IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jfpoli/v135y2025ics0306919225001393.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social networks and the demand for credence agricultural technologies

Author

Listed:
  • Arias-Granada, Yurani
  • Bauchet, Jonathan
  • Ricker-Gilbert, Jacob
  • Gulati, Kajal

Abstract

Little is known about the adoption of agricultural technologies that enhance unobservable attributes, such as food quality and food safety. Social networks can potentially be a key tool to disseminate information about such technologies, because informal discussions among network members could counter the lack of observability and awareness of the benefits of such technologies. To inform this issue, we conducted a field experiment that included experimental auctions and a lottery to estimate how social networks influence the demand for Aflasafe, a new food safety-enhancing technology, among smallholder farmers in Senegal. Aflasafe is an agricultural input that controls aflatoxins, which are unobservable carcinogenic compounds that contaminate grains and compromise their safety for human consumption. Despite the lack of any food-safety regulations or price incentives in the study area, we found that demand for Aflasafe was high at baseline after farmers were trained on its benefits. The results show that social networks increased demand for Aflasafe among participants who had a lower willingness to pay in the first period. These individuals likely needed the most convincing to adopt the technology. Further, we find suggestive evidence that having an Aflasafe adopter (“lottery winner”) who used the treated groundnut for own consumption and use as future seed in an individual’s network increases their demand. Having an adopter who used the treated groundnut for other purposes in an individual’s network is not associated with any change in an individual’s demand. These findings suggest that smallholder farmers – who are often both producers and consumers of their food – engage in discussions about technologies with unobservable benefits within their agricultural social networks. Thus, it seems possible, at least in the short term, that these networks can be harnessed to increase technology adoption by leveraging farmers’ concern about their health and food safety.

Suggested Citation

  • Arias-Granada, Yurani & Bauchet, Jonathan & Ricker-Gilbert, Jacob & Gulati, Kajal, 2025. "Social networks and the demand for credence agricultural technologies," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:135:y:2025:i:c:s0306919225001393
    DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2025.102934
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919225001393
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.foodpol.2025.102934?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • I15 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health and Economic Development
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • I31 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General Welfare, Well-Being
    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy

    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:eee:jfpoli:v:135:y:2025:i:c:s0306919225001393. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/foodpol .

    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.