IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v13y2023i10p1859-d1245848.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research on the Improvement of Digital Literacy for Moderately Scaled Tea Farmers under the Background of Digital Intelligence Empowerment

Author

Listed:
  • Dongkai Lin

    (Anxi College of Tea Science, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Quanzhou 362406, China)

  • Bingsheng Fu

    (Anxi College of Tea Science, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Quanzhou 362406, China)

  • Kexiao Xie

    (Anxi College of Tea Science, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Quanzhou 362406, China)

  • Wanhe Zheng

    (Anxi College of Tea Science, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Quanzhou 362406, China)

  • Linjie Chang

    (Anxi College of Tea Science, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Quanzhou 362406, China)

  • Jinke Lin

    (Anxi College of Tea Science, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Quanzhou 362406, China
    College of Horticulture, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Fuzhou 350002, China)

Abstract

In the context of digital intelligence empowerment, the digital literacy level of tea farmers has a significant impact on the intelligent development and transformation of the tea industry. This study extends the original model of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) by introducing the personal innovativeness theory and the self-efficacy theory and constructs a new model to explore the influencing factors of moderately scaled tea farmers’ digital literacy improvement behavior. There are a total of 22 research hypotheses. Using structural equation modeling and collecting questionnaire data for analysis, the following research results were obtained. (1) The performance expectancy, social influence, effort expectancy, personal innovativeness, and self-efficacy all significantly positively affected the willingness of tea farmers to improve their digital literacy, according to the path coefficient in descending order: social influence (0.226) > self-efficacy (0.224) > effort expectancy (0.178) > performance expectancy (0.157) > personal innovativeness (0.155). (2) Facilitating conditions and the willingness to improve digital literacy had a significant positive impact on tea farmers’ digital literacy improvement behavior, according to the size of the path coefficient: the willingness to improve (0.271) > facilitating conditions (0.106). (3) The willingness of tea farmers to improve their digital literacy played a complete mediating role between personal innovativeness and self-efficacy on their digital literacy improvement behavior, and was partially mediated between the performance expectancy, social influence, and effort expectancy on their digital literacy improvement behavior. According to the proportion of indirect effects, the order was effort expectancy (27%), performance expectancy (47%), and social influence (49%). (4) The gender and age of tea farmers had a significant positive moderating effect on the impact of performance expectancy on the willingness to improve digital literacy. Age and experience had a significant positive moderating effect on the impact of effort expectancy on the willingness to improve digital literacy. The age of tea farmers had a significant positive moderating effect on the improvement of digital literacy behavior through the facilitating conditions. This study extended the applicability of the UTAUT theoretical model and proposed six strategies to improve the digital literacy of tea farmers, which helps policymakers and industry leaders provide practical guidance for tea farmers to improve their digital literacy and provide reference for research related to farmers’ digital literacy.

