IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i14p6247-d1440232.html

Environmental–Socioeconomic Factors and Technology Adoption: Empirical Evidence from Small-Scale Salt Farmers in Improving Technical Efficiency in the Madurese Coastal Area, East Java, Indonesia

Author

Listed:
  • Campina Illa Prihantini

    (Doctoral Program in Agriculture, Brawijaya University, Malang 65145, Indonesia
    Agribusiness Study Program, Faculty of Agriculture, Fisheries and Animal Husbandry, Universitas Sembilanbelas November Kolaka, Kolaka 93561, Indonesia)

  • Nuhfil Hanani

    (Department of Socioeconomics, Faculty of Agriculture, Brawijaya University, Malang 65145, Indonesia)

  • Syafrial

    (Department of Socioeconomics, Faculty of Agriculture, Brawijaya University, Malang 65145, Indonesia)

  • Rosihan Asmara

    (Department of Socioeconomics, Faculty of Agriculture, Brawijaya University, Malang 65145, Indonesia)

Abstract

Salt farming has been a hereditary occupation in the coastal communities of Madura Island; however, salt productivity in this area is still relatively low. The government has introduced a new production technology, called a geomembrane, as part of their efforts. The application of the latest technological innovations has been promoted worldwide to increase farm productivity, including in salt farming. This research aims to determine the determinants of adoption decisions for salt production technology and estimate the adoption impact on technical efficiency. The data in this study are cross-sectional from 215 small-scale salt farmers on Madura Island, East Java, Indonesia. The data were analyzed using logistic regression to identify which factors influenced farmers’ decisions to use geomembranes. The influence of adoption on farmers’ technical efficiency was then assessed using propensity score matching (PSM) and data envelopment analysis (DEA). The findings indicate that age and the dummy variables of gender, land ownership, profit-sharing involvement, and membership in the People’s Salt Business Group (KUGAR) all had a significant impact on adoption rates. The findings of controlling matched samples using the PSM process reveal that geomembrane application improves and greatly increases farmers’ technical efficiency. Those who used geomembranes displayed greater technical efficiency than those who did not. These findings imply that salt production technology should be promoted more to increase productivity, especially geomembrane adoption, through outreach and dissemination of information, including for landowners involved in the profit-sharing system. The government should keep supporting salt farmers and motivate them to adopt geomembrane technology to ensure the sustainability of salt production in the coastal communities on Madura Island.

