IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ajarec/v69y2025i3p584-597.html

Understanding Farmers' Policy Preferences for Solar‐Powered Irrigation Systems in Karnataka, India: A Choice Experiment Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Aditya Korekallu Srinivasa
  • Dagmar Mithöfer

Abstract

Solar‐Powered Irrigation Systems (SPIS) are an important component of India's effort towards sustainable energy transition and are promoted with financial support under the PM‐KUSUM program. In spite of the promise and the policy push, adoption of SPIS has been low. In this paper, we use a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) to evaluate the policy attributes in the promotion of SPIS. We selected five attributes of SPIS: cost of the pump; terms of the loan; grid connection; service provision (repair services); and multiple uses of energy (generated from solar panels) with different levels for each attribute. D‐efficient, non‐zero prior design was used to design the choice combinations used in the study. The data was collected from 500 farmers randomly chosen from 31 villages across Mysore district, Karnataka, India, and analysed using the random parameter logit model. For a nuanced interpretation and contextualisation of the results, we conducted follow‐up qualitative interviews. The results highlight that farmer preferences, indicated by the highest part worth, are for a loan with a longer repayment period (WTP of US$ 1905), followed by guaranteed service provision for 10 years (WTP of US$ 1498). Given that SPIS is a new technology with high initial investment, easing liquidity constraints and assuring farmers of guaranteed repair services are strong incentives to adopt it. These findings can be incorporated into existing policies so that they align well with farmers' preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Aditya Korekallu Srinivasa & Dagmar Mithöfer, 2025. "Understanding Farmers' Policy Preferences for Solar‐Powered Irrigation Systems in Karnataka, India: A Choice Experiment Approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 69(3), pages 584-597, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ajarec:v:69:y:2025:i:3:p:584-597
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-8489.70024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8489.70024
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-8489.70024?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. Arnaud Van Der Cam & Ignace Adant & Goedele Van den Broeck, 2023. "The social acceptability of a personal carbon allowance: a discrete choice experiment in Belgium," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(7), pages 859-871, August.
    2. Lefore, N. & Closas, Alvar & Schmitter, Petra, 2021. "Solar for all: a framework to deliver inclusive and environmentally sustainable solar irrigation for smallholder agriculture," Papers published in Journals (Open Access), International Water Management Institute, pages 154:112313..
    3. Christian A. Vossler & Maurice Doyon & Daniel Rondeau, 2012. "Truth in Consequentiality: Theory and Field Evidence on Discrete Choice Experiments," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 145-171, November.
    4. Yanling Peng & Yuansheng Jiang & Yu Hong, 2022. "Heterogeneous Preferences for Selecting Attributes of Farmland Management Right Mortgages in Western China: A Demand Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-14, July.
    5. Peng, Yanling & Ren, Yanjun & Zhong, Yu & Jiang, Yuansheng, 2022. "Farmers’ Heterogeneous Preferences for Selecting Attributes of Farmland Management Right Mortgages: Evidence from Western China," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322408, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Nitin Bassi, 2018. "Solarizing groundwater irrigation in India: a growing debate," International Journal of Water Resources Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1), pages 132-145, January.
    7. Esther Bekker-Grob & Bas Donkers & Marcel Jonker & Elly Stolk, 2015. "Sample Size Requirements for Discrete-Choice Experiments in Healthcare: a Practical Guide," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 8(5), pages 373-384, October.
    8. Lemos, Scott & Halstead, John M. & Huang, Ju-Chin, 2022. "The effects of information about price anchoring: Evidence from a choice experiment," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(2), pages 240-265, August.
    9. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "Fitting mixed logit models by using maximum simulated likelihood," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 7(3), pages 388-401, September.
    10. Anjani Kumar & Vinay K. Sonkar & K. S. Aditya, 2023. "Assessing the Impact of Lending Through Kisan Credit Cards in Rural India: Evidence from Eastern India," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 35(3), pages 602-622, June.
    11. Yashodha, Yashodha & Sanjay, Aditi & Mukherji, Aditi, 2021. "Solar irrigation in India: a situation analysis report," IWMI Books, Reports H050619, International Water Management Institute.
    12. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    13. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "A comparison of approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(8), pages 827-840, August.
    14. Emile Sègbégnon Sonehekpon & Rose Fiamohe, 2022. "Identifying farmers' preferences for types of credit and its market structure in rural Benin using the conjoint analysis approach," Agricultural Finance Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 83(2), pages 299-319, December.
    15. Tocock, Mark & Tinch, Dugald & MacDonald, Darla Hatton & Rose, John M., 2023. "Managing the energy trilemma of reliability, affordability and renewables: Assessing consumer demands with discrete choice experiments," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 67(02), January.
    16. Mark Tocock & Dugald Tinch & Darla Hatton MacDonald & John M. Rose, 2023. "Managing the energy trilemma of reliability, affordability and renewables: Assessing consumer demands with discrete choice experiments," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 67(2), pages 155-175, April.
    17. Daly, Andrew & Dekker, Thijs & Hess, Stephane, 2016. "Dummy coding vs effects coding for categorical variables: Clarifications and extensions," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 36-41.
    18. Kafle, K. & Uprety, Labisha & Shrestha, Gitta & Pandey, V. & Mukherji, Aditi, 2022. "Are climate finance subsidies equitably distributed among farmers? Assessing socio-demographics of solar irrigation in Nepal," Papers published in Journals (Open Access), International Water Management Institute, pages 1-91:102756.
