IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ajarec/v69y2025i4p836-854.html

Harnessing Rice Combine Harvester Adoption for Sustainable Agriculture in the Haor (Wetland) Ecosystem of Bangladesh

Author

Listed:
  • Md. Hayder Khan Sujan
  • Mou Rani Sarker
  • Md Abdur Rouf Sarkar
  • Monira Sultana
  • Md. Sadique Rahman
  • Sharif Ahammad
  • Maruf Khan

Abstract

Technology revolutionises modern agriculture. Bangladesh's agriculture still relies heavily on manual labour for most operations, lacking full mechanisation. Given the pressing need for sustainable production and ongoing food security concerns, the country urgently requires agricultural technologies adoption. This paper aims to address this knowledge gap by examining the economic viability, determinants and impacts of adopting rice combine harvesters (RCH) in the wetland ecosystem. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected from three haor districts of Bangladesh in 2023—encompassing 300 Boro rice farmers, among whom 204 were RCH adopters and 96 were non‐adopters. Results revealed the use of RCH saved USD 75/ha, leading to a 6.47% decrease in total costs and a 5.06% higher gross return for adopters compared to non‐adopters. Additionally, it reduced human labour use in rice farming by 24.61%. The probit model analysis revealed that adoption factors encompassed age, yield, upland cultivation, harvester availability, repair services, perceived labour scarcity mitigation, family labour usage and harvesting losses. Propensity score matching confirmed the significant impacts of RCH adoption, showing reductions in production costs (113.97–176.23 USD/ha) and labour usage (30.04–32.08 man‐days/ha), along with increased net returns (444.05–503.57 USD/ha) for adopters. Major constraints to adoption identified through the constraint facing index were timely unavailability and unsatisfactory repair services, damage of straw, heavy weights and seasonal use only. Overall, RCH is cost‐effective and economically viable while also mitigating climate risks in the study area. The study findings will assist in achieving the target of doubling farmers' income under Sustainable Development Goal 2.3. JEL Classifications: Q12, Q16

Suggested Citation

  • Md. Hayder Khan Sujan & Mou Rani Sarker & Md Abdur Rouf Sarkar & Monira Sultana & Md. Sadique Rahman & Sharif Ahammad & Maruf Khan, 2025. "Harnessing Rice Combine Harvester Adoption for Sustainable Agriculture in the Haor (Wetland) Ecosystem of Bangladesh," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 69(4), pages 836-854, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ajarec:v:69:y:2025:i:4:p:836-854
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-8489.70055
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8489.70055
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-8489.70055?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. Solomon Estifanos Massresha & Tadesse Zenebe Lema & Markew Mengiste Neway & Wudineh Ayalew Degu & Muhammad Shafiullah, 2021. "Perception and determinants of agricultural technology adoption in North Shoa Zone, Amhara Regional State, Ethiopia," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 1956774-195, January.
    2. Hans P. Binswanger, 1980. "Attitudes Toward Risk: Experimental Measurement in Rural India," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 62(3), pages 395-407.
    3. Aryal, Jeetendra Prakash & Rahut, Dil Bahadur & Maharjan, Sofina & Erenstein, Olaf, 2019. "Understanding factors associated with agricultural mechanization: A Bangladesh case," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 1-9.
    4. Brick, Kerri & Visser, Martine, 2015. "Risk preferences, technology adoption and insurance uptake: A framed experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 383-396.
    5. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Feder, Gershon, 1980. "Farm Size, Risk Aversion and the Adoption of New Technology under Uncertainty," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 263-283, July.
    7. Reardon, Thomas & Vosti, Stephen A., 1995. "Links between rural poverty and the environment in developing countries: Asset categories and investment poverty," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(9), pages 1495-1506, September.
    8. Sarker, Md. Abdur Rashid & Alam, Khorshed & Gow, Jeff, 2012. "Exploring the relationship between climate change and rice yield in Bangladesh: An analysis of time series data," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 11-16.
    9. Just, Richard E. & Zilberman, David, 1988. "The effects of agricultural development policies on income distribution and technological change in agriculture," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 193-216, March.
    10. Seeni Mohamed Ayoob & Mohamed Anifa Mohamed Fowsar, 2020. "Invasion of Paddy Combine Harvester (PCH) and Its Socioeconomic Impacts: A Study based on Ampara District, Sri Lanka," Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, Richtmann Publishing Ltd, vol. 9, September.
    11. Jean-Paul Chavas & Robert G. Chambers & Rulon D. Pope, 2010. "Production Economics and Farm Management: a Century of Contributions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 92(2), pages 356-375.
    12. Winarno, Kodrad & Sustiyo, Joko & Aziz, Ammar Abdul & Permani, Risti, 2025. "Unlocking agricultural mechanisation potential in Indonesia: Barriers, drivers, and pathways for sustainable agri-food systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    13. Zhang, Xiaobo & Rashid, Shahidur & Kaikaus, Ahmad & Ahmed, Akhter, 2021. "Escalation of real wages in Bangladesh: Is it the beginning of structural transformation?," IFPRI book chapters, in: Securing food for all in Bangladesh, chapter 10, pages 343-374, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    14. Mariano, Marc Jim & Villano, Renato & Fleming, Euan, 2012. "Factors influencing farmers’ adoption of modern rice technologies and good management practices in the Philippines," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 41-53.
    15. 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.
    16. Jeffrey D Michler & Emilia Tjernström & Simone Verkaart & Kai Mausch, 2019. "Money Matters: The Role of Yields and Profits in Agricultural Technology Adoption," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 101(3), pages 710-731.
    17. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, December.
    18. Supaporn Poungchompu & Supawadee Chantanop, 2016. "Economic Aspects of Rice Combine Harvesting Service for Farmer in Northeast Thailand," Asian Social Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(8), pages 201-201, August.
    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. Mahzab, Moogdho & Bakhtiar, M. Mehrab & Karim, Md. Aminul & Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Roy, Shalini, 2025. "Labor market and gender impacts of agricultural mechanization: Evidence from Bangladesh's combine harvester subsidy program," Project notes 178946, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

