IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v13y2023i4p21582440231218688.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identification of Opportunities for Espousing Green Fertilizers Technology Among Smallholder Paddy Farmers for Higher Productivity and Environmental Sustenance

Author

Listed:
  • Shahrina Md Nordin
  • Sonia Lohana
  • Siti Nooriza Abd Razak
  • Vicky Kumar
  • Rafidah Abdul Rashid
  • Ammar Redza Ahmad Rizal
  • Eko Atmadji

Abstract

This study investigates the relationship between socio-psychological factors, innovation attributes, behavior intention, and green fertilizer technology (GFT) adoption among Malaysian paddy farmers. The study also examined whether behavior intention mediated the relationship between socio-psychological factors and green fertilizer technology. The study collected data from 170 paddy farmers in Malaysia’s Kedah and Perak states. The study used a quantitative research design and analyzed the data using the SmartPLS 4 software. The study’s results indicate a positive and significant relationship between the socio-psychological factors, innovation attributes, behavior intention, and the adoption of GFT. Specifically, the study found that the socio-psychological factors significantly positively affect farmers’ behavior intention to adopt GFT. Further, innovation attributes significantly impact farmers’ behavior and intention to adopt GFT. The study’s findings provide several implications for policymakers, extension agents, and other stakeholders interested in promoting the adoption of GFT among Malaysian paddy farmers. The study suggests that promoting positive attitudes toward GFT, creating awareness of the benefits of GFT, and improving farmers perceived behavioral control may increase farmers’ intention to adopt GFT. Additionally, policymakers should develop GFT that is simple and compatible with farmers’ needs, making it easier for farmers to adopt. Moreover, this study contributes to the literature on adopting green technologies by highlighting the importance of socio-psychological factors and innovation attributes in shaping farmers’ behavior intention to adopt GFT. The study’s findings have practical implications for policymakers and other stakeholders interested in promoting the adoption of GFT among Malaysian paddy farmers.