Suggested Citation

  • Campina Illa Prihantini & Nuhfil Hanani & Syafrial & Rosihan Asmara, 2024. "Environmental–Socioeconomic Factors and Technology Adoption: Empirical Evidence from Small-Scale Salt Farmers in Improving Technical Efficiency in the Madurese Coastal Area, East Java, Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(14), pages 1-16, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:14:p:6247-:d:1440232
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/14/6247/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/14/6247/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Manda, Julius & Alene, Arega D. & Tufa, Adane H. & Abdoulaye, Tahirou & Wossen, Tesfamicheal & Chikoye, David & Manyong, Victor, 2019. "The poverty impacts of improved cowpea varieties in Nigeria: A counterfactual analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 261-271.
    2. Fahad, Shah & Wang, Jing & Hu, Guangyin & Wang, Hui & Yang, Xiaoying & Shah, Ashfaq Ahmad & Huong, Nguyen Thi Lan & Bilal, Arshad, 2018. "Empirical analysis of factors influencing farmers crop insurance decisions in Pakistan: Evidence from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 459-467.
    3. Mather, David & Boughton, Duncan & Jayne, T.S., 2013. "Explaining smallholder maize marketing in southern and eastern Africa: The roles of market access, technology and household resource endowments," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 248-266.
    4. Nuhfil Hanani AR & Rosihan Asmara & Fahriyah Fahriyah, 2023. "Technology gap ratio decomposition in sugarcane farming in Indonesia," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 13(1), pages 1-7.
    5. Sanzidur Rahman & Md. Abdul Matin & Md. Kamrul Hasan, 2018. "Joint Determination of Improved Variety Adoption, Productivity and Efficiency of Pulse Production in Bangladesh: A Sample-Selection Stochastic Frontier Approach," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-16, July.
    6. Tesfamicheal Wossen & Arega Alene & Tahirou Abdoulaye & Shiferaw Feleke & Ismail Y. Rabbi & Victor Manyong, 2019. "Poverty Reduction Effects of Agricultural Technology Adoption: The Case of Improved Cassava Varieties in Nigeria," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(2), pages 392-407, June.
    7. Haitao Wu & Shijun Ding & Sushil Pandey & Dayun Tao, 2010. "Assessing the Impact of Agricultural Technology Adoption on Farmers' Well‐being Using Propensity‐Score Matching Analysis in Rural China," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 24(2), pages 141-160, June.
    8. Shiferaw, Bekele & Kassie, Menale & Jaleta, Moti & Yirga, Chilot, 2014. "Adoption of improved wheat varieties and impacts on household food security in Ethiopia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 272-284.
    9. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    10. Ma, Wanglin & Renwick, Alan & Yuan, Peng & Ratna, Nazmun, 2018. "Agricultural cooperative membership and technical efficiency of apple farmers in China: An analysis accounting for selectivity bias," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 122-132.
    11. Stefan Osborne & Michael A. Trueblood, 2006. "An examination of economic efficiency of Russian crop production in the reform period," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 34(1), pages 25-38, January.
    12. Jaleta, Moti & Kassie, Menale & Marenya, Paswel, 2015. "Impact of Improved Maize Variety Adoption on Household Food Security in Ethiopia: An Endogenous Switching Regression Approach," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211566, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Meeusen, Wim & van den Broeck, Julien, 1977. "Efficiency Estimation from Cobb-Douglas Production Functions with Composed Error," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 18(2), pages 435-444, June.
    14. Syafrial & Hery Toiba & Moh Shadiqur Rahman & Dwi Retnoningsih, 2021. "The Effects of Improved Cassava Variety Adoption on Farmers’ Technical Efficiency in Indonesia," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 11(4), pages 269-278.
    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. Matheus Koengkan & José Alberto Fuinhas & Emad Kazemzadeh & Fariba Osmani & Nooshin Karimi Alavijeh, 2022. "Measuring the economic efficiency performance in Latin American and Caribbean countries: An empirical evidence from stochastic production frontier and data envelopment analysis," International Economics, CEPII research center, issue 169, pages 43-54.
    2. Wang, Huaiyu & Bin, Bing & Pede, Valerien O., 2023. "Adoption of ratoon rice and its impact on technical efficiency of rice farming in China," 2023 Annual Meeting, July 23-25, Washington D.C. 335541, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. repec:ags:aaea22:335541 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Wiredu, Alexander Nimo & Manda, Julius & Feleke, Shiferaw & Asante, Bright Owusu & Savala, Canon Engoke & Kyei-Boahen, Stephen & Manyong, Victor & Alene, Arega, 2021. "Impacts of Quality Seeds of Improved Legume Varieties on Incomes and Poverty in Mozambique: An Ordered Choice Endogenous Switching Regression Analysis," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315294, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Lin, Bin & Wang, Xiaoxi & Jin, Songqing & Yang, Wanjiang & Li, Houjian, 2022. "Impacts of cooperative membership on rice productivity: Evidence from China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    6. António Afonso & Ana Patricia Montes & José M. Domínguez, 2024. "Measuring Tax Burden Efficiency in OECD Countries: An International Comparison," CESifo Working Paper Series 11333, CESifo.
    7. Khanal, Aditya & Koirala, Krishna & Regmi, Madhav, "undated". "Do Financial Constraints Affect Production Efficiency in Drought Prone Areas? A Case from Indonesian Rice Growers," 2016 Annual Meeting, February 6-9, 2016, San Antonio, Texas 230087, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    8. Fetene, G.M. & Getehun, T.D., 2018. "Agricultural Technology Adoption for Food and Nutrition Security: Evidence from Ethiopia," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277332, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Nan Wang & Yunning Ma & Yongrok Choi & Seungho Kang, 2025. "Efficiency Evaluation of the World’s Top Ten Seed Companies: Static and Dynamic Analysis in the Context of Global Consolidation and Sustainability Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-25, April.
    10. Noel Uri, 2003. "The Effect of Incentive Regulation in Telecommunications in the United States," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 169-191, May.
    11. Badunenko, Oleg & Galeotti, Marzio & Hunt, Lester C., "undated". "Better to grow or better to improve? Measuring environmental efficiency in OECD countries with a Stochastic Environmental Kuznets Frontier," FEEM Working Papers 316226, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    12. Idiano D’Adamo & Cinzia Daraio & Simone Di Leo & Léopold Simar, 2024. "A Flexible and Sustainable Analysis of Waste Efficiency at the European Level," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 25(4), pages 881-894, December.
    13. Nguyen, Khac Minh & Giang, Thanh Long, 2009. "Efficiency Estimates for the Agricultural Production in Vietnam: A Comparison of Parametric and Non-parametric Approaches," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 10(2), pages 1-17.
    14. Michaelides, Panayotis G. & Vouldis, Angelos T. & Tsionas, Efthymios G., 2010. "Globally flexible functional forms: The neural distance function," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 206(2), pages 456-469, October.
    15. Kuosmanen, Timo & Johnson, Andrew, 2017. "Modeling joint production of multiple outputs in StoNED: Directional distance function approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(2), pages 792-801.
    16. Tovar, Beatriz & Wall, Alan, 2015. "Can ports increase traffic while reducing inputs? Technical efficiency of Spanish Port Authorities using a directional distance function approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 128-140.
    17. Vaneet Bhatia & Sankarshan Basu & Subrata Kumar Mitra & Pradyumna Dash, 2018. "A review of bank efficiency and productivity," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 55(3), pages 557-600, November.
    18. Fabio Pammolli & Francesco Porcelli & Francesco Vidoli & Guido Borà, 2014. "La spesa sanitaria delle Regioni in Italia - Saniregio 3," Working Papers CERM 02-2014, Competitività, Regole, Mercati (CERM).
    19. repec:cuf:journl:y:2017:v:18:i:1:valles-gimenez is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Fabio Pammolli & Francesco Porcelli & Francesco Vidoli & Monica Auteri & Guido Borà, 2017. "La spesa sanitaria delle Regioni in Italia - Saniregio2017," Working Papers CERM 01-2017, Competitività, Regole, Mercati (CERM).
    21. Ahn, Heinz & Clermont, Marcel & Langner, Julia, 2023. "Comparative performance analysis of frontier-based efficiency measurement methods – A Monte Carlo simulation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(1), pages 294-312.
    22. Hari Wahyu Wijayanto & Kai-An Lo & Hery Toiba & Moh Shadiqur Rahman, 2022. "Does Agroforestry Adoption Affect Subjective Well-Being? Empirical Evidence from Smallholder Farmers in East Java, Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-10, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:14:p:6247-:d:1440232. 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.