Socio-environmental systems in technology adoption in animal husbandry in South-East Asia: A framework synthesis approach

Figures & data

Figure 1. The initial framework on innovation adoption decision (making) process as adapted from Ugochukwu and Phillips (Pierpaoli et al., 2013), Rogers (Fisher et al., 2000), and Pathak et al. (2019).

Figure 2. Screening process of search results.

Table 1. PICO-based inclusion criterion in screening search results.

Included if

Population: Animal farmers, smallholders, rural/livestock stakeholders

Intervention: The topic is technology adoption in animal farming (e.g. dairy, inland fishery) and mixed farming system^4

Comparison: To compare different factors and (social) aspects that affect technology adoption Adoption factors by farmers (not adoption impact) Social theories, stakeholders/farmers’ behaviour/behaviour change, systemic approach, etc.

Empirical papers with case studies located in South-East Asia (SEA)

Year of publication after 2000

Table 2. Scoring systems (absolute and relative) for adoption factors identified in 11 quantitative, 7 mixed methods,⁵ and 2 qualitative studies.

	Type of articles
	Quantitative studies	Qualitative studies
Absolute scoring	Score 1 for factors with a significant statistical correlation (p-value ≤0.05) Score 0.5 for factors with lower correlation (p-value 0.06–0.1).	Score 1 for factors that were most emphasized in the result and discussion section Score 0.5 for other mentioned factors
Relative scoring	Dividing the total absolute score (of a factor) with the number of papers that mention the factor

Figure 3. Socio-environmental system affecting farmers’ innovation adoption in South-East Asia, factors on the right side are related more to human capital and social capital; factors on the left side are related more to financial capital. (bold and CAPITAL = highly important factor; bold is the moderately important factors).

Table 3. Adoption factors affecting innovation adoption in animal husbandry in South-East Asia, (bold and CAPITAL = highly important factor; bold is the moderately important factors).

Individual factors		Score		Socio-Institutional factors		Score		Environmental factors		Score
Factor	Sub factor	Absolute	Relative	Factor	Sub Factor	Absolute	Relative	Factor	Sub factor	Absolute	Relative
Human Capital	Education	7.5	0.93	Innovation characteristics	PRICE	4	1	CLIMATE RISK	HEAVY AND PROLONGED RAINFALL	3 1	1 1
	SKILLS, KNOWLEDGE	3	1		Availability observability	2.5	0.83		Drought
	(Farming) experience	1.5	0.75		Practicality/Usability	1	1
					Benefits	8	0.88
					COMPATIBILITY, TRIALABILITY, CREDIBILITY	4	1
Demography	Age	5.5	0.91	Learning platforms	Training offered	5.5	0.91	LAND/SOIL DEGRADATION	SOIL DEGRADATION	4 1	1 1
	Women Support	2	1		Extension services, peer learning	8	0.96		Land scarcity
	Gender	2	0.66		Social care/counselling	1	1
	Family size, support	2.5	0.83
	Household needs, future orientation: income, food	3.5	0.875
Culture	Norms	1	1	Providing (consultancy) services	Facilities for maintenance (M&E)	0.5	1	Pollution	WATER POLLUTION	5 0.5	1 1
	Local knowledge/practices	4	0.75		Veterinary services	2	1		Air pollution
	Language	1
(Financial) capital	Income	7.5	0.93	Policies and governance of technology transfer	Mandates, regulations (food, health, environment)	2.5	0.83	Species scarcity		2	1
	Assets/ownership (including ICT tools)	1.5	0.5		FINANCIAL INCENTIVES, GRANT	3	1
					Dissemination strategy: marketing, experimentation	3	0.75
					Politics	0.5	1
					PROVISION OF LOAN/INVESTMENT	4	1
					Building capacity of local/institution, institutional arrangements	8	0.8
Social capital (access to networks)	ACCESS TO FINANCIAL SUPPORT	3	1	Creating market demand/pressure (local/international)	Premium price for animal products	5.5	0.91	Vegetation issues	Pest	1 1	1 1
	ACCESS TO TRAINING, experimentation, experts	7	1		Market orientation	0.5	0.5		Diseases
	BEING MEMBER OF FARMERS’ GROUPS, other households	7	1
Farm(ing) characteristics (management, technical, cost)	Farm income	2	1	Stakeholder network/dynamics	Cooperation	8	0.83	Ecosystems	Landscape	1 1	1 1
	Time availability/concern	1			Partnership (with successors)	2	1		Elevation
	Farm size, number of livestock	8	0.9
	LAND TENURE	3	1
	Farm system/types (diversity); layout; business/marketing management; confinement	0.5	0.5
	Farm location, distance from home/dealer/buyer	4	0.7
	OTHER SUPPORTING RESOURCES (FACILITIES, TECHNOLOGY, LABOUR)	4	1
Attitude	Vision for development	7.5	0.93
	Perception to sustainability	2.5	0.83
	Perception of technology advantage	7.5	0.93

