IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/54khv_v1.html

Are Farmers Algorithm-Averse? The Case of Decision Support Tools in Crop Management

Author

Listed:
  • Massfeller, Anna

    (University of Bonn)

  • Hermann, Daniel
  • Leyens, Alexa
  • Storm, Hugo

Abstract

The advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has the potential to improve farming efficiency globally, with decision support tools (DSTs) representing a particularly promising application. However, evidence from medical and financial domains reveals a user reluctance to accept AI-based recommendations, even when they outperform human alternatives. This is a phenomenon known as “algorithm aversion” (AA). This study is the first to examine this phenomenon in an agricultural setting. Drawing on survey data from a representative sample of 250 German farmers, we assessed farmers’ intention to use and their willingness-to-pay for DSTs for wheat fungicide application either based on AI or a human advisor. We implemented a novel Bayesian probabilistic programming workflow tailored to experimental studies, enabling a joint analysis that integrates an extended version of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology with an economic experiment. Our results indicate that AA plays an important role in farmers’ decision-making. For most farmers, an AI-based DST must outperform a human advisor by 11–30% to be considered equally valuable. Similarly, an AI-based DST with equivalent performance must be 21–56% less expensive than the human advisor to be preferred. These findings signify the importance of examining AA as a cognitive bias that may hinder the adoption of promising AI technologies in agriculture.

