1. Introduction
Sustainable development means providing current needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. As for the crop production sector, which is the main source of the provision for the population, a sustainable development foundation depends on the long-term fertility and productivity of the soil [
1]. Unfortunately, a large amount of land has degraded beyond reclamation in the last four decades, while a few percent of these lands are rehabilitated during that period [
2,
3]. Soil degradation implies a long-term decline in soil fertility, soil erosion, or adverse changes in the physical and chemical properties of soil. Among the possible causes, soil erosion has been the major process that leads to degradation [
4,
5]. As stated in [
6], the soil erosion rate has been much faster than the soil formation process and it has been found to be 100–1000 times higher for arable land than the natural background erosion rate.
The agricultural practices directly affect whether the soil erodes or retains fertile and provides long-term sustainable benefits. Contemporary agriculture has been dominated in many developing countries to solve economic and social issues by increasing agricultural productivity [
7,
8]. However, these growth-oriented agricultural practices have solved the challenge of providing agricultural production growth, leading to a decline in soil fertility (due to nutritional degradation, physical erosion, and loss of organic matter) [
9]. The negative impacts of unsustainable farming are not only limited by harming the environment but also affects the productivity and profitability of the production in the long run. Adoption and diffusion of sustainable agriculture practices (SAP) are considered to be the solution to cope with this unsustainable trend [
8,
9,
10]. SAPs are viewed as a win-win strategy because of their potential to simultaneously address environmental, economic, and social issues [
11]. In addition to becoming a protection against environmental damage [
10,
12], many studies have found that efficient usage of SAPs helps farmers to improve productivity and income [
13] and contributes to reducing poverty and hunger [
9,
14]. Countries adopt different types of SAPs and governments encourage the adoption process through their effective policy measures [
12,
15]. However, farmers’ adoption rate is still low in many countries [
2,
12,
16]. Thus, explaining this phenomenon and getting a better insight into farmers’ adoption behavior has become an issue of concern for researchers and policymakers.
Most of the arable area in Mongolia consists of brown loam soil with low humus and loose structure that is very vulnerable to erosion and degradation [
17]. The soil degradation in Mongolia is mainly due to soil erosion. In addition to the soil feature, strong and sustained wind, the absence of natural wind barriers, and farmers’ soil eroding conventional technology increase the soil vulnerability [
18,
19]. Around 46.5% of the total farming field were more-or-less eroded in 1990, but the amount of eroded land increased, and by 2010, all arable land was eroded to some extent [
18]. Moreover, 60.6% of the analyzed fields had a major erosion at that time [
20]. Like the other developing countries, the Mongolian agricultural sector has been directed to increase production and provide self-sufficiency in the past and now is transitioning from intensive to sustainable agriculture.
According to the Food Supply Law and the National Security Law, wheat is the main food staple and a strategic product in Mongolia. Although only one percent (1.35 million hectares) of the total land (1565 million hectares) is suitable for crop cultivation [
21], it is possible to grow wheat, potatoes, and some vegetables to provide domestic demand. In the last five years, on average, 75% of the total sown area or 342.0 thousand hectares was planted with wheat, and about 360 thousand tons of wheat was harvested, which meets around 95 percent of the total domestic demand. Yield per unit area has increased significantly over the last decade, with an average annual yield of 1.27 ha, the highest average yield in wheat production development (The beginning of the development of modern wheat production in Mongola is considered to be from 1960, and the period up to now can be divided into 5 stages of development. In the previous four stages, the average yield was 0.77 tons/ha; 0.9 tons/ha; 1.2 tons/ha; and 0.79 tons/ha, respectively). As of 2019, a total of 98,000 people were employed in the crop production sector, of which 40% was related to wheat cultivation [
22]. Crop production accounts for 17% (
$302 million) of total agricultural output, which is sourced from mostly wheat [
22].
Because of its importance, the wheat production sector is operating under huge government interventions. The Government of Mongolia (GoM) implements a specific policy that is dedicated to increasing wheat production. The policy has mainly consisted of various subsidies for the farmers to increase their operation scale (by encouraging them to cultivate more land), increasing productivity, and decreasing their financial burden [
23]. However, the aspects of sustainable farming have not been reflected in government policy so far. Besides the Government production growth-oriented policy, the German-Mongolian joint project on sustainable agriculture (abbreviated as DMKNL in German) has been implemented since 2013. As stated by DMKNL, the yield per area has been steadily increasing; however, due to the factors such as unsuitable tillage, cultivation of the mono-crop, and inappropriate fertilizing, the soil has been degrading year by year [
24]. Nyamsambuu and Ikhbayar [
18] stated that, as of 2016, 25.4 and 213.6 tons/ha fine-grained fertile soils were blowing away from a slight and severe eroded area, respectively. The loss of humus was 4.6–6.8 tons/ha from slightly eroded soils, while it was 21.6–40.8 tons/ha for severely eroded areas. According to the DMKNL project report in 2016, the current adoption level of the SAPs is not sufficient [
25]. Currently, Mongolia is in a period of transitioning from intensive to sustainable agriculture at the Government policy level (As a first step, “Land 4-Sustainable crop production development campaign” is developed and approved in the beginning of 2020. Before, “Land 3 campaign” had been implemented since 2008 and was dedicated to provide the self sufficiency of wheat demand). Therefore, it is required to assess the current subsidy policy impacts on sustainable behavior as well as to study the determinants of the farmers’ sustainable behavior.
