{"id":{"repo_id":"cambridge","oai_identifier":"oai:www.repository.cam.ac.uk:1810/374250"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/cambridge/oai:www.repository.cam.ac.uk:1810/374250","repository":{"repo_id":"cambridge","name":"Cambridge University","base_url":"https://api.repository.cam.ac.uk/server/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Psychological insights for sustainable agricultural transformation","abstract":"The agricultural sector grapples with significant challenges with regards to environmental sustainability, with the food system contributing to roughly 30% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Specifically, the widespread practice of Crop Residue Burning (CRB), involving the open burning of crop residues to clear fields after harvest, contributes 3.5% to global emissions. In Thailand, with the majority being smallholders, farmers are under pressure to reduce emissions from their operations which constitute 15.2% of the country’s total emissions while simultaneously facing financial struggles with incomes below the national poverty line. Data reveals a substantial increase in the burning of rice residues in Thailand, rising from 3.4 million tonnes of biomass burned from rice production in 1961 to 5.7 million tonnes in 2020. Despite extensive efforts to tackle CRB through the promotion of Sustainable Residue Management (SRM), its persistent prevalence underscores the inadequacy of current strategies. Given that 84% of the global farming community comprises smallholders, it is imperative for governments to optimise policy interventions towards smallholder farmers, effectively guiding them towards achieving a sustainable transformation in the global agricultural sector. Emerging evidence suggests a psychological approach towards understanding farmers’ decision-making processes can improve efforts to promote adoption. In particular, motivational factors of individuals within the industrial settings are deemed an important but largely neglected area. Existing policy interventions often utilise the top-down approach that fails to understand individual’s behaviours and motivations, particularly for smallholder farmers operating under financial and operational difficulties. This represents significant impediments to a sustainable transformation within the agricultural sector, and the literature calls for increased incorporation of these psychological factors into agricultural research and policy. Gaining this understanding could empower policymakers to design interventions that effectively address the root causes of CRB. This research seeks to address the following research questions, encompassing motivational factors driving the adoption decisions of Thai smallholder farmers: (i) How can agricultural interventions effectively target the motivation dimensions of smallholder famers to promote long-term sustainable agriculture adoption? (ii) What behavioural insights influence farmers’ decision-making when provided with subsidies for sustainable agriculture adoption? To comprehensively explore the two research questions, this study employs a two-phased mixed-method approach using the sequential exploratory design through the context of SRM adoption. This approach first utilises qualitative interviews in RQ1 to uncover rich insights from key informants and subsequently utilises field experiments in RQ2 to capture behavioural complexities with statistical robustness. Interview participants included both rice farmers and agricultural companies across the varying regions of Thailand. The qualitative study identified three distinct dimensions of motivations, including controlled, social, and autonomous motivations, and suggests how agricultural interventions can more effectively utilise these motivation dimensions to alleviate the current barriers hindering adoption. Specifically, despite the autonomous motivation (i.e., self-determined action) for environmental conservation present among farmers, interviewees mentioned other significant functional and psychological barriers that inhibits the autonomous motivation for sustainable practice adoption, therefore highlighting the crucial importance of controlled motivations (i.e., external rewards) in the immediate term. Building upon the insights gained from the qualitative study, a lab-in-the-field experiment was developed to delve deeper into the effect of controlled motivators as well as to understand potential psychological effects caused by cognitive limitations, referred to as “behavioural insights”. The objective of the study is to understand the optimal policy intervention by capturing the behavioural response of farmers when provided with differing government interventions. Experiment participants included 250 smallholder rice farmers in Thailand’s Northeastern region, the region with the highest incidence of CRB. The investigation focused on examining the impact of diverse formats of financial incentives, specifically cost and income subsidies, on the reduction of CRB among farmers with varying financial characteristics. To explicitly consider financial disparities, participants were subjected to different budget constraints through varied endowments provided at the onset of the experiment. The findings highlight a significant potential for temporary controlled motivators (i.e., government subsidies) in stimulating long-term adoption of SRM even after the removal of the subsidies. Additionally, multiple behavioural insights were identified, leading to disparities in adoption rates among different