IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i10p1805-d114174.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determinants of the Acceptance of Sustainable Production Strategies among Dairy Farmers: Development and Testing of a Modified Technology Acceptance Model

Author

Listed:
  • Simona Naspetti

    (Dipartimento di Scienze e Ingegneria della Materia, dell’Ambiente ed Urbanistica (SIMAU), Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche, Ancona 60131, Italy)

  • Serena Mandolesi

    (Dipartimento di Scienze e Ingegneria della Materia, dell’Ambiente ed Urbanistica (SIMAU), Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche, Ancona 60131, Italy)

  • Jeroen Buysse

    (Department of Agricultural Economics, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, B-9000 Gent, Belgium)

  • Terhi Latvala

    (LUKE, Economic Research, Latokartanonkaari 9, FI-00790 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Philippa Nicholas

    (Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, IBERS Gogerddan Campus, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth SY23 3EE, UK)

  • Susanne Padel

    (Organic Research Centre, Elm Farm, Hamstead Marshall, Newbury, Berkshire, RG20 0HR, UK)

  • Ellen J. Van Loo

    (Department of Agricultural Economics, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, B-9000 Gent, Belgium)

  • Raffaele Zanoli

    (Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie, Alimentari e Ambientali (D3A), Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche, Ancona 60131, Italy)

Abstract

An extended version of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) was applied by means of Structural Equation Modelling to testing various hypotheses on attitudes and intentions of dairy farmers towards three novel sustainable production strategies, as well as the influence of organic practices and collaborative behaviours, such as information sharing with supply-chain partners. Data on the acceptance of three sustainable production strategies, namely ‘Agro-forestry’, ‘Alternative protein source’, and ‘Prolonged maternal feeding’ were collected by a survey of dairy farmers in six European Union (EU) countries (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Italy, United Kingdom). We found that perceived usefulness is the key determinant of acceptance, while the intention to adopt a sustainable production strategy may derive from the influence of opinions (and behaviours) of relevant others (e.g., leading dairy farmers, family members, advisors) showing the role of interactions among farmers and other stakeholders in the adoption of innovations. Finally, the perceived usefulness of all of the investigated strategies is higher for organic farmers, while collaborative patterns reduce the impact of subjective norm on usefulness and overall acceptance. Our findings should encourage policy makers to consider the important role of supply chain management practices, including collaboration, to enhance the sustainability of dairy farming systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Simona Naspetti & Serena Mandolesi & Jeroen Buysse & Terhi Latvala & Philippa Nicholas & Susanne Padel & Ellen J. Van Loo & Raffaele Zanoli, 2017. "Determinants of the Acceptance of Sustainable Production Strategies among Dairy Farmers: Development and Testing of a Modified Technology Acceptance Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-16, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:10:p:1805-:d:114174
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/10/1805/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/10/1805/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mandolesi, Serena & Nicholas, Philippa & Naspetti, Simona & Zanoli, Raffaele, 2015. "Identifying viewpoints on innovation in low-input and organic dairy supply chains: A Q-methodological study," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 25-34.
    2. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    3. Porter, Constance Elise & Donthu, Naveen, 2006. "Using the technology acceptance model to explain how attitudes determine Internet usage: The role of perceived access barriers and demographics," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(9), pages 999-1007, September.