Numerous studies on adoption decisions in agriculture have been carried out worldwide [
26,
27,
28]. Early studies had employed conventional explanatory factors that are socio-economic characteristics of farmers and other exogenous factors such as environmental and macro-economic features. Many of these variables have been criticized because they were found to be not significant in many studies [
29]. In recent literature, with the arising use of behavioral analysis in economic studies, the researchers have started to consider the psychological factors to explain the farmers’ adoption behavior [
13,
30,
31]. Studies have highlighted that including psychological factors and appropriately assimilating with the socio-economic factors would provide a better understanding of farmers’ behavior in adopting SAPs [
28,
31,
32]. For instance, as stated in [
12], farmers might not adopt the SAPs even when the economic theory predicts they should. Moreover, studies suggest that taking multi-dimensional considerations into account would explain the complexity of decision-making on adoption [
33,
34].
The present study investigates the adoption of SAPs and examines the various socio-economic and psychological factors affecting wheat farmers’ adoption decisions in Mongolia. In this regard, the study sets two objectives: (1) revealing the impact of current subsidy policy on the adoption decision to get an insight to a certain extent on the consistency of current policy with the sustainable development in agriculture, (2) investigating the various factors affecting farmers’ adoption decisions of SAP. To do so, first, we aimed to analyze the use of several SAPs that are most common in Mongolia, such as minimum tillage, multi-crop rotation system, use of compost and manure, and straw mulching. Using the protection motivation theory (PMT), one of the common behavioral models on adoption decision and other factors from the multiple disciplines, we aim to explain the farmers’ adoption intensity of the SAPs. This study contributes to the current literature as follows. To our knowledge, analysis on the adoption of SAPs and predicting the adoption decision has not been studied for the Mongolian context. Therefore, the paper would fill this gap and become one of the fundamental sources for both policymakers and later researchers. To promote sustainable farming, designing or modifying policies that address the barriers to sustainable farming can be a possible measure worth taking. Second, the study contributes to the literature on the adoption of SAPs that takes multi-dimensional factors into account. Specifically, proposing context suitable adoption models and developing an appropriate model specification that fits the sample data characteristics can provide improved and repeatable study material. Finally, the explaining power of the protection motivation theory on farmers’ adoption decision of SAPs is tested in the Mongolian wheat farming sector.
2. Adoption of SAPs and the Government Policy Overview
Countries use a variety of agricultural practices for sustainable agricultural development [
26,
35]. For instance, Wezel, et al. [
36] distinguished 15 categories of agroecological practices for sustainable agriculture, while Nasir Ahmad et al. [
37] discerned 11 subthemes of SAPs (soil erosion control practices in the stud) observed in Asia. The benefits and impact of each practice vary depending on the features of the local area and the characteristics of that certain SAP. In general, according to [
38] as cited in [
27] (p. 2), the common attributes for SAPs are (1) conserving resources, (2) environmentally non-degrading, (3) technically appropriate, (4) economically viable, and (5) socially acceptable. The SAPs considered in this study are the most common practices among wheat farmers in Mongolia. Those are (1) multi-crop rotation system, (2) minimum tillage, (3) use of compost and manure, and (4) straw mulching.
Multi-crop rotation is a technique of growing different crops on the same land by recurring sequence over time to enhance soil fertility and plant protection [
39]. In Mongolia, farmers often use the conventional wheat-fallow short-rotation system [
17]. There is an advantage that wheat production will be stabilized through this short system; however, productivity will be reduced due to loss of soil fertility in the long run. Later rehabilitation of degraded soils will require high costs, time, and effort. A small percentage of farmers use multi-crop rotation systems, such as three-field (wheat-fallow-potato; wheat-fallow-forage; wheat-fallow-rapes, etc.) or four-field systems.
Farmers have begun to shift from traditional soil processing with high mechanical operations to technologies that reduce tillage, but the transition has been slow [
40]. Performing several technological operations in one pass or using fertilizers for soil processing, the reduced tillage or no-till system are the techniques for sustainable soil processing behavior. The reduced processing of the soil declines the vulnerability for erosion.
