Assessing the relative impacts of the factors affecting MIS adoption process

Abstract

Micro-irrigation systems (MIS) have been at the forefront of policy-making and social research in exploring determinants that could potentially impact the adoption of MIS technologies in the field to fulfil the basic aim of enhanced agricultural productivity and enriched nutritional quality of the produce with optimal adoption of natural resources. Therefore, this study was undertaken to determine why MIS technologies have not been adopted to the extent anticipated, so that suitable policy schemes, promotional schemes and socio-technical frameworks could be formulated for their enhanced adoption to enhance the socio-economic status of the farming community in the Dahod district of Gujarat State, India. A study of 350 non-MIS (NMIS) and 350 MIS farmers was conducted to identify factors affecting the MIS adoption process. The logit model was fitted using XLSTAT software (XLSTAT 2014.1.04) to the explanatory variables (determinants) of the MIS adoption process. Type III analysis and ANOVA were conducted to test the relative significance of the explanatory variables adopted. It was found that total income had the highest weight (or beta coefficient, i.e. 0.625) followed by total land area (0.546), motor horsepower (0.499), dependency ratio (0.397), and education (0.295) and age of household head (0.207). Furthermore, to assess the efficacy of the logit model, the ROC curve was also developed and the AUC was found to be 0.881, and therefore the model was considered to discriminate well in identifying the factors affecting the MIS adoption process. The study found that higher total income and education level increase the likelihood of MIS adoption and agricultural water management, and therefore special training programmes on installation, as well as repair and maintenance, of MIS systems and agricultural water management can be planned at the institutional/organisation level. The total cultivable area is also one of the important determinants in MIS adoption, and therefore the adoption of MIS schemes should not be restricted to large farmers only, but rather should be extended to both small and marginal farmers.

Review And Synthesis of Sustainable Land Management on Small Family Farms in Developing Countries

“…The economic impact of adopting SLM practices is measured using indicators such as income (Abdulai & Huffman, 2014;Kabir & Rainis, 2015;Kassie et al, 2018;Marques et al, 2016;Wyckhuys & O'Neil, 2010), economic profitability (Abdulai & Huffman, 2014;Kondylis et al, 2016;Reidsma et al, 2012), yield (Marques et al, 2016;Tougiani et al, 2009) or productivity (Pal et al, 2017). Regarding the social aspect, the impact has been determined through livelihoods assessments (Belay & Bewket, 2013;Pender, 2004;Tougiani et al, 2009), food security (Lal, 2016;Marques et al, 2016;Nkomoki et al, 2018;Sileshi et al, 2019;P. K. Singh et al, 2015) and increasingly nutritional security (Kim et al, 2019;Marques et al, 2016;Shew et al, 2019;P.…”

“…Regarding the social aspect, the impact has been determined through livelihoods assessments (Belay & Bewket, 2013;Pender, 2004;Tougiani et al, 2009), food security (Lal, 2016;Marques et al, 2016;Nkomoki et al, 2018;Sileshi et al, 2019;P. K. Singh et al, 2015) and increasingly nutritional security (Kim et al, 2019;Marques et al, 2016;Shew et al, 2019;P. K. Singh et al, 2015;R.…”

Groundwater Regulation Bills in Haryana – A Call forGroundwater Conservation and Management forSustainable Irrigation Supply Services – Opportunitiesand Challenges

“…Under the circumstances, the authorities need to promote the 'success stories' of micro-irrigation, using social/ print/electronic media, which includes cost savings on water, energy, fertilizer, labor, increased crop diversification opportunities, higher income etc. to name a few (Singh et al, 2015;Kumar and Palanisami, 2010;Narayanmoorthy, 2010).…”

Combining Econometric, Cost–Benefit, and Financial Methodologies in a Framework to Increase Diffusion and to Predict the Feasibility and Sustainability of Irrigation Schemes: A Case Study in Kurdistan, Iraq

“…The irrigation project is more likely to be adopted (joined) by: poorer farmers (unlike in [12,16,17,19]), who rely more on agriculture than those who rely on livestock activities (like in [15,25]); farmers who have been informed or trained by governmental agencies (like in [14,18,24]), and who feel that they can obtain fair prices for outputs (like in [13]); literate farmers (like in [12,17]); farmers with positive expectations about the future; farmers who base their decisions on a maximization approach rather than on a habit approach. On the other hand, the irrigation project is less likely to be joined by farmers who feel that they obtain fair prices for inputs (like in [13,14]), who have direct access to product markets, and who have satisfactory access to the private credit (loans) market (similar to [12]).…”

“…Technological interventions ( [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]), in general, and irrigation projects ( [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19]), in particular, often result in a low level of awareness among the target group and in a low level of successful diffusion of the project (i.e., dissemination of knowledge leading to participation) because farmers are rarely consulted a priori about their specific circumstances, priority problems, and expectations. a duration model in the U.S. to estimate the long-term trends in the adoption and diffusion of technologies designed to reduce environmental externalities from agriculture.…”