Analyzing Socio-Economic and Behavioral Determinants of Precision Farming Adoption among Diverse Farm Sizes in Semi-Urban India

Pravin Suryawanshi; Chandrani Singh

doi:10.69968/ijisem.2026v3i3135-141

Authors

Pravin Suryawanshi ISB&M College of Commerce, Pune, Maharashtra
Chandrani Singh Sinhgad Institute of Management, Pune, Maharashtra, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.69968/ijisem.2026v3i3135-141

Keywords:

Precision Farming, Technology Adoption, Farm Size Determinants, Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs), Perceived Usefulness, Semi-Urban Agriculture

Abstract

Precision farming might bring about the efficiencies in usage of inputs, but adoption of the farming technology among the Indian farming community is small and unbalanced. The focus of this study was to examine the institutional, behavioral and socioeconomic determinants affecting the precision farming adoption on various farm sizes in the semi-urban farm situation of India. Demographic profile, technological exposure, awareness, source of information, farmer participation in farmer-producer groups and five behavioral components of the 60 farmers in the Pune area under small, medium and large landholdings (or farm sizes) were captured through the help of a five-point Likert scale. Chi-square tests, odds ratios, one-way analysis of variance and Tukey HSD were used at the 0.05 level. Adoption levels were higher on small (17.9%), medium (40.0%) and large farms (66.7%). Overall, 35.0% (21/60) of farms adopted it. Farm size had a significant linear association with adoption (chi-square of 8.945, p=0.003 and Cramer's V=0.390) and a substantial association (chi-square 9.126, df 2, p=0.010). Farm size was at approximately nine times the odds for large farms compared to small farms. The participation of organizations led to a higher rate of adoption from 17.1 to 60.0% (odds ratio 7.25, p = 0.001). The information source was significant at p = 0.002; the scores of digital media and peer farmers were 63.6% and 52.9%, respectively. Although no significant differences in social impact were found between groups, significant differences were found in perceived utility (F = 2.98, p = 0.058), ease of use, risk perception and self-efficacy. High initial costs were the most prominent limitation to small farms, while absence of technical knowledge was the most crucial limitation with medium-sized farms.

References

[1] Puppala, H., Singh, A. P., & Peddinti, S. R. (2023). Barriers to the adoption of new technologies in rural areas: The case of unmanned aerial vehicles for precision agriculture in India. Technology in Society, 74, Article 102335.

[2] Suresh, K., Narmilan, A., Kariapper, R. K. A. R., Nawaz, S. S., & Suresh, J. (2022). Farmers’ perception on precision farming technologies: A novel approach. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 77(2), 264–276.

[3] Ruzzante, S., Labarta, R., & Bilton, A. (2021). Adoption of agricultural technology in the developing world: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. World Development, 146, Article 105599.

[4] Vecchio, Y., Agnusdei, G. P., Miglietta, P. P., & Capitanio, F. (2020). Adoption of precision farming tools: The case of Italian farmers. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(3), Article 869.

[5] Khanna, A., & Kaur, S. (2023). An empirical analysis on adoption of precision agricultural techniques among farmers of Punjab for efficient land administration. Land Use Policy, 126, Article 106533.

[6] Arjune, S., & Kumar, V. S. (2023). Precision agriculture: Influencing factors and challenges faced by farmers in delta districts of Tamil Nadu. In 2022 OPJU International Technology Conference on Emerging Technologies for Sustainable Development (OTCON) (pp. 1–6). IEEE.

[7] Nguyen, L. L. H., Halibas, A., & Nguyen, T. Q. (2022). Determinants of precision agriculture technology adoption in developing countries: A review. Journal of Crop Improvement, 37(1), 1–24.

[8] Iyer, P., Bozzola, M., Hirsch, S., Meraner, M., & Finger, R. (2023). Planned behavior, social networks and perceived risks: Understanding farmers' behavior toward precision dairy technologies. Journal of Dairy Science, 106(12), 9151–9166.

[9] Sharma, R., & Kaur, G. (2023). Antecedents of smart farming adoption to mitigate the digital divide – extended innovation diffusion model. Technology in Society, 75, Article 102348.

[10] Arjune, S., & Kumar, V. S. (2023). Precision agriculture: Influencing factors and challenges faced by farmers in delta districts of Tamil Nadu. In 2022 OPJU International Technology Conference on Emerging Technologies for Sustainable Development (OTCON) (pp. 1–6). IEEE.

[11] Mizik, T. (2023). How can precision farming work on a small scale? A systematic literature review. Precision Agriculture, 24(1), 384–406.

[12] Bethi, A., & Deshmukh, S. (2023). Economic viability of yield monitoring systems in Indian potato farming [Master’s thesis, Massey University]. Massey Research Online.

[13] Khanna, A., & Kaur, S. (2023). An empirical analysis on adoption of precision agricultural techniques among farmers of Punjab for efficient land administration. Land Use Policy, 126, Article 106533.

[14] Sugandh, U., Nigam, S., & Khari, M. (2023, March). Ecosystem of technologies for smart agriculture to improve the efficiency and profitability of Indian farmers. In 2023 10th International Conference on Computing for Sustainable Global Development (INDIACom) (pp. 1442–1449). IEEE.

[15] Kumar, S., Yadav, A., Taria, S., Alam, B., Singh, P., Dwivedi, R. P., & Arunachalam, A. (2024). Scope, importance and limitations of precision-agriculture-based practices for crop management: Indian perspective. In Remote sensing in precision agriculture (pp. 27–40). Academic Press.