Suggested Citation

  • Massfeller, Anna & Hermann, Daniel & Leyens, Alexa & Storm, Hugo, 2025. "Are Farmers Algorithm-Averse? The Case of Decision Support Tools in Crop Management," SocArXiv 54khv_v1, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:54khv_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/54khv_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6936be88a0cb2d866d180e4b/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/54khv_v1?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. Guido W. Imbens, 2020. "Potential Outcome and Directed Acyclic Graph Approaches to Causality: Relevance for Empirical Practice in Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(4), pages 1129-1179, December.
    2. Cao, Guangming & Duan, Yanqing & Edwards, John S. & Dwivedi, Yogesh K., 2021. "Understanding managers’ attitudes and behavioral intentions towards using artificial intelligence for organizational decision-making," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    3. Viswanath Venkatesh, 2000. "Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 342-365, December.
    4. Läpple, Doris & Barham, Bradford L., 2019. "How do learning ability, advice from experts and peers shape decision making?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 92-107.
    5. Rose, David C. & Sutherland, William J. & Parker, Caroline & Lobley, Matt & Winter, Michael & Morris, Carol & Twining, Susan & Ffoulkes, Charles & Amano, Tatsuya & Dicks, Lynn V., 2016. "Decision support tools for agriculture: Towards effective design and delivery," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 165-174.
    6. Skaalsveen, Kamilla & Ingram, Julie & Urquhart, Julie, 2020. "The role of farmers' social networks in the implementation of no-till farming practices," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    7. Kerebel, A. & Cassidy, R. & Jordan, P. & Holden, N.M., 2013. "Farmer perception of suitable conditions for slurry application compared with decision support system recommendations," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 49-60.
    8. Giua, Carlo & Materia, Valentina Cristiana & Camanzi, Luca, 2022. "Smart farming technologies adoption: Which factors play a role in the digital transition?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    9. Jonathan R. McFadden & Alicia Rosburg & Eric Njuki, 2022. "Information inputs and technical efficiency in midwest corn production: evidence from farmers' use of yield and soil maps," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(2), pages 589-612, March.
    10. Joshua D. Angrist & Jörn-Steffen Pischke, 2009. "Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 8769, December.
    11. François J Dessart & Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & René van Bavel, 2019. "Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: a policy-oriented review," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 417-471.
    12. Robert Finger & Scott M. Swinton & Nadja El Benni & Achim Walter, 2019. "Precision Farming at the Nexus of Agricultural Production and the Environment," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 11(1), pages 313-335, October.
    13. Otter, Verena & Deutsch, Maximilian, 2023. "Did policy lose sight of the wood for the trees? An UTAUT-based partial least squares estimation of farmers acceptance of innovative sustainable land use systems," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    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. Anna Massfeller & Hugo Storm, 2024. "Field observation and verbal exchange as different peer effects in farmers’ technology adoption decisions," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 55(5), pages 739-757, September.
    2. Rodríguez-Barillas, María & Klerkx, Laurens & Poortvliet, P. Marijn, 2024. "What determines the acceptance of Climate Smart Technologies? The influence of farmers' behavioral drivers in connection with the policy environment," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    3. Madhu Khanna, 2021. "Digital Transformation of the Agricultural Sector: Pathways, Drivers and Policy Implications," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(4), pages 1221-1242, December.
    4. Jonathan Fuhr & Philipp Berens & Dominik Papies, 2024. "Estimating Causal Effects with Double Machine Learning -- A Method Evaluation," Papers 2403.14385, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2024.
    5. Junquera, Victoria & Rubenstein, Daniel I. & Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne & Knaus, Florian, 2022. "Structural change in agriculture and farmers' social contacts: Insights from a Swiss mountain region," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    6. Julia Wahtra & Holger Johnsson, 2025. "The Sources of Slow Declines in Agricultural Nutrient Leakage: Evidence From Sweden," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 69(3), pages 611-624, July.
    7. Shang, Linmei & Heckelei, Thomas & Gerullis, Maria K. & Börner, Jan & Rasch, Sebastian, 2021. "Adoption and diffusion of digital farming technologies - integrating farm-level evidence and system interaction," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    8. Peter Hull & Michal Kolesár & Christopher Walters, 2022. "Labor by design: contributions of David Card, Joshua Angrist, and Guido Imbens," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 124(3), pages 603-645, July.
    9. Huber, Robert & Späti, Karin & Finger, Robert, 2023. "A behavioural agent-based modelling approach for the ex-ante assessment of policies supporting precision agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    10. Vikram Dayal & Anand Murugesan, 2020. "Demystifying causal inference: ingredients of a recipe," IEG Working Papers 393, Institute of Economic Growth.
    11. Fabian Klebl & Peter H. Feindt & Annette Piorr, 2024. "Farmers’ behavioural determinants of on-farm biodiversity management in Europe: a systematic review," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 41(2), pages 831-861, June.
    12. Gonzalez-Martinez, Ana & Jongeneel, Roel & Salamon, Petra, 2021. "Lighting on the Road to Explore Future Directions for Agricultural Modelling in the EU – some Considerations on what Needs to be Done," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 12(03), September.
    13. Kulkarni, Nirupama & Malmendier, Ulrike, 2022. "Homeownership segregation," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 123-149.
    14. Granado-Díaz, Rubén & Colombo, Sergio & Romero-Varo, Marina & Villanueva, Anastasio J., 2024. "Farmers' attitudes toward the use of digital technologies in the context of agri-environmental policies," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    15. Han, Guang & Niles, Meredith T., 2023. "An adoption spectrum for sustainable agriculture practices: A new framework applied to cover crop adoption," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    16. Osrof, Hazem Yusuf & Tan, Cheng Ling & Angappa, Gunasekaran & Yeo, Sook Fern & Tan, Kim Hua, 2023. "Adoption of smart farming technologies in field operations: A systematic review and future research agenda," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    17. Alex Coad, 2021. "Econometrics and the Growth of Firms: Perspectives from Evolutionary Economics," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(4), pages 338-352, December.
    18. Martin Huber, 2024. "An introduction to causal discovery," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, Springer;Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics, vol. 160(1), pages 1-16, December.
    19. Massfeller, Anna & Storm, Hugo, 2022. "Socio-spatial information sources influencing farmers’ decision to use mechanical weeding in sugar beets," 96th Annual Conference, April 4-6, 2022, K U Leuven, Belgium 321154, Agricultural Economics Society - AES.
    20. Gackstetter, David & von Bloh, Malte & Hannus, Veronika & Meyer, Sebastian T. & Weisser, Wolfgang & Luksch, Claudia & Asseng, Senthold, 2023. "Autonomous field management – An enabler of sustainable future in agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:osf:socarx:54khv_v1. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.