    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. Tanko, Mohammed, 2022. "Nexus of risk preference, culture and religion in the adoption of improved rice varieties: Evidence from Northern Ghana," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    2. Mulungu, Kelvin & Manning, Dale T. & Bozzola, Martina, 2025. "Once bitten, twice shy? Direct and indirect effects of weather shocks on fertilizer and improved seeds use," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    3. Galarza, Francisco, 2009. "Choices under Risk in Rural Peru," MPRA Paper 17708, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Sheremenko, Ganna & Magnan, Nicholas, 2015. "Gender-specific Risk Preferences and Fertilizer Use in Kenyan Farming Households," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205766, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Naranjo, Maria A. & Alpízar, Francisco & Martinsson, Peter, 2019. "Alternatives for Risk Elicitation in the Field: Evidence from Coffee Farmers in Costa Rica," EfD Discussion Paper 19-21, Environment for Development, University of Gothenburg.
    6. Visser, Martine & le Roux, Leonard & Mulwa, Chalmers K. & Tibesigwa, Byela & Bezabih, Mintewab, 2024. "Adaptive investment with land tenure and weather risk: Behavioral evidence from Tanzania," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 398-434.
    7. Chaudhary, Ashok Kumar & Pandit, Ram & Burton, Michael, 2022. "Farmyard manure use and adoption of agricultural mechanization among smallholders in the Mahottari District, Nepal," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 25(C).
    8. Roumasset, James, 2024. "Lexicographic Ordering and Loss Aversion among Low-Income Farmers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 483-492.
    9. Alexis H. Villacis & Jeffrey R. Alwang & Victor Barrera, 2021. "Linking risk preferences and risk perceptions of climate change: A prospect theory approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(5), pages 863-877, September.
    10. Negash, Martha, 2015. "Drivers of bioenergy crop adoption: evidence from Ethiopia's castor bean contract farming," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 230226, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Jim Engle-Warnick & Javier Escobal & Sonia Laszlo, 2009. "How do additional alternatives affect individual choice under uncertainty?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 42(1), pages 113-140, February.
    12. Jim Engle-Warnick & Javier Escobal & Sonia Laszlo, 2006. "The Effect Of An Additional Alternative On Measured Risk Preferences In A Laboratory Experiment In Peru," Departmental Working Papers 2006-10, McGill University, Department of Economics.
    13. Géraldine Bocquého & Florence Jacquet & Arnaud Reynaud, 2014. "Expected utility or prospect theory maximisers? Assessing farmers' risk behaviour from field-experiment data," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 41(1), pages 135-172, February.
    14. Ferdinand M. Vieider & Peter Martinsson & Pham Khanh Nam & Nghi Truong, 2019. "Risk preferences and development revisited," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(1), pages 1-21, February.
    15. Ihli, Hanna Julia & Chiputwa, Brian & Musshoff, Oliver, 2016. "Do Changing Probabilities or Payoffs in Lottery-Choice Experiments Affect Risk Preference Outcomes? Evidence from Rural Uganda," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(2), May.
    16. Visser, Martine & Mulwa, Chalmers K. & Gitonga, Zachary & Baard, Max, 2025. "Weather uncertainty and demand for information in technology adoption: Case of Namibia," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    17. Rodgers, Aaron & Morgan, Kimberly L. & Harri, Ardian, 2017. "Technology Adoption and Risk Preferences: The Case of Machine Harvesting by Southeastern Blueberry Producers," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 48(2), July.
    18. Ward, Patrick S. & Singh, Vartika, "undated". "Risk and Ambiguity Preferences and the Adoption of New Agricultural Technologies: Evidence from Field Experiments in Rural India," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150794, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Doan Nainggolan & Faizal Rahmanto Moeis & Mette Termansen, 2023. "Does risk preference influence farm level adaptation strategies? – Survey evidence from Denmark," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 28(7), pages 1-23, October.
    20. Liu, Elaine M. & Huang, JiKun, 2013. "Risk preferences and pesticide use by cotton farmers in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 202-215.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services

    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:4:p:836-854. 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.