individuals. First, the psychological appeal of higher incomes compared to reduced costs renders income subsidies more effective than cost subsidies. Additionally, the perceived need for obtaining more income among budget-constrained individuals led to a higher risk-taking and uptake of cost subsidies compared to their non-budget-constrained counterparts. Furthermore, the noteworthy impact of loss aversion bias was identified, contributing to divergent long-term behaviours after subsidies ended albeit similar payoffs. Analysis of both phases of the study indicates a need to enhance incentives for sustainable practices to foster autonomous motivation. This could range from the use of subsidies in the immediate-term to utilising market-led approaches in the long-term. Fundamentally, achieving adoption of sustainable practices that yield unfavourable private benefits for farmers can be challenging due to their existing financial circumstances. Moreover, facilitating conditions for adoption must be provided to alleviate potential barriers and increase the ease of adoption. In particular, psychological barriers exist which hinders farmers’ behavioural change, requiring specific interventions to address these barriers. Finally, interventions must be tailored towards individual farmers’ needs through a bottom-up approach. This research revealed notable disparities in farmers’ choices, as evidenced by the field experiment, and identifies obstacles arising from their specific situations. These challenges are shaped by factors like financial attributes and regional variations in the preparedness of ecosystems for sustainable agriculture. Implementation of policies without acknowledging these variations results in an inefficient allocation of governmental budgets due to the varying effectiveness. This study contributes to the existing literature by deepening our understanding of the integration of industrial psychology theories into sustainable production adoption research. Notably, the study delves into the elements of the self-determination theory in the context of smallholder farmers’ adoption of sustainable practices, introducing a novel perspective to tackling the issue of CRB. In addition, it provides further context of the innovation resistance theory among smallholder farmers, delineating the functional and psychological barriers towards SRM adoption. Furthermore, the study contributes experimental evidence on the behavioural insights influencing the effectiveness of temporary subsidies for sustainable practices, as well as contributing to the literary debate on the effect of extrinsic incentives on individual motivations. Furthermore, this research offers practical implications for both public and private sectors by providing an understanding of the motivations guiding smallholder farmers in their decisions regarding the adoption of sustainable practices. The barriers, enabling factors, and motivators uncovered in this study can serve as a valuable guide for developing policy interventions aimed at encouraging adoption. Traditionally, these policies are often top-down and lacks a comprehensive understanding of individual context, thereby limiting its effectiveness. This study also provides specific insights into the behavioural impacts of subsidies intended to support sustainable transformation, aiding in the strategic planning of policy implementations. Additionally, technology companies can enhance the alignment of their offerings with the identified enabling factors, improving the suitability and appeal to farmers. This approach can foster adoption of other technologies in general and contributes to the overall advancement of the agricultural sector. Despite the acknowledged contributions, this study is subject to several limitations. Firstly, the generalisability of the findings could be limited through the specific geographical focus. While the results are applicable to the context of smallholder farmers in Thailand, additional insights from diverse farming communities could enhance the robustness of the conclusions. Moreover, relying on specific individuals for qualitative interviews might introduce bias, as the perspectives shared may be influenced by individual views or preferences for particular technologies. Lastly, the field experiment is constrained by the inherent limitations of a lab-in-the-field approach, where the full complexity of actual farming practices may not be fully replicated in a simulated setting. Factors such as effort costs in operating machinery or the timing of farming cycles, which can have a crucial effect on adoption decisions, might be overlooked in the simulation.","abstract_html":"The agricultural sector grapples with significant challenges with regards to environmental sustainability, with the food system contributing to roughly 30% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Specifically, the widespread practice of Crop Residue Burning (CRB), involving the open burning of crop residues to clear fields after harvest, contributes 3.5% to global emissions. In Thailand, with the majority being smallholders, farmers are under pressure to reduce emissions from their operations which constitute 15.2% of the country’s total emissions while simultaneously facing financial struggles with incomes below the national poverty line. Data reveals a substantial increase in the burning of rice residues in Thailand, rising from 3.4 million tonnes of biomass burned from rice production in 1961 to 5.7 million tonnes in 2020. Despite extensive efforts to tackle