A systematic assessment of constraints influencing ICT adoption in agriculture sector

Introduction

Agriculture continues to be the backbone of rural livelihoods in India, employing nearly half of the workforce and contributing significantly to food security and the economy. However, the sector is increasingly confronted with challenges such as climate variability, resource scarcity, fragmented landholdings, market uncertainties, and low productivity. In this context, Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) are recognized as a powerful enabler for agricultural transformation. ICTs facilitate timely access to agricultural knowledge, market information, weather updates, pest and disease control measures, and government schemes, thereby helping farmers make informed decisions and improve productivity (Meera et al., 2004; Mittal & Mehar, 2012) [11,12] . The rapid expansion of digital tools such as mobile phones, internet-based services, social media platforms, mobile applications, and digital extension portals has created new opportunities for farmers to bridge information gaps. For instance, initiatives like m-Kisan Portal, Kisan Call Centres (KCCs), and AgriMobile Apps have been developed in India to provide customized information directly to farmers. Similarly, platforms such as YouTube and WhatsApp have become informal yet widely used channels for peer-to-peer knowledge sharing. The penetration of ICTs has also been bolstered by rising smartphone ownership, increased internet connectivity, and supportive government policies aimed at promoting digital agriculture (FAO, 2017; Gulati & Juneja, 2022) [7,9] . Despite these opportunities, ICT adoption among farmers remains uneven and limited, particularly in rural and hilly regions such as Himachal Pradesh. Multiple studies have indicated that farmers face barriers such as low digital literacy, inadequate infrastructure, high costs of devices and data, language barriers, and limited localized content (Chhachhar et al., 2014; Sharma et al., 2019) [6,16] . Furthermore, rural communities often encounter challenges related to poor internet connectivity, electricity shortages, and limited institutional support, which hinder the effective utilization of ICTs for agricultural purposes (Saravanan, 2010; Adejo & Haruna, 2019) [14,1] . Himachal Pradesh, though progressive in horticulture and vegetable production, is not immune to these challenges. The state's hilly terrain and dispersed settlements often limit infrastructure development, including internet networks and electricity supply. At the same time, the farming community in Himachal Pradesh is gradually adopting ICTs, especially mobile-based platforms, for seeking information on crop cultivation, weather advisories, pest management, and market prices. Yet, the barriers hindering ICT adoption remain underexplored at a localized level, particularly in districts like Solan, where agriculture and horticulture form the livelihood base of the majority. The importance of studying barriers to ICT adoption lies in ensuring inclusive digital agricultural development. If farmers are unable to access or effectively use ICTs, the digital divide between urban and rural areas is likely to deepen, further marginalizing small and marginal farmers. Moreover, inadequate use of ICTs may reduce the effectiveness of government programs aimed at doubling farmers' income and promoting smart agriculture. Research on barriers also contributes to designing more farmer-centric ICT tools, building capacity for digital literacy, and strengthening extension services (Chhachhar & Hassan, 2013; Ali, 2019) [6,3] . Several studies across the globe have emphasized the constraints in ICT adoption. For instance, Aker (2011) [2] highlighted that while mobile phones significantly reduce information asymmetry in African agriculture, issues of affordability and literacy limit widespread benefits. Similarly, studies in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa have consistently found that infrastructure, cost, and digital skills are critical determinants of ICT adoption (Mittal & Tripathi, 2009; Gillwald et al., 2010; Asongu & Boateng, 2018) [13,8,4] . In the Indian context, inadequate government support, language diversity, and poor ICT awareness have been flagged as major concerns (Kumar et al., 2015; Sharma & Chauhan, 2021) [10,15] . In light of these gaps, the present study was undertaken in Solan district of Himachal Pradesh with the objective of identifying and ranking the barriers faced by farmers in using ICTs. By employing the Garrett Ranking Technique, the study provides insights into the relative importance of different constraints and offers recommendations for policymakers, extension agencies, and ICT developers to design more effective strategies for digital agricultural transformation. The findings are expected to contribute to bridging the digital divide and enhancing the inclusivity of ICT-enabled agricultural development.

Objective

To assess the constraints in the utilization of ICTs among farmers in Solan district.