Table A1. List of reviewed papers from South-East Asia.

	Title	Authors and year	Countries case studies	Type of (technology) innovation
1	Continued innovation in a Cambodian rice-based farming system: farmer testing and recombination of new elements	S. Mak, 2001	Cambodia	Mixed crop-livestock; incorporate rainfed lowland rice, dry season rice, animal production (cattle, pigs, chickens, and ducks), fishing (or fish culture), and other activities (such as palm sugar production, vegetable production, wild food collection, and trade
2	Assessing the Potential for Small-Scale Aquaculture in Cambodia	R. B. Richardson and M. Suvedi, 2018	Cambodia	Semi-intensive pond management
3	Factors influencing biosecurity adoption on laying hen farmers	V. S. Lestari, A. Natsir, S. N. Sirajuddin, K. Kasim, H. M. Ali, Saadah, et al. 2012	Indonesia	Biosecurity measures: farm inputs, traffic onto farms, distance from sources of pathogens to shed, exposure of farm, biosecurity at farm boundary, biosecurity between farm boundary and shed, biosecurity at the shed door, traffic into the shed, and susceptibility of the flock.
4	A participatory, farming systems approach to improving Bali cattle production in the smallholder crop-livestock systems of Eastern Indonesia	S. Lisson, N. MacLeod, C. McDonald, J. Corfield, B. Pengelly, L. Wirajaswadi, et al. 2010	Indonesia	Cattle, forage improvement technologies;
5	Understanding the Motivation of Western Java Smallholder Broiler Farmers to Uptake Measures Against Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI).	M. G. Pramuwidyatama, H. Hogeveen and H. W. Saatkamp 2020	Indonesia	Implementing cleaning and disinfection (C&D), vaccination, reporting, and stamping-out
6	Biogas diffusion among small scale farmers in Indonesia: An application of duration analysis	A. R. S. Putra, S. M. Pedersen and Z. Liu 2019	Indonesia	Biogas
7	A behavioural approach to understanding semi-subsistence farmers’ technology adoption decisions: The case of an improved paddy-prawn system in Indonesia	L. A. A. T. Sambodo and P. L. Nuthall 2010	Indonesia	An improved paddy-prawn system
8	Social-economic factors that affect cattle farmers’ willingness to pay for artificial insemination programmes.	S. N. Sirajuddin, I. Sudirman, L. D. Bahar, A. R. Al Tawaha and A. R. Al-Tawaha 2018	Indonesia	Artificial insemination
9	A social science perspective on stock enhancement outcomes: Lessons learned from inland fisheries in southern Lao PDR	C. J. Garaway, R. I. Arthur, B. Chamsingh, P. Homekingkeo, K. Lorenzen, B. Saengvilaikham, et al. 2006	Lao	Stock enhancement
10	Gendered Roles in Agrarian Transition: A Study of Lowland Rice Farming in Lao PDR	M. Moglia, K. S. Alexander, S. Larson, A. Dray, G. Greenhalgh, P. Thammavong, et al. 2020	Lao	Mixed crop-livestock system; non-rice crops, livestock husbandry, and forest
11	Quantifying the value of adopting a post-rice legume crop to intensify mixed smallholder farms in South-East Asia	M. Monjardino, J. N. M. Philp, G. Kuehne, V. Phimphachanhvongsod, V. Sihathep and M. D. Denton 2020	Lao	Incorporating a legume crop into the traditional rice-cattle system
12	“Community-Based Technology Transfer in Rural Aquaculture: The Case of Mudcrab Scylla Serrata Nursery in Ponds in Northern Samar, Central Philippines	D. B. Baticados, R. F. Agbayani and E. T. Quinitio 2014	Philippines	Mudcrab nursery in ponds
13	Adoption of dual-purpose forages: some policy implications	M. L. A. Lapar and S. Ehui 2003	Philippines	Planted forages; Gliricidia sepium, Leucaena leucocephala, Setaria spp., Napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum), and vetiver grass (Vetiveria zizanioides)
14	Intention to adopt and diffuse innovative ultraviolet light C system to control the growth of microorganisms in raw milk among Thais Dairy Farmers.	D. Makarapong, S. Tantayanon, C. Gowanit and C. Inchaisri 2020	Thailand	Ultraviolet light C system
15	Adoption of Good Agricultural Practices by Cattle Farmers in the Binh Dinh Province of Vietnam	G. H. Hoang 2020	Vietnam	The rules, orders, and procedures that guide farmers to produce, process, and market agricultural produce to meet several requirements relating to food safety and quality, product traceability, and environmental protection
16	Factors of Biogas Adoption in Manure Management of Vietnamese Household Pig Production: A Case Study in Tien Lu District, Hung Yen Province	N. T. Ly, T. Nanseki and Y. Chomei 2015	Vietnam	Biogas
17	The impact of VietGAHP implementation on Vietnamese households’ pig production	L. T. Nguyen, T. Nanseki and Y. Chomei 2020		The rules, orders, and procedures that guide farmers to produce, process, and market agricultural produce to meet several requirements relating to food safety and quality, product traceability, and environmental protection
18	Integrated freshwater aquaculture (IAA), crop and livestock production in the Mekong delta, Vietnam: Factors and the role of the pond.	D. K. Nhan, L. T. Phong, M. J. C. Verdegem, L. T. Duong, R. H. Bosma and D. C. Little 2007		Mixed crops and livestock (IAA-farming)
19	Transformative Social Learning for Agricultural Sustainability and Climate Change Adaptation in the Vietnam Mekong Delta.	L. T. H. Phuong, T. D. Tuan and N. T. N. Phuc 2019		The VACB (V garden/orchard; A fishing farm; C livestock farm; B biogas) model
20	Factors constraining and enabling agroforestry adoption in Viet Nam: a multi-level policy analysis.	E. S. Simelton, D. C. Catacutan, T. C. Dao, B. V. Dam and T. D. Le 2017		Agroforestry