CRB through the promotion of Sustainable Residue Management (SRM), its persistent prevalence underscores the inadequacy of current strategies. Given that 84% of the global farming community comprises smallholders, it is imperative for governments to optimise policy interventions towards smallholder farmers, effectively guiding them towards achieving a sustainable transformation in the global agricultural sector. Emerging evidence suggests a psychological approach towards understanding farmers’ decision-making processes can improve efforts to promote adoption. In particular, motivational factors of individuals within the industrial settings are deemed an important but largely neglected area. Existing policy interventions often utilise the top-down approach that fails to understand individual’s behaviours and motivations, particularly for smallholder farmers operating under financial and operational difficulties. This represents significant impediments to a sustainable transformation within the agricultural sector, and the literature calls for increased incorporation of these psychological factors into agricultural research and policy. Gaining this understanding could empower policymakers to design interventions that effectively address the root causes of CRB. This research seeks to address the following research questions, encompassing motivational factors driving the adoption decisions of Thai smallholder farmers: (i) How can agricultural interventions effectively target the motivation dimensions of smallholder famers to promote long-term sustainable agriculture adoption? (ii) What behavioural insights influence farmers’ decision-making when provided with subsidies for sustainable agriculture adoption? To comprehensively explore the two research questions, this study employs a two-phased mixed-method approach using the sequential exploratory design through the context of SRM adoption. This approach first utilises qualitative interviews in RQ1 to uncover rich insights from key informants and subsequently utilises field experiments in RQ2 to capture behavioural complexities with statistical robustness. Interview participants included both rice farmers and agricultural companies across the varying regions of Thailand. The qualitative study identified three distinct dimensions of motivations, including controlled, social, and autonomous motivations, and suggests how agricultural interventions can more effectively utilise these motivation dimensions to alleviate the current barriers hindering adoption. Specifically, despite the autonomous motivation (i.e., self-determined action) for environmental conservation present among farmers, interviewees mentioned other significant functional and psychological barriers that inhibits the autonomous motivation for sustainable practice adoption, therefore highlighting the crucial importance of controlled motivations (i.e., external rewards) in the immediate term. Building upon the insights gained from the qualitative study, a lab-in-the-field experiment was developed to delve deeper into the effect of controlled motivators as well as to understand potential psychological effects caused by cognitive limitations, referred to as “behavioural insights”. The objective of the study is to understand the optimal policy intervention by capturing the behavioural response of farmers when provided with differing government interventions. Experiment participants included 250 smallholder rice farmers in Thailand’s Northeastern region, the region with the highest incidence of CRB. The investigation focused on examining the impact of diverse formats of financial incentives, specifically cost and income subsidies, on the reduction of CRB among farmers with varying financial characteristics. To explicitly consider financial disparities, participants were subjected to different budget constraints through varied endowments provided at the onset of the experiment. The findings highlight a significant potential for temporary controlled motivators (i.e., government subsidies) in stimulating long-term adoption of SRM even after the removal of the subsidies. Additionally, multiple behavioural insights were identified, leading to disparities in adoption rates among different individuals. First, the psychological appeal of higher incomes compared to reduced costs renders income subsidies more effective than cost subsidies. Additionally, the perceived need for obtaining more income among budget-constrained individuals led to a higher risk-taking and uptake of cost subsidies compared to their non-budget-constrained counterparts. Furthermore, the noteworthy impact of loss aversion bias was identified, contributing to divergent long-term behaviours after subsidies ended albeit similar payoffs. Analysis of both phases of the study indicates a need to enhance incentives for sustainable practices to foster autonomous motivation. This could range from the use of subsidies in the immediate-term to utilising market-led approaches in the long-term. Fundamentally, achieving adoption of sustainable practices that yield unfavourable private benefits for farmers can be challenging due to their existing financial circumstances. Moreover, facilitating conditions for adoption must be provided to alleviate potential barriers and increase the ease of adoption. In particular, psychological barriers exist which hinders farmers’ behavioural change, requiring specific interventions to address these barriers. Finally, interventions must be tailored towards individual farmers’ needs through a bottom-up