Suggested Citation

  • Dongkai Lin & Bingsheng Fu & Kexiao Xie & Wanhe Zheng & Linjie Chang & Jinke Lin, 2023. "Research on the Improvement of Digital Literacy for Moderately Scaled Tea Farmers under the Background of Digital Intelligence Empowerment," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-26, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:10:p:1859-:d:1245848
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/10/1859/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/10/1859/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bandura, Albert & Cervone, Daniel, 1986. "Differential engagement of self-reactive influences in cognitive motivation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 92-113, August.
    2. Nick Bontis & Mary M. Crossan & John Hulland, 2002. "Managing An Organizational Learning System By Aligning Stocks and Flows," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(4), pages 437-469, June.
    3. Kexiao Xie & Yuerui Zhu & Yongqiang Ma & Youcheng Chen & Shuiji Chen & Zhidan Chen, 2022. "Willingness of Tea Farmers to Adopt Ecological Agriculture Techniques Based on the UTAUT Extended Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-14, November.
    4. Liu, Yu & Yan, Binjian & Wang, Yue & Zhou, Yingheng, 2019. "Will land transfer always increase technical efficiency in China?—A land cost perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 414-421.
    5. Srikanta Bhaskara & Kamaljit S. Bawa, 2021. "Societal Digital Platforms for Sustainability: Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-8, April.
    6. Bruce F. Hall & E. Phillip LeVeen, 1978. "Farm Size and Economic Efficiency: The Case of California," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 60(4), pages 589-600.
    7. Eliana Lima & Thomas Hopkins & Emma Gurney & Orla Shortall & Fiona Lovatt & Peers Davies & George Williamson & Jasmeet Kaler, 2018. "Drivers for precision livestock technology adoption: A study of factors associated with adoption of electronic identification technology by commercial sheep farmers in England and Wales," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, January.
    8. Sarah Hackfort, 2021. "Patterns of Inequalities in Digital Agriculture: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-18, November.
    9. Friedrich Rübcke von Veltheim & Heinke Heise, 2021. "German Farmers’ Attitudes on Adopting Autonomous Field Robots: An Empirical Survey," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-19, March.
    10. He, Ke & Zhang, Junbiao & Zeng, Yangmei, 2018. "Rural households' willingness to accept compensation for energy utilization of crop straw in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 165(PA), pages 562-571.
    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. Kexiao Xie & Yuerui Zhu & Yongqiang Ma & Youcheng Chen & Shuiji Chen & Zhidan Chen, 2022. "Willingness of Tea Farmers to Adopt Ecological Agriculture Techniques Based on the UTAUT Extended Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-14, November.
    2. Little, Cedric & Felzensztein, Christian & Gimmon, Eli & Muñoz, Pablo, 2015. "The business management of the Chilean salmon farming industry," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 108-117.
    3. Sylvie Héroux & Mélanie Roussy, 2020. "Three cases of compliance with governance regulation: an organizational learning perspective," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 24(2), pages 449-479, June.
    4. Petra Štamfestová, 2013. "Performance management of industrial companies in the Czech Republic," Ekonomika a Management, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2013(2), pages 5-17.
    5. Jianglin Lu & Keqiang Wang & Hongmei Liu, 2022. "Residents’ Selection Behavior of Compensation Schemes for Construction Land Reduction: Empirical Evidence from Questionnaires in Shanghai, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-29, December.
    6. Sirén, Charlotta & Kohtamäki, Marko, 2016. "Stretching strategic learning to the limit: The interaction between strategic planning and learning," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 653-663.
    7. Tew, Bernard V. & Spurlock, Stan & Musser, Wesley N. & Miller, Bill R., 1980. "Some Evidence on Pecuniary Economies of Size for Farm Firms," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 151-154, July.
    8. Coppola, A. & Ianuario, S. & Chinnici, G. & Di Vita, G. & Pappalardo, G. & D'Amico, D., 2018. "Endogenous and Exogenous Determinants of Agricultural Productivity: What Is the Most Relevant for the Competitiveness of the Italian Agricultural Systems?," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 10(2).
    9. Bagi, Faqir Singh, 1983. "A Logit Model Of Farmers' Decisions About Credit," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 15(2), pages 1-7, December.
    10. Mohammad H. Pakravan & Nordica MacCarty, 2020. "What Motivates Behavior Change? Analyzing User Intentions to Adopt Clean Technologies in Low-Resource Settings Using the Theory of Planned Behavior," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-32, June.
    11. Di Liu & Pan Wang, 2023. "WeChat E-Commerce, Social Connections, and Smallholder Agriculture Sales Performance: A Survey of Orange Farmers in Hubei Province, China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-14, October.
    12. Nguyen ThiThuy Van & Le Ba Phong & Luu Thi Loan, 2018. "Antecedents of Innovation Capability: The Role of Transformational Leadership and Organizational Learning," International Journal of Business Administration, International Journal of Business Administration, Sciedu Press, vol. 9(5), pages 1-10, September.
    13. Delphine Lacaze, 2005. "Towards A Better Understanding Of Integration Processes: Validation Of A Model Of Newcomers’ Proactive Behaviors [Vers Une Meilleure Comprehension Des Processus D'Integration : Validation D'Un Mode," Post-Print hal-04321292, HAL.
    14. Sanna Hilden & Kati Tikkamäki, 2013. "Reflective Practice as a Fuel for Organizational Learning," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-20, July.
    15. Dalton, P.S. & Gonzalez Jimenez, V.H. & Noussair, C.N., 2015. "Paying with Self-Chosen Goals : Incentives and Gender Differences," Discussion Paper 2015-021, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    16. Dimo Dimov, 2007. "Beyond the Single-Person, Single-Insight Attribution in Understanding Entrepreneurial Opportunities," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 31(5), pages 713-731, September.
    17. Ruiz-Mercader, Josefa & Meroño-Cerdan, Angel Luis & Sabater-Sánchez, Ramón, 2006. "Information technology and learning: Their relationship and impact on organisational performance in small businesses," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 16-29.
    18. Islam, Asad & Kwon, Sungoh & Masood, Eema & Prakash, Nishith & Sabarwal, Shwetlena & Saraswat, Deepak, 2020. "When Goal-Setting Forges Ahead but Stops Short," GLO Discussion Paper Series 526, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    19. Daniel R Clark & Dan Li & Dean A Shepherd, 2018. "Country familiarity in the initial stage of foreign market selection," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 49(4), pages 442-472, May.
    20. Jianyu Zhao & Yining Huang & Xi Xi & Shanshan Wang, 2021. "How knowledge heterogeneity influences business model design: mediating effects of strategic learning and bricolage," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 889-919, June.

    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:gam:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:10:p:1859-:d:1245848. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.