The use of manure involves the application of livestock waste, while the use of compost refers to the fine stabilized organic matter resulting from composting processes. These organic fertilizations reduce soil erosion rate, improve soil structure, and substitute the chemical fertilizers [
36,
37]. The mulching technique helps to prevent soil erosion, maintain humidity and heat. According to several studies in Mongolia, the moisture content of the straw-covered area was 9–14 mm higher than that of the unpaved area, and the humus content increased by 1.0–2.4% [
41].
Mongolia has introduced various types of subsidies in 2008 to restore the previously declining wheat production. During the democratic revolution in 1990, the former state-owned farms disintegrated and were privatized. The former extensive government control and support /unified policy, loans, and grants/ was removed, and most of the farms had fallen into the hands of non-professional individuals. As in many other countries, this democratic shift significantly impacted agricultural production, leading to a sharp decline in the size of arable land and harvested crops. As a consequence, the average wheat yield had reached 0.79 tons/ha between 1990 and 2008, which is the all-time lowest level [
23].
Subsidies include an output-based cash payment, soft loans for purchasing inputs, and a soft loan for purchasing agricultural machinery. As of 2019, around
$25 was given per tons of wheat that met the domestic wheat quality standard. In terms of soft loans, only the farmers who purchase inputs and machinery from the Crop Supporting Fund (the impelementing agency of the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Light Industry of Mongolia) are eligible to take the loans. For soft loans, it is not the whole amount considered, but the interest rate concessions are accounted as a subsidy. The soft loan for purchasing inputs has no interest, and farmers can repay their loan with their harvest. In the machinery soft loan case, the annual interest rate is 2% at maximum, while the market interest rate for the same loan is around 24% annually. According to the budget report of the Ministry of Food, Agriculture, and Light Industry of Mongolia, on average, 63–68% of the budget approved for crop production over the last five years has been spent on cash incentives and other subsidies for wheat. Moreover, according to the estimation of [
23], the wheat production had the most share (38%) in total agricultural subsidy (other subsidies for agriculture include, the subsidies for wool and cashmere, meat, and milk), which was around
$37 million.
In general, these subsidies are intended to increase the farmers’ income, decrease their financial burden. The direct outcome that the Government expected is the increase in production and yield per area [
40]. Consequently, the self-sufficiency ratio rose from 25% in 2008 to 80% in 2018 [
42]. As reported in the World Bank review, the subsidy policy contributed to the farmers’ financial capacity and increased production [
23]. However, the impact on sustainability has not been studied so far.
3. Conceptual Framework and Research Hypothesis
In the previous literature, adoption behavior has been commonly considered as a dichotomous decision and treated as a binary variable for each specific practice [
9,
13,
14,
30]. However, our study proposed to take the intensity of adoption as a dependent variable. Several studies use the number of sustainable practices that farmers have employed during a specified period, which means as a count dependent variable [
8,
43,
44]. Sharma et al. [
45] demonstrated that it is more appropriate to model the adoption of conservation agriculture as a multiple technology selection. Thus, understanding the decision of adoption intensity has become an important issue.
Mongolia’s current wheat subsidies are more focused on increasing production and revitalizing the sector. Although not directly related to SAPs, these subsidies can be a motivator for the use of sustainable practices that reduce soil erosion to increase productivity and maintain long-term efficiency. Government supports can motivate the farmers to work efficiently and increase their productivity [
46,
47], and one way to increase the efficiency is to transform into sustainable farming [
15]. From here, the first hypothesis we make in this study is:
Hypothesis 1 (H1). Current agricultural subsidies have a positive impact on the SAP adoption.
In terms of psychological works in this area, research has been widely based on the theory of planned behavior (TPB) [
8,
32,
33], technology adoption model [
10,
48], and the protection motivation theory (PMT) [
7,
30,
49]. These models use different psychological determinants to explain an individual’s adoption behavior.
Of these, the theoretical framework of PMT is considered more consistent with the nature of SAP. SAP itself seeks to reduce future risks by applying appropriate practices to cultivation, while PMT theory links the perception of the risk and the perception of the possibility of overcoming the threat through engaging specific activity to explain the adoption decision. Furthermore, PMT employs a broader set of predictors than the theories mentioned above that may enhance our understanding of factors driving the adoption decision [
31].
According to PMT, individuals facing a potential risk make two appraisals, threat appraisal and coping appraisal. In threat appraisal, individuals make perceptions on the severity of the threat and the vulnerability to the threat. If these perceptions are high, it is more likely that people will engage in protecting measures [
30]. However, the awareness or perception of a threat alone does not encourage taking protective behavior [
8,
35]. The coping appraisal consists of perceived self-efficacy and perceived response efficacy. Self-efficacy refers to the perception of themselves are competent to conduct the actions, while the response efficacy relates to the perception of whether the actions could be effective [
31].