approach. This research revealed notable disparities in farmers’ choices, as evidenced by the field experiment, and identifies obstacles arising from their specific situations. These challenges are shaped by factors like financial attributes and regional variations in the preparedness of ecosystems for sustainable agriculture. Implementation of policies without acknowledging these variations results in an inefficient allocation of governmental budgets due to the varying effectiveness. This study contributes to the existing literature by deepening our understanding of the integration of industrial psychology theories into sustainable production adoption research. Notably, the study delves into the elements of the self-determination theory in the context of smallholder farmers’ adoption of sustainable practices, introducing a novel perspective to tackling the issue of CRB. In addition, it provides further context of the innovation resistance theory among smallholder farmers, delineating the functional and psychological barriers towards SRM adoption. Furthermore, the study contributes experimental evidence on the behavioural insights influencing the effectiveness of temporary subsidies for sustainable practices, as well as contributing to the literary debate on the effect of extrinsic incentives on individual motivations. Furthermore, this research offers practical implications for both public and private sectors by providing an understanding of the motivations guiding smallholder farmers in their decisions regarding the adoption of sustainable practices. The barriers, enabling factors, and motivators uncovered in this study can serve as a valuable guide for developing policy interventions aimed at encouraging adoption. Traditionally, these policies are often top-down and lacks a comprehensive understanding of individual context, thereby limiting its effectiveness. This study also provides specific insights into the behavioural impacts of subsidies intended to support sustainable transformation, aiding in the strategic planning of policy implementations. Additionally, technology companies can enhance the alignment of their offerings with the identified enabling factors, improving the suitability and appeal to farmers. This approach can foster adoption of other technologies in general and contributes to the overall advancement of the agricultural sector. Despite the acknowledged contributions, this study is subject to several limitations. Firstly, the generalisability of the findings could be limited through the specific geographical focus. While the results are applicable to the context of smallholder farmers in Thailand, additional insights from diverse farming communities could enhance the robustness of the conclusions. Moreover, relying on specific individuals for qualitative interviews might introduce bias, as the perspectives shared may be influenced by individual views or preferences for particular technologies. Lastly, the field experiment is constrained by the inherent limitations of a lab-in-the-field approach, where the full complexity of actual farming practices may not be fully replicated in a simulated setting. Factors such as effort costs in operating machinery or the timing of farming cycles, which can have a crucial effect on adoption decisions, might be overlooked in the simulation.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Chindasombatcharoen, Nopparuj"],"institution":"University of Cambridge","degree_name":"Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)","degree_level":"Doctoral","degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Kumar, Mukesh"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2024,"date_issued":"2024-03-16","date_published":"2024-03-16","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:24:25Z","subjects":["crop residue burning","innovation systems","psychological insights","sustainable agriculture","technology adoption"],"languages":["eng"],"rights":[],"rights_urls":["https://apollo8-f-pro.lib.cam.ac.uk/bitstreams/248610d3-9cbc-44a0-b70a-ae0dc51af569/download","https://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved/"],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:creator.authoridentifier","label":"Author Identifier","values":["0000000257407536"],"render_values":[{"text":"0000-0002-5740-7536","href":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5740-7536","code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.112382","outbound_label":"DOI","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.doi"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Kumar, Mukesh"]},{"key":"dc:contributor.sponsor","label":"Sponsor","values":["Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI) R&D Management Association (RADMA)"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Chindasombatcharoen, Nopparuj"]},{"key":"dc:creator.authoridentifier","label":"Author Identifier","values":["0000000257407536"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2024-03-16"]},{"key":"dc:publisher.institution","label":"Dc Publisher Institution","values":["University of Cambridge"]},{"key":"dc:relation.isreferencedby.uri","label":"Dc Relation Isreferencedby URI","values":["https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/374250"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationlevel","label":"Dc Type Qualificationlevel","values":["Doctoral"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationname","label":"Dc Type Qualificationname","values":["Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["crop