Pierpaoli, E., Carli, G., Pignatti, E., & Canavari, M. (2013). Drivers of precision agriculture technologies adoption: A literature review. Procedia Technology, 8, 61–69. 01/1/2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2013.11.010

 Google Scholar

Fisher, D. K., Norvell, J., Sonka, S., & Nelson, M. J. (2000). Understanding technology adoption through system dynamics modeling: Implications for agribusiness management. The International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 3(3), 281–296.

 Google Scholar

Pathak, H. S., Brown, P., & Best, T. (2019). A systematic literature review of the factors affecting the precision agriculture adoption process. Precision Agriculture, 20(6), 1292–1316. January 12 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-019-09653-x

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mak, S. (2001). Continued innovation in a Cambodian rice-based farming system: Farmer testing and recombination of new elements. Agricultural Systems, 69(1–2), 137–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0308-521x(01)00022-1

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lestari, V. S., Natsir, A., Sirajuddin, S. N., Kasim, K., Ali, H. M., Saadah, S., & Mawardi, M. (2012). Factors influencing biosecurity adoption on laying hen farmers. Journal of the Indonesian Tropical Animal Agriculture. 37(4), 302–307. https://doi.org/10.14710/jitaa.37.4.302-307

 Google Scholar

Lisson, S., MacLeod, N., McDonald, C., Corfield, J., Pengelly, B., Wirajaswadi, L., Rahman, R., Bahar, S., Padjung, R., Razak, N., Puspadi, K. D, Sutaryono, Y., Saenong, S., Panjaitan, T., Hadiawati, L., Ash, A., & Brennan, L. (2010, September). A participatory, farming systems approach to improving Bali cattle production in the smallholder crop–livestock systems of Eastern Indonesia. Agricultural Systems, 103(7), 486–497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2010.05.002

