Purpose: Adoption of new technology in the agricultural sector is low. This is similar to the condition in many other sectors as well. Many studies have been conducted to find out reasons for this issue. While some studies have identified similar factors affecting the decision to adopt a technology, some studies revealed factors which were uniqe to their study. Therefore, identification and compilation of these factors will support future studies and researchers.Research Method: An analysis of literature on technology adoption was conducted. Literature originated from numerous sources spanning almost 50 years were taken for the study. The factors identified by different studies were then compiled for this review paper.Findings: The factors identified can be mainly categorized into three; (1) factors related to the user, such as farm size, income, prior experience, gender, education level, and age; (2) factors related to the technology, such as affordability, availability, compatibility, complexity, trialability and observability; (3) institutional factors, such as access to extension services, inputs, markets and credit facilities. The review findings reveal that adoption is a collective and interactive effect of some or all factors. Thus, identification of priority factors and a holistic approach need to be considered to ensure greater adoption.Originality/ Value: This compilation will support practitioners in technology dissemination for proper identification of factors affecting technology adoption, and future research on technology adoption and  diffusion

Agriculture is crucial in catering to the increasing demand for food and employment. Thus, adoption of novel technologies is important. Many scientists have developed different theories and models explaining the process of behavioral change relevant to adoption. They are either completely different, similar, or improvements of previously developed models. Therefore, compilation and summarization of these theories and models will support future studies and researchers. Thus, an analysis of literature on technology adoption was conducted. The review was prepared based on literature from various sources spanning around 50 years. The theories and models identified by different studies were compiled and analyzed in this review paper. Many theories and models in agricultural technology adoption such as transtheoretical model, theory of reasoned action, theory of interpersonal behavior, model for innovation-decision process, different versions of technology acceptance model, theory of planned behavior, theory of diffusion of innovation, task-technology fit, technology readiness, unified theory of acceptance and use of technology, expectancy livelihood model, social cognitive theory, and perceived characteristics of innovating theory were compiled. Each theory and model has its own uniqueness, which had explained different aspects of technology adoption process and factors determining the behavioral change. These theories and models included affecting factors such as technological, personal, social, and economical factors. In conclusion, it can be stated that, rather than having a single theory or a model, an integrated and amalgamated form will be more explanatory for technology adoption.

No abstract

to surgery, and preparation of the left flank region for surgery. Immediately prior to the surgery parenteral analgesic injection was administered and left para-vertebral nerve block was performed. The rumen wall was exteriorized through a laparotomy incision and a metal clamp was applied. Simple interrupted sutures were placed using nylon through the skin, rumen wall and the clamp. After 7-9 days the exteriorized rumen wall sloughed off leaving a fistula. A tight rubber cannula was inserted through the fistula and the cannula was closed with a ring and stopper. The antibiotic and analgesic were repeated post-operatively for three days. The cannulated animals were used for a one-year research project and the animals were clinically normal throughout the project. Evaluation of the digestible components of the diets of grazing animals has been emphasized by various nutritionists, physiologists and pathologists (Phillipson and Innes, 1939). As the quality and the quantity of the ruminal fluid obtained via a stomach tube are inadequate, an alternative method for collecting the ruminal fluid was preferred (Harmon and Richards, 1997). Rumen cannulation is a minimally invasive technique which allows access to the rumen for in vitro and in vivo studies (Sedeek and Suliman, 2007). The first successful ruminal fistulation was performed by Colin in 1886 in an ox, but the fistula was not closed by mechanical means (Phillipson and Innes, 1939). The same procedure was followed by Schalk and Amadon in 1928 in cattle and an attempt was made to close the fistula using a block of wood (Phillipson and Innes, 1939). Over the years modifications and new evolutions of these methods have taken place (Phillipson and Innes, 1939). Open fistulae have been used in ruminants for digestibility trials for a long period of time, but it has shown some disadvantages, including unsightly appearance and unsatisfactory carrying out of physiological work after fistulation (Grovum, 1988). Open ruminal fistulae also allow loss of water, electrolytes, nitrogen and organic matter, which is another main drawback, leading to loss of weight and body condition of the animals (Grovum, 1988;