residue burning","innovation systems","psychological insights","sustainable agriculture","technology adoption"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["eng"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["https://apollo8-f-pro.lib.cam.ac.uk/bitstreams/248610d3-9cbc-44a0-b70a-ae0dc51af569/download","https://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved/"]},{"key":"dc:rights.embargodate","label":"Dc Rights Embargodate","values":["2025-10-03"]},{"key":"dc:rights.embargotype","label":"Dc Rights Embargotype","values":["embargo"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.doi","label":"DOI","values":["https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.112382"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://apollo8-f-pro.lib.cam.ac.uk/bitstreams/ebdcaa7c-6d93-4289-867d-01aea3dafb63/download"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The agricultural sector grapples with significant challenges with regards to environmental sustainability, with the food system contributing to roughly 30% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Specifically, the widespread practice of Crop Residue Burning (CRB), involving the open burning of crop residues to clear fields after harvest, contributes 3.5% to global emissions. In Thailand, with the majority being smallholders, farmers are under pressure to reduce emissions from their operations which constitute 15.2% of the country’s total emissions while simultaneously facing financial struggles with incomes below the national poverty line. Data reveals a substantial increase in the burning of rice residues in Thailand, rising from 3.4 million tonnes of biomass burned from rice production in 1961 to 5.7 million tonnes in 2020. Despite extensive efforts to tackle CRB through the promotion of Sustainable Residue Management (SRM), its persistent prevalence underscores the inadequacy of current strategies. Given that 84% of the global farming community comprises smallholders, it is imperative for governments to optimise policy interventions towards smallholder farmers, effectively guiding them towards achieving a sustainable transformation in the global agricultural sector. Emerging evidence suggests a psychological approach towards understanding farmers’ decision-making processes can improve efforts to promote adoption. In particular, motivational factors of individuals within the industrial settings are deemed an important but largely neglected area. Existing policy interventions often utilise the top-down approach that fails to understand individual’s behaviours and motivations, particularly for smallholder farmers operating under financial and operational difficulties. This represents significant impediments to a sustainable transformation within the agricultural sector, and the literature calls for increased incorporation of these psychological factors into agricultural research and policy. Gaining this understanding could empower policymakers to design interventions that effectively address the root causes of CRB. This research seeks to address the following research questions, encompassing motivational factors driving the adoption decisions of Thai smallholder farmers: (i) How can agricultural interventions effectively target the motivation dimensions of smallholder famers to promote long-term sustainable agriculture adoption? (ii) What behavioural insights influence farmers’ decision-making when provided with subsidies for sustainable agriculture adoption? To comprehensively explore the two research questions, this study employs a two-phased mixed-method approach using the sequential exploratory design through the context of SRM adoption. This approach first utilises qualitative interviews in RQ1 to uncover rich insights from key informants and subsequently utilises field experiments in RQ2 to capture behavioural complexities with statistical robustness. Interview participants included both rice farmers and agricultural companies across the varying regions of Thailand. The qualitative study identified three distinct dimensions of motivations, including controlled, social, and autonomous motivations, and suggests how agricultural interventions can more effectively utilise these motivation dimensions to alleviate the current barriers hindering adoption. Specifically, despite the autonomous motivation (i.e., self-determined action) for environmental conservation present among farmers, interviewees mentioned other significant functional and psychological barriers that inhibits the autonomous motivation for sustainable practice adoption, therefore highlighting the crucial importance of controlled motivations (i.e., external rewards) in the immediate term. Building upon the insights gained from the qualitative study, a lab-in-the-field experiment was developed to delve deeper into the effect of controlled motivators as well as to understand potential psychological effects caused by cognitive limitations, referred to as “behavioural insights”. The objective of the study is to understand the optimal policy intervention by capturing the behavioural response of farmers when provided with differing government interventions. Experiment participants included 250 smallholder rice farmers in Thailand’s Northeastern region, the region with the highest incidence of CRB. The investigation focused on examining the impact of diverse formats of financial incentives, specifically cost and income subsidies, on the reduction of CRB among farmers with varying financial characteristics. To explicitly