farmers in Cluster I to build a future in the dairy farming business field. Marescotti et al [49] studied Italian mountain region dairy farmers' relationship to smart farming technologies and found three clusters, one of which was keen on technological development. These farmers had positive expectations for their farm development, which was somewhat similar to the farmers in Cluster I [49].…”

Section: Cluster I Goal Oriented Farmersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Marescotti et al [49] studied Italian mountain region dairy farmers' relationship to smart farming technologies and found three clusters, one of which was keen on technological development. These farmers had positive expectations for their farm development, which was somewhat similar to the farmers in Cluster I [49]. Cluster I farmers also assessed climate change quite positively.…”

Section: Cluster I Goal Oriented Farmersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

How Farmers Conceive and Cope with Megatrends: The Case of Finnish Dairy Farmers

Lahnamäki-Kivelä

Kuhmonen

2022

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Megatrends (urbanization, digitalization, globalization, climate change, etc.) are mainstream developments that affect most economic activities. These megatrends have varying incidences and impacts on individual entrepreneurs and enterprises, also in farming sector. A farmer can either ignore or try to adapt to or benefit from megatrends. This reaction depends on many things: individuals’ futures orientation, management practices, business strategy, sunk costs, the life cycle and type of business, for example. The study explores the association between eight common megatrends and business strategies among a sample of Finnish dairy producers. The analysis is based on survey data from the year 2019 (n = 135) collected among a major Finnish dairy industry co-operative’s contract producers. The respondents evaluated the expected impact of the megatrends on their own business within the next 10 years with 5-point Likert-type scale (−2 … +2). K-means cluster analysis was utilized to uncover a few basic settings in the association between megatrends and farmers behaviours. After trying out several numbers of clusters, a distinctive three cluster solution was found. Additionally, cluster member profiles were framed with farmers’ Likert -scale responses. The analysis indicates that dairy farmers differ in their observation of megatrends. The results confirm that some of the farmers more or less ignore the common megatrends, whereas some other farmers adapt to or benefit from the common megatrends. Supporting farmers’ futures consciousness will strengthen their capacities of coping in the changing business environment.

show abstract

Section: Cluster III Production Oriented Farmerscontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Cluster I Goal Oriented Farmersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cluster I Goal Oriented Farmersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How Farmers Conceive and Cope with Megatrends: The Case of Finnish Dairy Farmers

Lahnamäki-Kivelä

Kuhmonen

2022

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the literature is still discordant on the influence of the gender variable for adoption, some scholars (Zheng et al 2019;Michels et al 2020) show a higher propensity of men to use PATs, while other researchers evidence multiple paths of innovation in women farms, characterised by heterogeneity and by special attention towards multifunctional agriculture (Seuneke Bock 2015). Regarding education, the results highlight, in line with the literature (Marescotti et al 2021), how higher values correspond to more excellent knowledge and propensity to adopt: in particular, those with a university degree or diploma in an agricultural specialisation are more likely to uptake PATs (Balafoutis et al 2017). Undoubtedly, larger farms record the highest rates along the sequence, consistent with the literature (Shang et al 2021;Giua et al 2022).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

The long way to innovation adoption: insights from precision agriculture

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The adoption of innovations may boost the transition to sustainable agricultural models. Among these innovations, precision farming offers a fundamental contribution to sustainable soil management and the improvement in product quality. The work is set against this background and aims to analyse the rate of introducing precision farming tools and the variables that prevent/facilitate this adoption. Although adoption rates in Italy remain relatively low, it is vital to underline the obstacles that limit the broader use of precision agricultural technologies inside farms. To this end, the literature has highlighted various elements of complexity (farm characteristics, socio-economic and psychological), which can hinder or generate perceived complexity and significantly reduce the potential for technology adoption. In this context emerges the increasing importance of public and private activities related to knowledge transfer. The paper focuses on agricultural knowledge and innovation systems, which are also relevant in light of the recent proposal for the new regulation on rural development. The awareness–knowledge–adoption–product (AKAP) sequence was used to reveal the gap between the potential and actual adoption of innovation on Italian farms to comprehend the adoption process and identify relevant barriers and the role knowledge systems played. Empirical findings show that AKIS has a critical mediating function in promoting innovation uptake. Strengthening knowledge systems, acting on the different phases of the AKAP sequence, could allow a greater understanding of precision agriculture techniques and bottlenecks to adoption.

show abstract

“…One can find such alternatives in the market'. Such type of modest advancements could potentially diminish the disruptions caused by more sophisticated systems in machine-to-machine or machine-to-human connections, also reducing what Marescotti et al (2021) term technophobia, which is farmers' fear that Agriculture 4.0 technologies will fundamentally, and perhaps negatively, change their routines and work motifs.…”

Section: The Warpmentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovating digitally: The new texture of practices in Agriculture 4.0

Lioutas

Charatsari

2021

Sociologia Ruralis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research aimed to identify the practices used by actors while innovating digitally in the field of agriculture. We also attempted to depict if and how they experience disruptions associated with the emergence of digital technologies. A qualitative research design permitted us to uncover that work‐ and system‐related disruptions follow the process of agricultural digitalisation. The study also indicated that innovating digitally is a collective process in which, however, some actors independently attempt to elevate their positions through weaving, that is, engaging in networking practices. On the other hand, despite their intense efforts to promote these technologies to farmers, innovation brokers, technology providers and researchers are not actively involved in the process of co‐creating value for and with farmers. We conclude by arguing that digital technologies are not scope‐neutral devices and by pointing out the need for redefining what responsibility means, what agricultural digitalisation research should stand upon and what it should stand for.

show abstract

Smart farming in mountain areas: Investigating livestock farmers’ technophobia and technophilia and their perception of innovation

Cited by 38 publications

References 41 publications

How Farmers Conceive and Cope with Megatrends: The Case of Finnish Dairy Farmers

How Farmers Conceive and Cope with Megatrends: The Case of Finnish Dairy Farmers

The long way to innovation adoption: insights from precision agriculture

Innovating digitally: The new texture of practices in Agriculture 4.0

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About