What affects organic farming adoption in emerging economies? A missing link in the Indian agriculture sector

Abstract

PurposeThis article intends to explore critical factors that affect the adoption of organic farming in emerging economies. The authors respond to the calls from policymakers, non-government organizations, business firms and scholars to improve the farmers' awareness of the negative impact of synthetic chemical pesticides, phosphorus, potassium fertilizers and mineral nitrogen used in traditional farming.Design/methodology/approachThrough self-administered survey questionnaires, responses were obtained from 397 farmers (conventional) regarding organic farming adoption in Haryana (India). The survey responses were collected between October 2022 and December 2022. The authors apply the “partial least squares structural equation modeling” (PLS-SEM) to test the framed hypotheses.FindingsThe present article demonstrates six critical determinants of organic farming adoption, i.e. behavioral, cultivation, economic, governmental, marketing, and social factors. These six factors drive 71.0% (R2) variation in organic farming adoption. Governmental factors have a positive but insignificant influence on organic farming adoption. Interestingly, the impact of behavioral and cultivation factors is crucial per path coefficient values.Originality/valueFor the first time, the authors conducted a study on organic farming adoption in Haryana that lies in its context-specific implementation, utilization of localized knowledge and expertise, regional policy support, agricultural diversification and community participation. Future research can build upon by adding agriculture scientists to the study to respond to the cost, quality of the crop and impact of socio-economic policies as moderators/mediators on adoption decisions.

Crowdfunding adoption in emerging economies: insights for entrepreneurs and policymakers

“…Therefore, Harman’s single factor was applied as a statistical procedure to confirm that there was no CMB in the dataset (Kumar et al. , 2023a; Kumar et al. , 2023b.…”

“…The attributes of the data collected are self-reported, which shows that common method bias (CMB) may be an issue for the validity of the outcomes. Therefore, Harman's single factor was applied as a statistical procedure to confirm that there was no CMB in the dataset (Kumar et al, 2023a;Kumar et al, 2023b. On a sample of 422, the single factor extraction was 31.28%, less than the threshold value of 50%, indicating no CMB problem in this model (Kumar et al, 2023d).…”

Exploring the determinants of solo female travel intention among millennials: a comparative study from rural and urban perspectives

“…Two professors of tourism thoroughly tested it. Inspired by the study of Kumar et al. (2023a,b, c) and Rani and Kumar (2023), each latent construct is based on a “seven-point Likert” scale “where 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree”.…”

Human-machine dialogues unveiled: an in-depth exploration of individual attitudes and adoption patterns toward AI-powered ChatGPT systems

“…Similarly, the R 2 of 0.459 indicates that ATT and BI drive a 45.9% variation in AU. In the following phase, the effect size of predictive ability (f 2 ) varies from small (0.02-0.15) to medium (0.15-0.35), and then the results state that the result demonstrated moderate predictive ability (Legate et al, 2023;Kumar et al, 2023c).…”