consider financial disparities, participants were subjected to different budget constraints through varied endowments provided at the onset of the experiment. The findings highlight a significant potential for temporary controlled motivators (i.e., government subsidies) in stimulating long-term adoption of SRM even after the removal of the subsidies. Additionally, multiple behavioural insights were identified, leading to disparities in adoption rates among different individuals. First, the psychological appeal of higher incomes compared to reduced costs renders income subsidies more effective than cost subsidies. Additionally, the perceived need for obtaining more income among budget-constrained individuals led to a higher risk-taking and uptake of cost subsidies compared to their non-budget-constrained counterparts. Furthermore, the noteworthy impact of loss aversion bias was identified, contributing to divergent long-term behaviours after subsidies ended albeit similar payoffs. Analysis of both phases of the study indicates a need to enhance incentives for sustainable practices to foster autonomous motivation. This could range from the use of subsidies in the immediate-term to utilising market-led approaches in the long-term. Fundamentally, achieving adoption of sustainable practices that yield unfavourable private benefits for farmers can be challenging due to their existing financial circumstances. Moreover, facilitating conditions for adoption must be provided to alleviate potential barriers and increase the ease of adoption. In particular, psychological barriers exist which hinders farmers’ behavioural change, requiring specific interventions to address these barriers. Finally, interventions must be tailored towards individual farmers’ needs through a bottom-up approach. This research revealed notable disparities in farmers’ choices, as evidenced by the field experiment, and identifies obstacles arising from their specific situations. These challenges are shaped by factors like financial attributes and regional variations in the preparedness of ecosystems for sustainable agriculture. Implementation of policies without acknowledging these variations results in an inefficient allocation of governmental budgets due to the varying effectiveness. This study contributes to the existing literature by deepening our understanding of the integration of industrial psychology theories into sustainable production adoption research. Notably, the study delves into the elements of the self-determination theory in the context of smallholder farmers’ adoption of sustainable practices, introducing a novel perspective to tackling the issue of CRB. In addition, it provides further context of the innovation resistance theory among smallholder farmers, delineating the functional and psychological barriers towards SRM adoption. Furthermore, the study contributes experimental evidence on the behavioural insights influencing the effectiveness of temporary subsidies for sustainable practices, as well as contributing to the literary debate on the effect of extrinsic incentives on individual motivations. Furthermore, this research offers practical implications for both public and private sectors by providing an understanding of the motivations guiding smallholder farmers in their decisions regarding the adoption of sustainable practices. The barriers, enabling factors, and motivators uncovered in this study can serve as a valuable guide for developing policy interventions aimed at encouraging adoption. Traditionally, these policies are often top-down and lacks a comprehensive understanding of individual context, thereby limiting its effectiveness. This study also provides specific insights into the behavioural impacts of subsidies intended to support sustainable transformation, aiding in the strategic planning of policy implementations. Additionally, technology companies can enhance the alignment of their offerings with the identified enabling factors, improving the suitability and appeal to farmers. This approach can foster adoption of other technologies in general and contributes to the overall advancement of the agricultural sector. Despite the acknowledged contributions, this study is subject to several limitations. Firstly, the generalisability of the findings could be limited through the specific geographical focus. While the results are applicable to the context of smallholder farmers in Thailand, additional insights from diverse farming communities could enhance the robustness of the conclusions. Moreover, relying on specific individuals for qualitative interviews might introduce bias, as the perspectives shared may be influenced by individual views or preferences for particular technologies. Lastly, the field experiment is constrained by the inherent limitations of a lab-in-the-field approach, where the full complexity of actual farming practices may not be fully replicated in a simulated setting. Factors such as effort costs in operating machinery or the timing of farming cycles, which can have a crucial effect on adoption decisions, might be overlooked in the simulation."]