IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i18p10064-d631501.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Changes in Use of Communication Channels by Livestock Farmers during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Author

Listed:
  • Karmen Erjavec

    (Faculty of Economic and Informatics, University of Novo Mesto, Na Loko 2, 8000 Novo Mesto, Slovenia)

  • Marjan Janžekovič

    (Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Maribor, Pivola 10, 2311 Hoče, Slovenia)

  • Milena Kovač

    (Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Groblje 3, 1230 Domžale, Slovenia)

  • Mojca Simčič

    (Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Groblje 3, 1230 Domžale, Slovenia)

  • Andrej Mergeduš

    (Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Maribor, Pivola 10, 2311 Hoče, Slovenia)

  • Dušan Terčič

    (Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Groblje 3, 1230 Domžale, Slovenia)

  • Marija Klopčič

    (Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Groblje 3, 1230 Domžale, Slovenia)

Abstract

The study aims to identify any changes in the communication channels used by Slovenian livestock farmers before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the main (dis)advantages of relying on them. An online survey was completed by 502 Slovenian farmers of various farm enterprises in winter 2020/2021. Most respondents generally used telephone, e-mail, and the internet to obtain agricultural information before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. During the pandemic, farmers increasingly relied on online conferences and social networking sites. At the same time, younger farmers and farmers with a higher education level used digital channels the most frequently, with men doing so more often than women. Digital channels were primarily used by cattle and horse farmers, while cattle farmers showed the greatest online conference participation. Respondents reported having more time to spend with their families and animals as an advantage and the lack of face-to-face interaction with other farmers and advisers as a disadvantage of such communication patterns. As the study reveals differences in the use of communication channels during the COVID-19 pandemic by various farmers, a new communication strategy is needed that involves the use of appropriate communication channels to provide farmers with agricultural information both during the COVID-19 situation and later.

Suggested Citation

  • Karmen Erjavec & Marjan Janžekovič & Milena Kovač & Mojca Simčič & Andrej Mergeduš & Dušan Terčič & Marija Klopčič, 2021. "Changes in Use of Communication Channels by Livestock Farmers during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-14, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:18:p:10064-:d:631501
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/18/10064/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/18/10064/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Garforth, Chris & Usher, Richard, 1997. "Promotion and uptake pathways for research output: a review of analytical frameworks and communication channels," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 301-322, October.
    2. Aker, Jenny C. & Ksoll, Christopher, 2016. "Can mobile phones improve agricultural outcomes? Evidence from a randomized experiment in Niger," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 44-51.
    3. Eduardo Nakasone & Maximo Torero, 2016. "A text message away: ICTs as a tool to improve food security," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(S1), pages 49-59, November.
    4. Uwe Deichmann & Aparajita Goyal & Deepak Mishra, 2016. "Will digital technologies transform agriculture in developing countries?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(S1), pages 21-33, November.
    5. Coombs, W. Timothy, 2015. "The value of communication during a crisis: Insights from strategic communication research," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 141-148.
    6. Luigi Mastronardi & Aurora Cavallo & Luca Romagnoli, 2020. "Diversified Farms Facing the Covid-19 Pandemic: First Signals from Italian Case Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-12, July.
    7. Kinya K. Kigatiira & Hellen K. Mberia & Kyalo wa Ngula, 2018. "The Effect of Communication Channels used between Extension Officers and Farmers on the Adoption of Irish Potato Farming," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 8(4), pages 377-391, April.
    8. Alba Vázquez-López & Martín Barrasa-Rioja & Manuel Marey-Perez, 2021. "ICT in Rural Areas from the Perspective of Dairy Farming: A Systematic Review," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, April.
    9. Gisela Redondo-Sama & Virginia Matulic & Ariadna Munté-Pascual & Irene de Vicente, 2020. "Social Work during the COVID-19 Crisis: Responding to Urgent Social Needs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-16, October.
    10. Mostaghel, Rana, 2016. "Innovation and technology for the elderly: Systematic literature review," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 4896-4900.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Durant, Jennie L. & Asprooth, Lauren & Galt, Ryan E. & Schmulevich, Sasha Pesci & Manser, Gwyneth M. & Pinzón, Natalia, 2023. "Farm resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic: The case of California direct market farmers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).

