IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jchals/v15y2024i2p32-d1412699.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Innovating in an Uncertain World: Understanding the Social, Technical and Systemic Barriers to Farmers Adopting New Technologies

Author

Listed:
  • Louise Manning

    (Lincoln Institute for Agri-Food Technology, Riseholme Park, University of Lincoln, Lincoln LN2 2LG, UK)

Abstract

The current geopolitical and socioeconomic landscape creates a difficult and uncertain operating environment for farming and agri-food businesses. Technological innovation has not been suggested to be a “silver bullet” but is one of the ways organizations can seek to reduce environmental impact, deliver net zero, address the rural skills and labor deficit and produce more output from fewer resources and as a result, make space for nature. But what barriers limit this promissory narrative from delivering in practice? The purpose of the paper is to firstly explore the reported social, technical and systemic barriers to agri-technology adoption in an increasingly uncertain world and then secondly identify potential research gaps that highlight areas for future research and inform key research questions. Socio-technical and infrastructural barriers have been identified within the context of the complex hollowing out and infilling of rural communities across the world. These barriers include seventeen factors that emerge, firstly those external to the farm (economic conditions, external conditions including bureaucracy, market conditions, weather uncertainty and the narratives about farmers), those internal to the farm business (farming conditions, employee relations, general finance, technology and time pressures) and then personal factors (living conditions, personal finances, physical health, role conflict, social isolation and social pressure). Adaptive resilience strategies at personal, organizational and community levels are essential to address these barriers and to navigate agri-technology adoption in an uncertain and dynamic world.

Suggested Citation

  • Louise Manning, 2024. "Innovating in an Uncertain World: Understanding the Social, Technical and Systemic Barriers to Farmers Adopting New Technologies," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-20, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jchals:v:15:y:2024:i:2:p:32-:d:1412699
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/15/2/32/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/15/2/32/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sotiris Blanas & Gino Gancia & Sang Yoon (Tim) Lee, 2019. "Who is afraid of machines?," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 34(100), pages 627-690.
    2. Jennifer L. Rice & Daniel Aldana Cohen & Joshua Long & Jason R. Jurjevich, 2020. "Contradictions of the Climate‐Friendly City: New Perspectives on Eco‐Gentrification and Housing Justice," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(1), pages 145-165, January.
    3. LoPiccalo, Katherine, 2022. "Impact of broadband penetration on U.S. Farm productivity: A panel approach," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(9).
    4. Caryn M. Vazzana & Jeta Rudi-Polloshka, 2019. "Appalachia Has Got Talent, But Why Does It Flow Away? A Study on the Determinants of Brain Drain From Rural USA," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 33(3), pages 220-233, August.
    5. Zhu, Chen & Qiu, Zhiyi & Liu, Fengjun, 2021. "Does innovation stimulate employment? Evidence from China," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1007-1017.
    6. Mutascu, Mihai, 2021. "Artificial intelligence and unemployment: New insights," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 653-667.
    7. Terasa Younker & Heidi Liss Radunovich, 2021. "Farmer Mental Health Interventions: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-30, December.
    8. E R Larsen & A Lomi, 1999. "Resetting the clock: a feedback approach to the dynamics of organisational inertia, survival and change," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 50(4), pages 406-421, April.
    9. Rinaldo Evangelista & Maria Savona, 2002. "The Impact of Innovation on Employment in Services: Evidence from Italy," International Review of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3), pages 309-318.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sinha, Avik & Adhikari, Arnab & Jha, Ashish Kumar, 2021. "Innovational Duality and Sustainable Development: Finding Optima amidst Socio-Ecological Policy Trade-off in post-COVID-19 Era," MPRA Paper 110946, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2021.
    2. Filippi, Emilia & Bannò, Mariasole & Trento, Sandro, 2023. "Automation technologies and their impact on employment: A review, synthesis and future research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    3. Horst Feldmann, 2013. "Technological unemployment in industrial countries," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 1099-1126, November.
    4. Sun, Chuanwang & Tie, Ying & Yu, Lili, 2024. "How to achieve both environmental protection and firm performance improvement: Based on China's carbon emissions trading (CET) policy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    5. Francesco Bogliacino & Marco Vivarelli, 2012. "The Job Creation Effect Of R&D Expenditures," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 96-113, June.
    6. Fabio Montobbio & Jacopo Staccioli & Maria Enrica Virgillito & Marco Vivarelli, 2022. "The empirics of technology, employment and occupations: lessons learned and challenges ahead," DISCE - Quaderni del Dipartimento di Politica Economica dipe0028, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimenti e Istituti di Scienze Economiche (DISCE).
    7. Cavicchia, Rebecca, 2023. "Housing accessibility in densifying cities: Entangled housing and land use policy limitations and insights from Oslo," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    8. Alex Chernoff & Casey Warman, 2023. "COVID-19 and implications for automation," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(17), pages 1939-1957, April.
    9. Luca Ferrucci & Antonio Picciotti, 2017. "From economic dualism to local variety: The development of service industries in Italian regions," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 32(1), pages 14-33, February.
    10. M. Battisti & M. Del Gatto & A. F. Gravina & C. F. Parmeter, 2021. "Robots versus labor skills: a complementarity/substitutability analysis," Working Paper CRENoS 202104, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    11. Vivarelli, Marco, 2012. "Innovation, Employment and Skills in Advanced and Developing Countries: A Survey of the Literature," IZA Discussion Papers 6291, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Alex Coad & Rekha Rao, 2007. "The employment effects of innovation," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne r07036, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    13. Ilona Pavlenkova & Luca Alfieri & Jaan Masso, 2024. "Effects of automation on the gender pay gap: the case of Estonia," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 33(3), pages 584-608.
    14. Lars Marcus & Johan Colding, 2023. "Placing Urban Renewal in the Context of the Resilience Adaptive Cycle," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, December.
    15. Henrik Schwabe & Fulvio Castellacci, 2020. "Automation, workers’ skills and job satisfaction," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-26, November.
    16. Shuai Qin & Xiaolan Chen, 2023. "The role of entrepreneurship policy and culture in transitional routes from entrepreneurial intention to job creation: a moderated mediation model," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 1-25, March.
    17. Su, Chi-Wei & Yuan, Xi & Umar, Muhammad & Lobonţ, Oana-Ramona, 2022. "Does technological innovation bring destruction or creation to the labor market?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    18. Mathias, Blake D. & Hutto, Haley & Williams, Trenton Alma, 2024. "Amish brain gain: Building thriving rural communities through a creation perspective toward work," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 147-160.
    19. Hémous, David & Dechezleprêtre, Antoine & Olsen, Morten & Zanella, carlo, 2019. "Automating Labor: Evidence from Firm-level Patent Data," CEPR Discussion Papers 14249, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Alex Coad, 2007. "Firm Growth: a Survey," Post-Print halshs-00155762, HAL.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jchals:v:15:y:2024:i:2:p:32-:d:1412699. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.