IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aare11/100570.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

ADOPT: a tool for predicting adoption of agricultural innovations

Author

Listed:
  • Kuehne, Geoff
  • Llewellyn, Rick S.
  • Pannell, David J.
  • Wilkinson, Roger
  • Dolling, P.
  • Ewing, Michael A.

Abstract

A wealth of evidence exists about the adoption of new practices and technologies in agriculture but there does not appear to have been any attempt to simplify this vast body of research knowledge into a model to make quantitative predictions across a broad range of contexts. This is despite increasing demand from research, development and extension agencies for estimates of likely extent of adoption and the likely timeframes for project impacts. This paper reports on the reasoning underpinning the development of ADOPT (Adoption and Diffusion Outcome Prediction Tool). The tool has been designed to: 1) predict an innovation‘s likely peak extent of adoption and likely time for reaching that peak; 2) encourage users to consider the influence of a structured set of factors affecting adoption; and 3) engage R, D & E managers and practitioners by making adoptability knowledge and considerations more transparent and understandable. The tool is structured around four aspects of adoption: 1) characteristics of the innovation, 2) characteristics of the population, 3) actual advantage of using the innovation, and 4) learning of the actual advantage of the innovation. The conceptual framework used for developing ADOPT is described.

Suggested Citation

  • Kuehne, Geoff & Llewellyn, Rick S. & Pannell, David J. & Wilkinson, Roger & Dolling, P. & Ewing, Michael A., 2011. "ADOPT: a tool for predicting adoption of agricultural innovations," 2011 Conference (55th), February 8-11, 2011, Melbourne, Australia 100570, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aare11:100570
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.100570
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/100570/files/Keuhne.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.100570?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. Amir K. Abadi Ghadim & David J. Pannell & Michael P. Burton, 2005. "Risk, uncertainty, and learning in adoption of a crop innovation," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 33(1), pages 1-9, July.
    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. Barnes, Belinda & Southwell, Darren & Bruce, Sarah & Woodhams, Felicity, 2014. "Additionality, common practice and incentive schemes for the uptake of innovations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 43-61.
    2. Rose, David C. & Sutherland, William J. & Parker, Caroline & Lobley, Matt & Winter, Michael & Morris, Carol & Twining, Susan & Ffoulkes, Charles & Amano, Tatsuya & Dicks, Lynn V., 2016. "Decision support tools for agriculture: Towards effective design and delivery," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 165-174.
    3. Schulz, Dario & Börner, Jan, 2021. "Context and Technology Traits Explain Heterogeneity Across Adoption Studies of Agricultural Innovations: A Global Meta-Analysis," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315003, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Kuehne, Geoff & Nicholson, Cam & Robertson, Michael & Llewellyn, Rick & McDonald, Cam, 2012. "Engaging project proponents in R&D evaluation using bio-economic and socio-economic tools," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 94-103.
    5. Dario Schulz & Jan Börner, 2023. "Innovation context and technology traits explain heterogeneity across studies of agricultural technology adoption: A meta‐analysis," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(2), pages 570-590, June.
    6. Lutengano Mwinuka & Khamaldin Daud Mutabazi & Frieder Graef & Stefan Sieber & Jeremia Makindara & Anthony Kimaro & Götz Uckert, 2017. "Simulated willingness of farmers to adopt fertilizer micro-dosing and rainwater harvesting technologies in semi-arid and sub-humid farming systems in Tanzania," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(6), pages 1237-1253, December.
    7. Martha Swamila & Damas Philip & Adam Meshack Akyoo & Stefan Sieber & Mateete Bekunda & Anthony Anderson Kimaro, 2020. "Gliricidia Agroforestry Technology Adoption Potential in Selected Dryland Areas of Dodoma Region, Tanzania," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    8. Moglia, Magnus & Alexander, Kim S. & Thephavanh, Manithaythip & Thammavong, Phomma & Sodahak, Viengkham & Khounsy, Bountom & Vorlasan, Sysavanh & Larson, Silva & Connell, John & Case, Peter, 2018. "A Bayesian network model to explore practice change by smallholder rice farmers in Lao PDR," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 84-94.