    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. Omulo, Godfrey & Kumeh, Eric Mensah, 2020. "Farmer-to-farmer digital network as a strategy to strengthen agricultural performance in Kenya: A research note on ‘Wefarm’ platform," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    2. Sekabira, Haruna & Qaim, Matin, 2017. "Can mobile phones improve gender equality and nutrition? Panel data evidence from farm households in Uganda," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 95-103.
    3. Martin C. Parlasca & Oliver Mußhoff & Matin Qaim, 2020. "Can mobile phones improve nutrition among pastoral communities? Panel data evidence from Northern Kenya," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(3), pages 475-488, May.
    4. Wen Yao & Zhuo Sun, 2023. "The Impact of the Digital Economy on High-Quality Development of Agriculture: A China Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-19, March.
    5. Kabbiri, Ronald & Dora, Manoj & Kumar, Vikas & Elepu, Gabriel & Gellynck, Xavier, 2018. "Mobile phone adoption in agri-food sector: Are farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa connected?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 253-261.
    6. Jianxin Guo & Songqing Jin & Lei Chen & Jichun Zhao, 2018. "Impacts of Distance Education on Agricultural Performance and Household Income: Micro-Evidence from Peri-Urban Districts in Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, October.
    7. Pallavi Rajkhowa & Heike Baumüller, 2024. "Assessing the potential of ICT to increase land and labour productivity in agriculture: Global and regional perspectives," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(2), pages 477-503, June.
    8. Evans, Olaniyi, 2018. "Digital Agriculture: Mobile Phones, Internet & Agricultural Development in Africa," MPRA Paper 90359, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Min, Shi & Liu, Min & Huang, Jikun, 2020. "Does the application of ICTs facilitate rural economic transformation in China? Empirical evidence from the use of smartphones among farmers," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    10. Gershom Endelani Mwalupaso & Shangao Wang & Sanzidur Rahman & Essiagnon John-Philippe Alavo & Xu Tian, 2019. "Agricultural Informatization and Technical Efficiency in Maize Production in Zambia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-17, April.
    11. Parlasca, Martin C. & Mußhoff, Oliver & Qaim, Matin, 2018. "How mobile phones can improve nutrition among pastoral communities: Panel data evidence from Northern Kenya," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 274651, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    12. Svenja Fluhrer & Kati Kraehnert, 2024. "Mobile phone network expansion and agricultural income: A panel study," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 55(1), pages 54-85, January.
    13. Fred Mawunyo Dzanku & Robert Osei & Isaac Osei‐Akoto, 2021. "The impact of mobile phone voice message reminders on agricultural outcomes in Mali," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(5), pages 789-806, September.
    14. Gershom Endelani Mwalupaso & Shangao Wang & Zhangxing Xu & Xu Tian, 2019. "Towards Auspicious Agricultural Informatization—Implication of Farmers’ Behavioral Intention Apropos of Mobile Phone Use in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-21, November.
    15. Gershom Endelani Mwalupaso & Shangao Wang & Aseres Mamo Eshetie & Xu Tian, 2020. "Ameliorating Food and Nutrition Security in Farm Households: Does Informatization Matter?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-20, January.
    16. Sekabira, Haruna & Qaim, Matin, 2017. "Can Mobile Phones Improve Gender Equality and Nutrition? Panel Data Evidence from Farm Households in Uganda," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 256215, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    17. Daum, Thomas & Ravichandran, Thanammal & Kariuki, Juliet & Chagunda, Mizeck & Birner, Regina, 2022. "Connected cows and cyber chickens? Stocktaking and case studies of digital livestock tools in Kenya and India," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    18. Zhu, Xiaoke & Hu, Ruifa & Zhang, Chao & Shi, Guanming, 2021. "Does Internet use improve technical efficiency? Evidence from apple production in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    19. Lin Xie & Biliang Luo & Wenjing Zhong, 2021. "How Are Smallholder Farmers Involved in Digital Agriculture in Developing Countries: A Case Study from China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-16, March.
    20. Shingo Yoshida & Hironori Yagi, 2021. "Long-Term Development of Urban Agriculture: Resilience and Sustainability of Farmers Facing the Covid-19 Pandemic in Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-23, April.

    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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:18:p:10064-:d:631501. 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.