    19. Shah, Tushaar & Rajan, Abhishek & Rai, Gyan Prakash & Verma, Shilp & Durga, Neha, "undated". "Solar pumps and South Asia's energy-groundwater nexus: exploring implications and reimagining its future," Papers published in Journals (Open Access) H048971, International Water Management Institute.
    20. Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Martinsson, 2003. "Design techniques for stated preference methods in health economics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(4), pages 281-294, April.
    21. Ruzzante, Sacha & Labarta, Ricardo & Bilton, Amy, 2021. "Adoption of agricultural technology in the developing world: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    22. Mitra, Archisman & Alam, Mohammad Faiz & Yashodha, Yashodha, 2021. "Solar irrigation in Bangladesh: a situation analysis report," IWMI Books, Reports H050618, International Water Management Institute.
    23. Lefore, Nicole & Closas, Alvar & Schmitter, Petra, 2021. "Solar for all: A framework to deliver inclusive and environmentally sustainable solar irrigation for smallholder agriculture," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    24. Niskanen, Olli & Tienhaara, Annika & Haltia, Emmi & Pouta, Eija, 2021. "Farmers’ heterogeneous preferences towards results-based environmental policies," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    25. Madhu Khanna & Ruiqing Miao, 2022. "Inducing the adoption of emerging technologies for sustainable intensification of food and renewable energy production: insights from applied economics," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(1), pages 1-23, January.
    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. repec:ags:cfcp15:344382 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Aditya, Korekallu Srinivasa & Dagmar, Mithöfer, 2024. "Understanding Farmers' Policy Preferences for Solar Powered Irrigation Systems in Karnataka, India: A Choice Experiment Approach," IAAE 2024 Conference, August 2-7, 2024, New Delhi, India 344382, International Association of Agricultural Economists (IAAE).
    3. Jan Vanstockem & Liesbet Vranken & Brent Bleys & Ben Somers & Martin Hermy, 2018. "Do Looks Matter? A Case Study on Extensive Green Roofs Using Discrete Choice Experiments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-15, January.
    4. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    5. Huang, Yongming & Abbas, Qaiser & Sharif, Muhammad, 2025. "Addressing agricultural energy poverty to enhance farmers' profitability and productivity: Policy interventions for global food security challenges," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    6. Panchalingam, Thadchaigeni & Howard, Gregory & Allen Klaiber, H. & Roe, Brian E., 2023. "Food choice behavior of adolescents under parent-child interaction in the context of US school lunch programs," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    7. Jackson Bunyangha & Agnes. W. N. Muthumbi & Anthony Egeru & Robert Asiimwe & Dunston W. Ulwodi & Nathan. N. Gichuki & Mwanjalolo. J. G. Majaliwa, 2022. "Preferred Attributes for Sustainable Wetland Management in Mpologoma Catchment, Uganda: A Discrete Choice Experiment," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-18, June.
    8. Cordula Hinkes & Inken Christoph-Schulz, 2020. "No Palm Oil or Certified Sustainable Palm Oil? Heterogeneous Consumer Preferences and the Role of Information," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-26, September.
    9. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    10. Xinyi Hong & Chenguang Li & Liming Wang & Mansi Wang & Simona Grasso & Frank J. Monahan, 2023. "Consumer Preferences for Processed Meat Reformulation Strategies: A Prototype for Sensory Evaluation Combined with a Choice-Based Conjoint Experiment," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-15, January.
    11. Joachim Marti & John Buckell & Johanna Catherine Maclean & Jody Sindelar, 2019. "To “Vape” Or Smoke? Experimental Evidence On Adult Smokers," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 57(1), pages 705-725, January.
    12. Hui Luo & Zhaomin Hu & Xiuping Hao & Nawab Khan & Xiaojie Liu, 2022. "Assessment and Comparison of Agricultural Technology Development under Different Farmland Management Modes: A Case Study of Grain Production, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-24, October.
    13. Tensay Meles & L. (Lisa B.) Ryan & Sanghamitra Mukherjee, 2019. "Preferences for Renewable Home Heating: A Choice Experiment Study of Heat Pump System in Ireland," Open Access publications 10197/11467, School of Economics, University College Dublin.
    14. Damian Clarke & Sonia Oreffice & Climent Quintana‐Domeque, 2021. "On the Value of Birth Weight," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 83(5), pages 1130-1159, October.
    15. Terang, Bharat & Baruah, Debendra Chandra, 2023. "Techno-economic and environmental assessment of solar photovoltaic, diesel, and electric water pumps for irrigation in Assam, India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    16. Katsuya Tanaka & Nicholas Hanley & Laure Kuhfuss, 2022. "Farmers’ preferences toward an outcome‐based payment for ecosystem service scheme in Japan," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(3), pages 720-738, September.
    17. Carole Ropars-Collet & Mélody Leplat & Philippe Le Goffe & Marie Lesueur, 2015. "La pêche professionnelle est-elle un facteur d’attractivité récréative sur le littoral ?," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 66(4), pages 729-754.
    18. Svenningsen, Lea S. & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark, 2021. "The Effect of Gain-loss Framing on Climate Policy Preferences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    19. Mulatu, Dawit W. & van der Veen, Anne & van Oel, Pieter R., 2014. "Farm households' preferences for collective and individual actions to improve water-related ecosystem services: The Lake Naivasha basin, Kenya," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 22-33.
    20. Ben Ma & Yali Wen, 2019. "Community Participation and Preferences Regarding Conservation and Development Policies in China’s Giant Panda Nature Reserves," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-17, September.
    21. Kolstoe, Sonja & Naald, Brian Vander & Cohan, Alison, 2022. "A tale of two samples: Understanding WTP differences in the age of social media," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).

    More about this item

    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:bla:ajarec:v:69:y:2025:i:3:p:584-597. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (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.