    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. Haberli, Caetano, Jr. & Oliveira, Tiago & Yanaze, Mitsuru, 2017. "Understanding the determinants of adoption of enterprise resource planning (ERP) technology within the agri- food context: the case of the Midwest of Brazil," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 20(5).
    2. Greiner, Romy & Miller, Owen & Patterson, Louisa, 2008. "The role of grazier motivations and risk attitudes in the adoption of grazing best management practices," 2008 Conference (52nd), February 5-8, 2008, Canberra, Australia 6002, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    3. Senthold Asseng & David Pannell, 2013. "Adapting dryland agriculture to climate change: Farming implications and research and development needs in Western Australia," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 118(2), pages 167-181, May.
    4. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    5. Beatrice Dingha & Leah Sandler & Arnab Bhowmik & Clement Akotsen-Mensah & Louis Jackai & Kevin Gibson & Ronald Turco, 2019. "Industrial Hemp Knowledge and Interest among North Carolina Organic Farmers in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, May.
    6. Greiner, Romy & Patterson, Louisa & Miller, Owen, 2009. "Motivations, risk perceptions and adoption of conservation practices by farmers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 99(2-3), pages 86-104, February.
    7. Beltran, Jesusa C. & Pannell, David J. & Doole, Graeme J. & White, Benedict, 2011. "Factors that affect the use of herbicides in Philippine rice farming systems," Working Papers 108769, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    8. Fang, Lan & Quan, Yurong & Mao, Hui & Chen, Shaojian, 2022. "The Information Communication Technology and Off-farm Employment of Rural Laborers: An Analysis Based on the Micro Data of China Family Panel Studies," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322088, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Kotsiri, Sofia & Rejesus, Roderick M. & Marra, Michele C. & Velandia, Margarita M., 2011. "Farmers' Perceptions about Spatial Yield Variability and Precision Farming Technology Adoption: An Empirical Study of Cotton Production in 12 Southeastern States," 2011 Annual Meeting, February 5-8, 2011, Corpus Christi, Texas 98689, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    10. Julián Aramburu & Mario González & Lina Salazar & Paul Winters, 2014. "When a Short-term Analysis is not a Short-term Approach: Impacts of Agricultural Technology Adoption in Bolivia," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 86815, Inter-American Development Bank.
    11. Fariña, S.R. & Alford, A. & Garcia, S.C. & Fulkerson, W.J., 2013. "An integrated assessment of business risk for pasture-based dairy farm systems intensification," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 10-20.
    12. Kharel, S. & d'Abbadie, C. & Abadi, A. & Kingwell, R., 2022. "Reducing farming system emissions via spatial application of payoff functions," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    13. Tengda Wei & Ye Liu & Ke Wang & Qiao Zhang, 2021. "Can Crop Insurance Encourage Farmers to Adopt Environmentally Friendly Agricultural Technology—The Evidence from Shandong Province in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-15, December.
    14. Kondylis, Florence & Mueller, Valerie, 2012. "Seeing is Believing? Evidence from a Demonstration Plot Experiment in Mozambique," MSSP working papers 1, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    15. Anne V Bossange & Kandace M Knudson & Anil Shrestha & Ronald Harben & Jeffrey P Mitchell, 2016. "The Potential for Conservation Tillage Adoption in the San Joaquin Valley, California: A Qualitative Study of Farmer Perspectives and Opportunities for Extension," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(12), pages 1-21, December.
    16. Muuz Hadush, 2021. "Does it pay to switch from free grazing to stall feeding? Impact of stall feeding practice on household welfare in Tigrai Ethiopia," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-29, December.
    17. Liu, Guohui & Zhang, Weiguo & Chen, Yan, 2024. "Being a householder speaking a foreign language: Foreign language proficiency and the internet technology adoption of the household," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    18. Kaywana Raeburn & Sonia Laszlo & Jim Warnick, 2023. "Resolving ambiguity as a public good: experimental evidence from Guyana," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 95(1), pages 79-107, July.
    19. François J Dessart & Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & René van Bavel, 2019. "Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: a policy-oriented review," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 417-471.
    20. Tzemi, Domna & Breen, James Patrick, 2019. "Socio-economic factors affecting the adoption of GHG emission abatement practices; the case of spring slurry spreading," International Journal of Agricultural Management, Institute of Agricultural Management, vol. 8(01), August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ags:aare11:100570. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaresea.html .

    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.