Methodology

The present study was conducted in Solan district of Himachal Pradesh, which is administratively divided into five blocks i.e., Dharmpur, Solan, Kandaghat, Kunihar, Nalagarh. Out of these, two blocks-Solan and Kandaghat-were selected using a simple random sampling technique. A multistage random sampling method was adopted, wherein one-third of Gram Panchayats from each block were selected, resulting in 20 Gram Panchayats. From each Panchayat, six farmers who owned at least one ICT tool or had an active social media account were purposively chosen, yielding a sample of 120 respondents. Data were collected using a pre-tested, structured interview schedule. Barriers to ICT adoption were identified and analyzed using the Garrett Ranking Technique, which facilitated prioritization of constraints based on farmers' perceptions.

Results and Discussion

The analysis of barriers faced by farmers in adopting ICTs revealed a complex interplay of infrastructural, socio-economic, and institutional constraints. Using the Garrett Ranking Technique, fourteen key barriers were ranked based on farmer perceptions in Solan district of Himachal Pradesh. The results highlight that while ICT tools hold transformative potential, systemic and localized constraints limit their full adoption and utilization. This finding aligns with Saravanan (2010) [14] , who noted that inadequate institutional backing hampers the sustainability of ICT projects in rural areas. Similarly, Ali (2019) [3] emphasized that government negligence in providing training and awareness reduces farmers' motivation to adopt digital tools. Hence, strengthening extension systems and proactive government engagement remain crucial.

Time and Practice Required to Learn ICT Tools (Rank II, Score 62.52)

Farmers ranked the need for more time and practice as the second barrier. ICT tools, though beneficial, were perceived as time-consuming and technically challenging, particularly for older farmers. Digital skills were not acquired intuitively, and the absence of localized training programs exacerbated the issue. This resonates with Mittal and Mehar (2012) [12] , who found that farmers often struggle with unfamiliar interfaces and require repetitive guidance. Chhachhar et al. (2014) [6] similarly reported that inadequate technical training reduces confidence and leads to under-utilization of ICTs. Thus, digital literacy training should be integrated into extension services.

Low Digital Literacy Rate (Rank III, Score 62.17)

Closely following was low digital literacy, particularly among small and marginal farmers. Despite widespread smartphone penetration, many respondents lacked the skills to use advanced ICT applications beyond basic calling and messaging. They often relied on children or younger family members for assistance.

A similar pattern has been observed in multiple contexts. Aker (2011) [2] and Gillwald et al. (2010) [8] highlighted that while mobile penetration is growing in rural Africa and Asia, digital literacy remains a bottleneck in ensuring meaningful ICT use. In Himachal Pradesh, this challenge is further compounded by linguistic barriers and low exposure to digital content in local dialects.

Inconvenient Timing of Broadcasting and Conferencing (Rank IV, Score 61.28)

Respondents highlighted that scheduled ICT-based programs such as agricultural telecasts or live expert conferencing often coincided with peak farming hours. This mismatch in timing discouraged participation, reflecting the need for farmer-centric scheduling.

Sharma & Chauhan (2021) [15] observed a similar mismatch in agricultural extension programs in northern India, where farmers missed important telecasts due to farm work. This indicates that flexibility, such as providing recordings or on-demand access, could significantly improve adoption.

High Initial Cost of ICT (Rank V, Score 58.11)

The cost of acquiring ICT tools-smartphones, laptops, or internet subscriptions-was ranked as a major constraint. For smallholders, investments in ICTs often competed with pressing household and farm expenditures. This finding corroborates with Mittal & Tripathi (2009) [13] , who argued that affordability is a decisive factor in ICT adoption.

Asongu & Boateng (2018) [4] also stressed that cost barriers disproportionately affect marginalized farmers, widening the digital divide. Chhachhar & Hassan (2013) [5] and Adejo & Haruna (2019) [1] identified language barriers as a significant reason for limited ICT uptake in rural Asia and Africa. The provision of vernacular content can thus enhance comprehension and relatability.

Poor Internet Network (Rank VII, Score 57.08)

Connectivity issues were widely reported, especially in hilly terrains where network coverage is patchy and unreliable. Poor bandwidth limited access to video tutorials, online conferences, and real-time market data. This finding mirrors Gulati & Juneja (2022) [9] , who argued that internet infrastructure remains the Achilles heel of digital agriculture in India. Without robust connectivity, ICT initiatives fail to reach their full potential. [11] previously noted that ICT systems designed without farmer participation often fail. Infrastructure gaps such as limited access to ICT kiosks, weak mobile towers, and absence of rural training centers were also highlighted in earlier studies by Kumar et al. (2015) [10] .