},{"key":"dc:format.checksum.md5","label":"Dc Format Checksum Md5","values":["ec31c6fc3c1ffb7ed94576f05f608b20","87eda9de84448d1f82354d60eee3eb5f"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Psychological insights for sustainable agricultural transformation"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Kumar, Mukesh"],"dc:contributor.sponsor":["Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI) R&D Management Association (RADMA)"],"dc:creator":["Chindasombatcharoen, Nopparuj"],"dc:creator.authoridentifier":["0000000257407536"],"dc:date.issued":["2024-03-16"],"dc:description.abstract":["The agricultural sector grapples with significant challenges with regards to environmental sustainability, with the food system contributing to roughly 30% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Specifically, the widespread practice of Crop Residue Burning (CRB), involving the open burning of crop residues to clear fields after harvest, contributes 3.5% to global emissions. In Thailand, with the majority being smallholders, farmers are under pressure to reduce emissions from their operations which constitute 15.2% of the country’s total emissions while simultaneously facing financial struggles with incomes below the national poverty line. Data reveals a substantial increase in the burning of rice residues in Thailand, rising from 3.4 million tonnes of biomass burned from rice production in 1961 to 5.7 million tonnes in 2020. Despite extensive efforts to tackle CRB through the promotion of Sustainable Residue Management (SRM), its persistent prevalence underscores the inadequacy of current strategies. Given that 84% of the global farming community comprises smallholders, it is imperative for governments to optimise policy interventions towards smallholder farmers, effectively guiding them towards achieving a sustainable transformation in the global agricultural sector. Emerging evidence suggests a psychological approach towards understanding farmers’ decision-making processes can improve efforts to promote adoption. In particular, motivational factors of individuals within the industrial settings are deemed an important but largely neglected area. Existing policy interventions often utilise the top-down approach that fails to understand individual’s behaviours and motivations, particularly for smallholder farmers operating under financial and operational difficulties. This represents significant impediments to a sustainable transformation within the agricultural sector, and the literature calls for increased incorporation of these psychological factors into agricultural research and policy. Gaining this understanding could empower policymakers to design interventions that effectively address the root causes of CRB. This research seeks to address the following research questions, encompassing motivational factors driving the adoption decisions of Thai smallholder farmers: (i) How can agricultural interventions effectively target the motivation dimensions of smallholder famers to promote long-term sustainable agriculture adoption? (ii) What behavioural insights influence farmers’ decision-making when provided with subsidies for sustainable agriculture adoption? To comprehensively explore the two research questions, this study employs a two-phased mixed-method approach using the sequential exploratory design through the context of SRM adoption. This approach first utilises qualitative interviews in RQ1 to uncover rich insights from key informants and subsequently utilises field experiments in RQ2 to capture behavioural complexities with statistical robustness. Interview participants included both rice farmers and agricultural companies across the varying regions of Thailand. The qualitative study identified three distinct dimensions of motivations, including controlled, social, and autonomous motivations, and suggests how agricultural interventions can more effectively utilise these motivation dimensions to alleviate the current barriers hindering adoption. Specifically, despite the autonomous motivation (i.e., self-determined action) for environmental conservation present among farmers, interviewees mentioned other significant functional and psychological barriers that inhibits the autonomous motivation for sustainable practice adoption, therefore highlighting the crucial importance of controlled motivations (i.e., external rewards) in the immediate term. Building upon the insights gained from the qualitative study, a lab-in-the-field experiment was developed to delve deeper into the effect of controlled motivators as well as to understand potential psychological effects caused by cognitive limitations, referred to as “behavioural insights”. The objective of the study is to understand the optimal policy intervention by capturing the behavioural response of farmers when provided with differing government interventions. Experiment participants included 250 smallholder rice farmers in Thailand’s Northeastern region, the region with the highest incidence of CRB. The investigation focused on examining the impact of diverse formats of financial incentives, specifically cost and income subsidies, on the reduction of CRB among farmers with varying financial characteristics. To explicitly consider financial disparities, participants were subjected to different budget constraints through varied endowments provided at the onset of the experiment. The findings highlight a significant potential for temporary controlled motivators (i.e., government subsidies) in stimulating long-term adoption of SRM even after the removal of the subsidies. Additionally, multiple behavioural insights were identified, leading to disparities in adoption rates among different individuals. First, the psychological appeal of higher incomes compared to reduced costs renders income subsidies more effective than cost subsidies. Additionally, the perceived need for obtaining more income among budget-constrained individuals led to a