    4. Zanoli, Raffaele & Naspetti, Simona, 2002. "Consumer motivations in the purchase of organic food. A means-end approach," MPRA Paper 32712, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Flett, Ross & Alpass, Fiona & Humphries, Steve & Massey, Claire & Morriss, Stuart & Long, Nigel, 2004. "The technology acceptance model and use of technology in New Zealand dairy farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 199-211, May.
    6. Genius, Margarita & Pantzios, Christos J. & Tzouvelekas, Vangelis, 2006. "Information Acquisition and Adoption of Organic Farming Practices," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 31(1), pages 1-21, April.
    7. Padel, Susanne & Vaarst, Mette & Zaralis, Konstantinos, 2015. "Supporting Innovation in Organic Agriculture: A European Perspective Using Experience from the SOLID Project," Sustainable Agriculture Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 4(3 Special).
    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. Asghar Bagheri & Abolmohammad Bondori & Mohammad Sadegh Allahyari & Jhalukpreya Surujlal, 2021. "Use of biologic inputs among cereal farmers: application of technology acceptance model," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 5165-5181, April.
    2. Zahid, Muhammad & Rahman, Haseeb Ur & Ullah, Zabeeh & Muhammad, Ali, 2021. "Sustainability and branchless banking: The development and validation of a distinct measurement scale," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    3. Shira Bukchin & Dorit Kerret, 2018. "Food for Hope: The Role of Personal Resources in Farmers’ Adoption of Green Technology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-11, May.
    4. Veronika Hannus & Johannes Sauer, 2021. "Understanding Farmers’ Intention to Use a Sustainability Standard: The Role of Economic Rewards, Knowledge, and Ease of Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-21, September.
    5. Asrar Ahmed Sabir & Iftikhar Ahmad & Hassan Ahmad & Muhammad Rafiq & Muhammad Asghar Khan & Neelum Noreen, 2023. "Consumer Acceptance and Adoption of AI Robo-Advisors in Fintech Industry," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-24, March.
    6. Letizia Tebaldi & Barbara Bigliardi & Eleonora Bottani, 2018. "Sustainable Supply Chain and Innovation: A Review of the Recent Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-29, October.
    7. Ivonne Angelica Castiblanco Jimenez & Laura Cristina Cepeda García & Maria Grazia Violante & Federica Marcolin & Enrico Vezzetti, 2020. "Commonly Used External TAM Variables in e-Learning, Agriculture and Virtual Reality Applications," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, December.
    8. Nadia Adnan & Shahrina Md Nordin, 2021. "How COVID 19 effect Malaysian paddy industry? Adoption of green fertilizer a potential resolution," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(6), pages 8089-8129, June.
    9. Daniel J. Veit & Jason B. Thatcher, 2023. "Digitalization as a problem or solution? Charting the path for research on sustainable information systems," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 93(6), pages 1231-1253, August.
    10. Kirsi Kotilainen & Ulla A. Saari, 2018. "Policy Influence on Consumers’ Evolution into Prosumers—Empirical Findings from an Exploratory Survey in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-22, January.
    11. Hannus, Veronika & Sauer, Johannes, 2021. "It is not only about money —– German farmers' preferences regarding voluntary standards for farm sustainability management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    12. Gerli, Paolo & Clement, Jessica & Esposito, Giovanni & Mora, Luca & Crutzen, Nathalie, 2022. "The hidden power of emotions: How psychological factors influence skill development in smart technology adoption," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    13. Ronald Baganzi & Geon-Cheol Shin & Shali Wu, 2019. "Examining Consumers’ Attitudes toward Gmarket Online Shopping," J, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-20, August.
    14. William Orjuela-Garzon & Santiago Quintero & Diana P. Giraldo & Laura Lotero & César Nieto-Londoño, 2021. "A Theoretical Framework for Analysing Technology Transfer Processes Using Agent-Based Modelling: A Case Study on Massive Technology Adoption (AMTEC) Program on Rice Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-23, October.
    15. Stefano Orsini & Ambrogio Costanzo & Francesco Solfanelli & Raffaele Zanoli & Susanne Padel & Monika M. Messmer & Eva Winter & Freya Schaefer, 2020. "Factors Affecting the Use of Organic Seed by Organic Farmers in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-16, October.