11-14. Literacy, Accessibility, Time, and Electricity Constraints

The lower-ranked barriers included lack of ICT literacy (54.66), inability to access relevant information (53.02), less availability of time (43.70), and electricity issues (39.79). While relatively less severe compared to earlier constraints, these still present practical hindrances. In remote villages, electricity shortages limited ICT usage, while farmers' busy schedules restricted time available for learning. Similar issues were documented by Adejo & Haruna (2019) [1] in Nigeria and FAO (2017) [7] globally, where infrastructural and temporal limitations often reduced ICT utility.

Recommendations

Based on the findings, the following strategies are recommended to overcome ICT adoption barriers among farmers:

1. Strengthen Government Support

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgementThe authors express their sincere gratitude to Dr. Samriti, Dr. Rajneesh and Dr. Dhirender of Dr. YSPUHF Nauni for their valuable time and insights. We also thank Shubhangini Jasta, Gauri Sharma, Om Prakash, Venus Thakur Alisha Thakur, Rakesh Kumar, Sabhyata, for their support in this study. Special thanks to the Department of Social Sciences, Dr. YSPUHF Nauni, for providing the necessary resources and guidance throughout the research. We appreciate the constructive feedback from peers and reviewers that enriched this work. Lastly, heartfelt thanks to AdiShakti Kamaksha, Sh. Prem Dutt Shastri Ji, Pawan Sharma, Meena Sharma and our families for their constant encouragement and support.

References

1. Adejo PE, Haruna U. ICTs in agricultural development: Challenges and prospects for developing countries. Int J Agric Ext. 2019;7(1):41-47.
2. Aker JC. Dial "A" for agriculture: A review of information and communication technologies for agricultural extension in developing countries. Agric Econ. 2011;42(6):631-647.
3. Ali J. Adoption of information and communication technology (ICT) in agriculture and its impact. Indian J Agric Econ. 2019;74(3):395-410.
4. Asongu S, Boateng A. Mobile phones and inclusive human development in Sub-Saharan Africa. J Afr Bus. 2018;19(2):1-24.
5. Chhachhar AR, Hassan MS. The use of mobile phone among farmers for agriculture development. Int J Sci Res. 2013;2(6):95-98.
6. Chhachhar AR, Qureshi B, Khushk GM, Ahmed S. Impact of information and communication technologies in agriculture development. J Basic Appl Sci Res. 2014;4(1):281-288.
7. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in Agriculture: Report of the FAO Committee on Agriculture. Rome: FAO; 2017.
8. Gillwald A, Milek A, Stork C. Gender assessment of ICT access and usage in Africa. Research ICT Africa Policy Paper. 2010;5:1-34.
9. Gulati A, Juneja R. Digital agriculture: India's tryst with technology. Indian J Agric Econ. 2022;77(3):457-471.
10. Kumar R, Singh RK, Pandey DK. Farmers' perception regarding usefulness of ICT in agriculture. Indian Res J Ext Educ. 2015;15(1):21-25.
11. Meera SN, Jhamtani A, Rao DUM. Information and Communication Technology in Agricultural Development: A Comparative Analysis of Three Projects from India. Agricultural Research and Extension Network Paper No. 135. London: ODI; 2004.
12. Mittal S, Mehar M. How mobile phones contribute to growth of small farmers? Evidence from India. Q J Int Agric. 2012;51(3):227-244.
13. Mittal S, Tripathi G. Role of mobile phone technology in improving small farm productivity. Agric Econ Res Rev. 2009;22(1):451-459.
14. Saravanan R. ICTs for Agricultural Extension: Global Experiments, Innovations and Experiences. New Delhi: New India Publishing Agency; 2010.
15. Sharma S, Chauhan J. Barriers in adoption of ICT tools among farmers in Himachal Pradesh. Himachal J Agric Res. 2021;47(2):145-153.
16. Sharma V, Sharma P, Thakur R. Constraints in use of ICTs for agricultural extension services in Himachal Pradesh. Indian J Ext Educ. 2019;55(3):85-89.