higher risk-taking and uptake of cost subsidies compared to their non-budget-constrained counterparts. Furthermore, the noteworthy impact of loss aversion bias was identified, contributing to divergent long-term behaviours after subsidies ended albeit similar payoffs. Analysis of both phases of the study indicates a need to enhance incentives for sustainable practices to foster autonomous motivation. This could range from the use of subsidies in the immediate-term to utilising market-led approaches in the long-term. Fundamentally, achieving adoption of sustainable practices that yield unfavourable private benefits for farmers can be challenging due to their existing financial circumstances. Moreover, facilitating conditions for adoption must be provided to alleviate potential barriers and increase the ease of adoption. In particular, psychological barriers exist which hinders farmers’ behavioural change, requiring specific interventions to address these barriers. Finally, interventions must be tailored towards individual farmers’ needs through a bottom-up approach. This research revealed notable disparities in farmers’ choices, as evidenced by the field experiment, and identifies obstacles arising from their specific situations. These challenges are shaped by factors like financial attributes and regional variations in the preparedness of ecosystems for sustainable agriculture. Implementation of policies without acknowledging these variations results in an inefficient allocation of governmental budgets due to the varying effectiveness. This study contributes to the existing literature by deepening our understanding of the integration of industrial psychology theories into sustainable production adoption research. Notably, the study delves into the elements of the self-determination theory in the context of smallholder farmers’ adoption of sustainable practices, introducing a novel perspective to tackling the issue of CRB. In addition, it provides further context of the innovation resistance theory among smallholder farmers, delineating the functional and psychological barriers towards SRM adoption. Furthermore, the study contributes experimental evidence on the behavioural insights influencing the effectiveness of temporary subsidies for sustainable practices, as well as contributing to the literary debate on the effect of extrinsic incentives on individual motivations. Furthermore, this research offers practical implications for both public and private sectors by providing an understanding of the motivations guiding smallholder farmers in their decisions regarding the adoption of sustainable practices. The barriers, enabling factors, and motivators uncovered in this study can serve as a valuable guide for developing policy interventions aimed at encouraging adoption. Traditionally, these policies are often top-down and lacks a comprehensive understanding of individual context, thereby limiting its effectiveness. This study also provides specific insights into the behavioural impacts of subsidies intended to support sustainable transformation, aiding in the strategic planning of policy implementations. Additionally, technology companies can enhance the alignment of their offerings with the identified enabling factors, improving the suitability and appeal to farmers. This approach can foster adoption of other technologies in general and contributes to the overall advancement of the agricultural sector. Despite the acknowledged contributions, this study is subject to several limitations. Firstly, the generalisability of the findings could be limited through the specific geographical focus. While the results are applicable to the context of smallholder farmers in Thailand, additional insights from diverse farming communities could enhance the robustness of the conclusions. Moreover, relying on specific individuals for qualitative interviews might introduce bias, as the perspectives shared may be influenced by individual views or preferences for particular technologies. Lastly, the field experiment is constrained by the inherent limitations of a lab-in-the-field approach, where the full complexity of actual farming practices may not be fully replicated in a simulated setting. Factors such as effort costs in operating machinery or the timing of farming cycles, which can have a crucial effect on adoption decisions, might be overlooked in the simulation."],"dc:format.checksum.md5":["ec31c6fc3c1ffb7ed94576f05f608b20","87eda9de84448d1f82354d60eee3eb5f"],"dc:identifier.doi":["https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.112382"],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://apollo8-f-pro.lib.cam.ac.uk/bitstreams/ebdcaa7c-6d93-4289-867d-01aea3dafb63/download"],"dc:language":["eng"],"dc:publisher.institution":["University of Cambridge"],"dc:relation.isreferencedby.uri":["https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/374250"],"dc:rights":["https://apollo8-f-pro.lib.cam.ac.uk/bitstreams/248610d3-9cbc-44a0-b70a-ae0dc51af569/download","https://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved/"],"dc:rights.embargodate":["2025-10-03"],"dc:rights.embargotype":["embargo"],"dc:subject":["crop residue burning","innovation systems","psychological insights","sustainable agriculture","technology adoption"],"dc:title":["Psychological insights for sustainable agricultural transformation"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"dc:type.qualificationlevel":["Doctoral"],"dc:type.qualificationname":["Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:24:25Z"}