As employed in the PMT in this study framework, we assumed that soil erosion endangers the productivity of the farmer in the long-term, the perception of threat encourages taking actions to repair or prevent further damage. Along with this, when the perceived efficacy of specific SAP(s) is high, the willingness to adopt the SAP would be greater. The related hypotheses are determined as follows:
Hypothesis 2 (H2). Farmer’s perception of the threat severity has a positive and significant effect on the adoption of SAP.
Hypothesis 3 (H3). Farmer’s perception of the vulnerability to threat has a positive and significant effect on the adoption of SAP.
Hypothesis 4 (H4). Farmer’s perceived self-efficacy has a positive and significant effect on the adoption of SAP.
Hypothesis 5 (H5). Farmer’s perceived response-efficacy has a positive and significant effect on the adoption of SAP.
Furthermore, many adoption-related studies have shown that information about the particular practice or training has a high impact on adoption [
35]. Although the sources of information may vary, our study used an official source of information as an explanatory variable. It was defined as whether farmers had received information about SAP from the Sustainable Agriculture Project framework, a joint German-Mongolian project. Thus, our last hypothesis is proposed as follows:
Hypothesis 6 (H6). Obtaining information about SAP has a significant positive impact on the SAP adoption.
Control variables such as experience, wheat acreage, and soil fertility are also employed to explain the adoption decision. Moreover, we are assuming a certain relationship between exogenous explanatory variables and perception variables. Soil fertility of a specific area could have a negative relationship between the farmer’s perception of the threat and perception of vulnerability. In addition, the experience might have a significant effect on the farmers’ perceived self-efficacy. These assumptions create indirect effects of soil fertility and experience on the adoption decision. The proposed conceptual model is presented in
Figure 1.
6. Conclusions
To maintain agricultural productivity and achieve sustainability, encouraging farmers to use SAPs has been considered an essential goal in the development of agriculture. In this study, we examined the factors affecting the adoption of SAPs in the context of Mongolian wheat farmers. Our study fills in knowledge gaps in domestic research on sustainable farming behavior and incentive policies for agricultural production.
Farmers’ adoption behavior was measured by adoption intensity as we assume it is appropriate to model sustainable behavior as a selection of multiple SAPs. The analytical approach we used in this study contributes to the existing research studies of adoption behavior by using generalized structural equation modeling (GSEM) with a count dependent variable (which has Poisson distribution) to analyze the impacts of observable and latent variables on adoption intensity.
Our findings show that current subsidies granted for wheat farmers do not have significant impacts on the adoption intensity of SAPs. This verifies that the current policy needs to be modified in order to develop sustainable agriculture. The psychological determinants based on protection motivation theory were found to have significant positive effects on adoption intensity. Specifically, farmers’ perception toward the severity and vulnerability of soil erosion along with the farmer’s appraisal of coping abilities of the SAPs and farmer’s own ability to implement the SAPs can induce the farmers to conduct sustainable practices more. Many previous studies, covering different country contexts, have also identified the influence of farmers’ psychological factors as essential determinants.
Furthermore, information regarding the SAPs was another key factor that leads to the adoption of these technologies. Together, all these outcomes of this study reveal policy implications for further development of agricultural support policy in order to develop sustainable farming. The study suggests that using economic supports, along with the measures to impact the farmers’ perceptions and increase awareness, can lead to an appealing result for promoting the adoption of SAPs. Besides, because adoption intensity varied from region to region, further policies should be tailored to regional specifics rather than common to all areas.
The study is subject to several limitations. First, the study focused on the general impact of the current subsidy policy and other key determinants or controlling variables on the adoption decision of SAPs of the wheat farmers. In this case, the adoption of SAPs was taken as an indicator of farmers’ sustainable behavior. Thus, detailed analysis or information on how the subsidy policy influenced soil fertility, which is the actual outcome of farming practices, was not covered in this study. Second, the study is limited to the protection motivation theory and several control variables in terms of possible determinants and controlling variables. Hence, the results may reflect omitted variable bias. Moreover, soil fertility condition, one control variable, was defined by the general fertility score of each district, not by the specific measure of each farmer’s land, as this information was not available for all the farmers in the sample. Thus, the study can be upgraded by including more detailed variables that can affect adoption decisions. Finally, the sample size covered in this study is limited to around 30% of the total population and the results might cannot represent the whole situation. Nevertheless, this study can be a valuable starting point for further analysis in this matter.
Further research could focus on explaining the adoption of specific SAPs in order to get more insights for designing proper measures to promote the adoptions. As a result, useful information such as which kind of barriers and motivators for adopting certain sustainable practices are existing and how it can be solved or developed further by implementing specific policies and measures.