    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. Simona Naspetti & Serena Mandolesi & Jeroen Buysse & Terhi Latvala & Phillipa Nicholas & Susanne Padel & Ellen J. Loo & Raffaele Zanoli, 2021. "Consumer perception of sustainable practices in dairy production," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-26, December.
    2. Daxini, Amar & Ryan, Mary & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Barnes, Andrew P., 2019. "Understanding farmers’ intentions to follow a nutrient management plan using the theory of planned behaviour," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 428-437.
    3. Chen, Chien-fei & Nelson, Hannah & Xu, Xiaojing & Bonilla, Gregory & Jones, Nicholas, 2021. "Beyond technology adoption: Examining home energy management systems, energy burdens and climate change perceptions during COVID-19 pandemic," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    4. Andriosopoulos, Kostas & Bigerna, Simona & Bollino, Carlo Andrea & Micheli, Silvia, 2018. "The impact of age on Italian consumers' attitude toward alternative fuel vehicles," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 299-308.
    5. Kamrath, Carolin & Rajendran, Srinivasulu & Nenguwo, Ngoni & Afari-Sefa, Victor & Broring, Stefanie, 2018. "Adoption behavior of market traders: an analysis based on Technology Acceptance Model and Theory of Planned Behavior," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 21(6), July.
    6. Areal, Francisco J. & Riesgo, Laura & Gómez-Barbero, Manuel & Rodríguez-Cerezo, Emilio, 2012. "Consequences of a coexistence policy on the adoption of GMHT crops in the European Union," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 401-411.
    7. Chi Kwong Bruce Wan & Adaobi J. Onuike, 2021. "Illuminating Opportunities for Smart Tourism Innovation That Foster Sustainable Tourist Well-Being Using Q Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-16, July.
    8. Amitabha Ghose & Bibhas Chandra, 2020. "Models for Predicting Sustainable Durable Products Consumption Behaviour: A Review Article," Vision, , vol. 24(1), pages 81-89, March.
    9. Jahanmir, Sara F. & Cavadas, Joana, 2018. "Factors affecting late adoption of digital innovations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 337-343.
    10. Vu, Ha Thu & Tran, Duc & Goto, Daisaku & Kawata, Keisuke, 2020. "Does experience sharing affect farmers’ pro-environmental behavior? A randomized controlled trial in Vietnam," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    11. Evrim ERDOĞAN YAZAR & Murat BURUCUOĞLU, 2019. "Consumer Attitude towards Organic Foods: A Multigroup Analysis across Genders," Istanbul Business Research, Istanbul University Business School, vol. 48(2), pages 176-196, November.
    12. Erifili Papista & Athanasios Krystallis, 2013. "Investigating the Types of Value and Cost of Green Brands: Proposition of a Conceptual Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 115(1), pages 75-92, June.
    13. Boun My, Kene & Nguyen-Van, Phu & Kim Cuong Pham, Thi & Stenger, Anne & Tiet, Tuyen & To-The, Nguyen, 2022. "Drivers of organic farming: Lab-in-the-field evidence of the role of social comparison and information nudge in networks in Vietnam," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    14. Heungsik Park & Wim Vandekerckhove & Jaeil Lee & Joowon Jeong, 2020. "Laddered Motivations of External Whistleblowers: The Truth About Attributes, Consequences, and Values," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 165(4), pages 565-578, September.
    15. Gianluigi Guido & M. Prete & Alessandro Peluso & R. Maloumby-Baka & Carolina Buffa, 2010. "The role of ethics and product personality in the intention to purchase organic food products: a structural equation modeling approach," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 57(1), pages 79-102, March.
    16. Kelly, Edel & Heanue, Kevin & Buckley, Cathal & O'Gorman, Colm, 2015. "Proven Science versus Farmer Perception," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 229067, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Gregori, M. & Nassivera, F., 2014. "Health and Green consciousness in consumer behavior: a case study on Eco-labelled food products," Politica Agricola Internazionale - International Agricultural Policy, Edizioni L'Informatore Agrario, vol. 2014(3).
    18. Teemu Rantanen & Paula Lehto & Pertti Vuorinen & Kirsi Coco, 2018. "The adoption of care robots in home care—A survey on the attitudes of Finnish home care personnel," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(9-10), pages 1846-1859, May.
    19. Yang, Byunghwa & Kim, Youngchan & Yoo, Changjo, 2013. "The integrated mobile advertising model: The effects of technology- and emotion-based evaluations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1345-1352.
    20. Attié, Elodie & Meyer-Waarden, Lars, 2022. "The acceptance and usage of smart connected objects according to adoption stages: an enhanced technology acceptance model integrating the diffusion of innovation, uses and gratification and privacy ca," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).

    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:9:y:2017:i:10:p:1805-:d:114174. 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.