Suggested Citation

  • Shahrina Md Nordin & Sonia Lohana & Siti Nooriza Abd Razak & Vicky Kumar & Rafidah Abdul Rashid & Ammar Redza Ahmad Rizal & Eko Atmadji, 2023. "Identification of Opportunities for Espousing Green Fertilizers Technology Among Smallholder Paddy Farmers for Higher Productivity and Environmental Sustenance," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:13:y:2023:i:4:p:21582440231218688
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440231218688
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440231218688
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440231218688?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shira Bukchin & Dorit Kerret, 2018. "Food for Hope: The Role of Personal Resources in Farmers’ Adoption of Green Technology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-11, May.
    2. Yang, Xin & Zhou, Xiaohe & Deng, Xiangzheng, 2022. "Modeling farmers’ adoption of low-carbon agricultural technology in Jianghan Plain, China: An examination of the theory of planned behavior," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    3. Kazushi Takahashi & Rie Muraoka & Keijiro Otsuka, 2020. "Technology adoption, impact, and extension in developing countries’ agriculture: A review of the recent literature," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 31-45, January.
    4. Yuichiro Amekawa & Ng Chuck Chuan & Linda A. Lumayag & Guan Huat Tan & Chee Seng Wong & Lukman B Abdulra’uf & Hui Bing Tan & Wen Xi Tai & She Mei Tan & Chai Hong Liu & Jing Lim Chee, 2017. "Producers’ perceptions of public good agricultural practices and their pesticide use: The case of MyGAP for durian farming in Pahang, Malaysia," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 7(1), pages 1-16.
    5. Joshua Ariga & Edward Mabaya & Michael Waithaka & Maria Wanzala‐Mlobela, 2019. "Can improved agricultural technologies spur a green revolution in Africa? A multicountry analysis of seed and fertilizer delivery systems," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 50(S1), pages 63-74, November.
    6. Andrew D. Foster & Mark R. Rosenzweig, 2010. "Microeconomics of Technology Adoption," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 395-424, September.
    7. Bergevoet, R. H. M. & Ondersteijn, C. J. M. & Saatkamp, H. W. & van Woerkum, C. M. J. & Huirne, R. B. M., 2004. "Entrepreneurial behaviour of dutch dairy farmers under a milk quota system: goals, objectives and attitudes," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 1-21, April.
    8. Thompson, Nathanael M. & Bir, Courtney & Widmar, David A. & Mintert, James R., 2019. "Farmer Perceptions Of Precision Agriculture Technology Benefits," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(1), pages 142-163, February.
    9. Peter J Jordan & Ashlea C Troth, 2020. "Common method bias in applied settings: The dilemma of researching in organizations," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 45(1), pages 3-14, February.
    10. Hafiz Yasir Ali & Rizwan Qaiser Danish & Muhammad Asrar‐ul‐Haq, 2020. "How corporate social responsibility boosts firm financial performance: The mediating role of corporate image and customer satisfaction," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1), pages 166-177, January.
    11. Yan Tang & Fan Zheng & Shiyi Liu & Cuibai Yang, 2020. "Which factors influence farmers’ intentions to adopt giant panda conservation practices?," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 63(14), pages 2518-2533, December.
    12. repec:asi:ajosrd:2017:p:1-16 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Woldegebrial Zeweld & Guido Van Huylenbroeck & Girmay Tesfay & Hossein Azadi & Stijn Speelman, 2018. "Impacts of Socio-Psychological Factors on Actual Adoption of Sustainable Land Management Practices in Dryland and Water Stressed Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-23, August.
    14. Marko Sarstedt & Jun-Hwa Cheah, 2019. "Partial least squares structural equation modeling using SmartPLS: a software review," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(3), pages 196-202, September.
    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. Khushbu Mishra & Abdoul G. Sam & Gracious M. Diiro & Mario J. Miranda, 2020. "Gender and the dynamics of technology adoption: Empirical evidence from a household‐level panel data," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(6), pages 857-870, November.
    2. repec:ags:aaea22:335541 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Abebayehu Girma Geffersa, 2024. "Does cooperative membership enhance inorganic fertilizer use intensity? Panel data evidence from maize farmers in Ethiopia," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 95(2), pages 327-361, June.
    4. Sadick Mohammed & Awudu Abdulai, 2022. "Do Egocentric information networks influence technical efficiency of farmers? Empirical evidence from Ghana," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 58(2), pages 109-128, December.
    5. Lorraine Balaine & Doris Läpple & Emma J Dillon & Cathal Buckley, 2023. "Extension and management pathways for enhanced farm sustainability: evidence from Irish dairy farms," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 50(2), pages 810-850.
    6. Castillo, Gracia Maria Lanza & Engler, Alejandra & Wollni, Meike, 2021. "Planned behavior and social capital: Understanding farmers’ behavior toward pressurized irrigation technologies," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    7. Varshney, Deepak & Mishra, Ashok K. & Joshi, Pramod K. & Roy, Devesh, 2022. "Social networks, heterogeneity, and adoption of technologies: Evidence from India," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    8. Passarelli, Mariacarmela & Bongiorno, Giuseppe & Cucino, Valentina & Cariola, Alfio, 2023. "Adopting new technologies during the crisis: An empirical analysis of agricultural sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PA).
    9. Abebayehu Girma Geffersa, 2023. "Agricultural productivity, land use intensification and rural household welfare: evidence from Ethiopia," Agrekon, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 62(3-4), pages 309-327, October.
    10. Jinhua Xie & Gangqiao Yang & Ge Wang & Shuoyan He, 2024. "How does social capital affect farmers’ environment-friendly technology adoption behavior? A case study in Hubei Province, China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(7), pages 18361-18384, July.
    11. Mekonnen, Daniel Ayalew & Gerber, Nicolas & Matz, Julia Anna, 2018. "Gendered Social Networks, Agricultural Innovations, and Farm Productivity in Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 321-335.
    12. Bryan Cheng-Yu Hsu & Yu-Feng Wu & Hsin-Wei Chen & Man-Lai Cheung, 2020. "How Sport Tourism Event Image Fit Enhances Residents’ Perceptions of Place Image and Their Quality of Life," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-14, October.
    13. Sseruyange, J. & Bulte, E., 2018. "Do Incentives matter for Knowledge Diffusion? Experimental Evidence from Uganda," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 275896, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Nathan D. DeLay & Nathanael M. Thompson & James R. Mintert, 2022. "Precision agriculture technology adoption and technical efficiency," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 195-219, February.
    15. Michael J. Andrews, 2020. "Local Effects of Land Grant Colleges on Agricultural Innovation and Output," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of Research and Innovation in Agriculture, pages 139-175, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Bensch, Gunther & Grimm, Michael, 2024. "Behavioural constraints in energy technology uptake: Evidence from real-purchase offers in rural Rwanda and Senegal," Ruhr Economic Papers 1081, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    17. Chen, Cheng & Senga, Tatsuro & Sun, Chang & Zhang, Hongyong, 2023. "Uncertainty, imperfect information, and expectation formation over the firm’s life cycle," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 60-77.
    18. Nicholas Bloom & Luis Garicano & Raffaella Sadun & John Van Reenen, 2014. "The Distinct Effects of Information Technology and Communication Technology on Firm Organization," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(12), pages 2859-2885, December.
    19. Mabaya, Edward & Kachule, Richard & Waithaka, Michael & Mugoya, Mainza & Kanyenji, George & Tihanyi, Krisztina, 2021. "Malawi Country Report 2020," TASAI: The African Seed Access Index-Reports 317014, TASAI: The African Seed Access Index.
    20. Chen, Shuo & Lan, Xiaohuan, 2020. "Tractor vs. animal: Rural reforms and technology adoption in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    21. Muscillo, Alessio & Pin, Paolo & Razzolini, Tiziano & Serti, Francesco, 2018. "Does "Network Closure" Beef up Import Premium?," IZA Discussion Papers 12036, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    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:sae:sagope:v:13:y:2023:i:4:p:21582440231218688. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.