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Pramuwidyatama, M. G., Hogeveen, H., & Saatkamp, H. W. (2020). Understanding the Motivation of Western Java Smallholder Broiler Farmers to uptake measures against highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI). Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 7, 362–362. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.00362

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Putra, A. R. S., Pedersen, S. M., & Liu, Z. (2019). Biogas diffusion among small scale farmers in Indonesia: An application of duration analysis. Land Use Policy, Article. 86, 399–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.05.035

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sirajuddin, S. N., Sudirman, I., Bahar, L. D., Al Tawaha, A. R., & Al-Tawaha, A. R. (2018, August). Social economic factors that affect cattle farmer’s willingness to pay for artificial insemination programs. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science, 24(4), 574–580. https://WOS:000448988600006

 Google Scholar

Garaway, C. J., Arthur, R. I., Chamsingh, B., Homekingkeo, P., Lorenzen, K., Saengvilaikham, B., & Sidavong, K. (2006, August). A social science perspective on stock enhancement outcomes: Lessons learned from inland fisheries in southern Lao PDR. Fisheries Research, 80(1), 37–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2006.03.012

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Moglia, M., Alexander, K. S., Larson, S., (Giger)-Dray, A., Greenhalgh, G., Thammavong, P., Thephavanh, M., & Case, P. (2020, July). Gendered roles in agrarian transition: A study of lowland rice farming in Lao PDR. Sustainability, 12(13), 5403. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12135403

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Monjardino, M., Philp, J. N. M., Kuehne, G., Phimphachanhvongsod, V., Sihathep, V., & Denton, M. D. (2020, January). Quantifying the value of adopting a post-rice legume crop to intensify mixed smallholder farms in Southeast Asia. Agricultural Systems, 177(102690), 102690. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2019.102690

 Google Scholar

Baticados, D. B., Agbayani, R. F., & Quinitio, E. T. (2014). Community-based technology transfer in rural aquaculture: The case of mudcrab scylla serrata nursery in ponds in Northern Samar, Central Philippines, (in English). AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment, 43(8), 1047–1058. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-014-0528-5

 Google Scholar

Makarapong, D., Tantayanon, S., Gowanit, C., & Inchaisri, C. (2020). Intention to adopt and diffuse innovative ultraviolet light C system to control the growth of microorganisms in raw milk among Thais dairy farmers. Animal Science Journal, 91(1), e13375. https://doi.org/10.1111/asj.13375

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hoang, G. H. (2020, October). Adoption of good agricultural practices by Cattle Farmers in the binh dinh province of Vietnam. Journal of Agricultural Extension, 24(4), 151–160. https://doi.org/10.4314/jae.v24i4.15

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ly, N. T., Nanseki, T., & Chomei, Y. (2015, September). Determinants of biogas adoption in manure management of Vietnamese household pig production: A case study in Tien Lu District, Hung Yen Province. Journal of the Faculty of Agriculture, Kyushu University, 60(2), 577–581. https://WOS:000362390700040

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Nhan, D. K., Phong, L. T., Verdegem, M. J. C., Duong, L. T., Bosma, R. H., & Little, D. C. (2007, May). Integrated freshwater aquaculture, crop and livestock production in the Mekong delta, Vietnam: Determinants and the role of the pond. Agricultural Systems, 94(2), 445–458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2006.11.017

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Phuong, L. T. H., Tuan, T. D., & Phuc, N. T. N. (2019, December). Transformative Social Learning for Agricultural Sustainability and Climate Change Adaptation in the Vietnam Mekong Delta. Sustainability, 11(23), 6775. Art. no. 6775. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11236775

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Simelton, E. S., Catacutan, D. C., Dao, T. C., Dam, B. V., & Le, T. D. (2017, February). Factors constraining and enabling agroforestry adoption in Viet Nam: A multi-level policy analysis. Agroforestry Systems, 91(1), 51–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-016-9906-2

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar