Why Have Economic Incentives Failed to Convince Farmers to Adopt Drip Irrigation in Southwestern Iran?

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript is an interesting topic and has the potential to print in a valuable international journal like Journal of Sustainability. There are some points if applying them, the manuscript has a good potential to accept and publish.

While the authors included abstract, introduction, methods, discussion and conclusion, limitation, this manuscript could be improved in each section if the following issues are addressed. The paper is interesting in terms of novelty because it considers three dimensions of socio-economic, technology characteristics and social capital in affecting innovation adoption.

At first, there seems to be some slight negligence when inserting the manuscript into the journal template. The title of "0. How to Use This Template" above the introduction should be removed.

Table 1 on page 8 should be deleted.

Below I make comments specific to different section of the paper:

1. Abstract - The sentence " Knowledge of the determinants of new irrigation systems adoption could help agricultural extension agents and policy-makers to design appropriate and effective strategies aimed at facilitating to increase the adoption of this policy that has experienced failure to date." Should be rewritten as a policy implication or contribution of the research.
2. Introduction- The introduction is somewhat lengthy, after stating the problem (page 2) it is necessary to write a headline or subheading for the theoretical framework.
3. Define some variables such as compatibility, complexity, and trialability in the section "Technology characteristics".
4. Methodology- In general, the methodology is well written. There is a bit of confusion and haste in the sentence "The results revealed that the reliability of the questionnaire variables (0.60- 0.91) was acceptable to very good for these parts both validity (through a panel of experts) and reliability (Table 1) were confirmed". Explain the validity more carefully. Who was experts?
5. Data collection process is limited. It would be useful if the author(s) could provide details on sampling technique.
6. There are some in-text citation errors (e.g., line 186… (Rogers, 2010 Aubert et al. (2012)
7. Results- In like 249, in the sentences "m is the number of predictors variables", Do you mean n? Does not exist in the formula ((1) DF=c1×X1+c2×X2+⋯+cn × Xn + a) m.
8. Discussion- Theoretical implications should be mentioned in the discussion., while the authors claims that the current research findings are consisting with previous scholars, the authors is advised to emphasize on the theoretical research gaps that the present findings can contribute to strengthen the insight of this paper.
9. References in the text should be reviewed, you should use one style only
10. Tables should be in the same format.

- With regard to what was said, my suggestion is to accept the manuscript after “minor revisions”.

Author Response

Dear reviewer

Enclosed you can find our latest edited paper including the revised manuscript in the highlighted background based on required modification according to all received comments and guides.

Overall, in below, you can find the main modifications and our responses which are done in detail inside the attached revised manuscript.

 

Q. While the authors included abstract, introduction, methods, discussion and conclusion, limitation, this manuscript could be improved in each section if the following issues are addressed. The paper is interesting in terms of novelty because it considers three dimensions of socio-economic, technology characteristics, and social capital in affecting innovation adoption.

At first, there seems to be some slight negligence when inserting the manuscript into the journal template. The title of "0. How to Use This Template" above the introduction should be removed.

Table 1 on page 8 should be deleted.

Response) Thank you very much. we removed the title "0. How to Use This Template". We also deleted Table 1 on page 8 in the revised manuscript.

 

Below I make comments specific to different sections of the paper:

Q- Abstract - The sentence " Knowledge of the determinants of new irrigation systems adoption could help agricultural extension agents and policy-makers to design appropriate and effective strategies aimed at facilitating to increase the adoption of this policy that has experienced failure to date." Should be rewritten as a policy implication or contribution of the research.

Response) it's edited.

Edited text

These results can help agricultural extension agents and policy-makers design appropriate and effective strategies that facilitate the adoption of drip irrigation at an increasing rate.

Q- Introduction- The introduction is somewhat lengthy, after stating the problem (page 2) it is necessary to write a headline or subheading for the theoretical framework.

Response) it's edited. With the title "conceptual framework", we separated the introduction from the framework of the study. 

 

Q- Define some variables such as compatibility, complexity, and trialability in the section "Technology characteristics".

Response) Definition of all five innovation characteristics added to the revised manuscript.

added text:

Rogers (2003) defines relative advantage as the degree to which an innovation is seen as better than the idea it replaces or supersedes. Compatibility refers to the degree to which the innovation is consistent with socio-cultural values, past experience, and/or perceived need. In other words, if an innovation is to be accepted by a farmer, that technology must be compatible with the conditions facing the farmer (Conley & Udry, 2010; Warner et al., 2020). Complexity refers to the degree to which an innovation is difficult to use or understand (Rogers, 2003). Trialability is the degree to which an innovation may be experimented with on a limited basis. Observability refers to the ability to observe an innovation and its results, which directly relates to visual perception and other sensory perception (McCann et al., 2015).  

 

Q- Methodology- In general, the methodology is well written. There is a bit of confusion and haste in the sentence "The results revealed that the reliability of the questionnaire variables (0.60- 0.91) was acceptable to very good for these parts both validity (through a panel of experts) and reliability (Table 1) were confirmed". Explain the validity more carefully. Who were the experts?

Response) it's edited.

Edited text:

We assessed questionnaire validity and reliability through two distinct processes. First, the questionnaire was vetted and amended based on advice from a panel of experts (with backgrounds and credentials in agriculture extension, sociology, and economics). The content validity was assessed in terms of relevance and clarity of items by them.

Second, a pilot study was undertaken with 30 farmers to investigate the questionnaire’s reliability. Cronbach's alpha coefficient is used to evaluate internal consistency reliability. A generally accepted rule of thumb is that α 0.6-0.7 indicates a satisfactory level of reliability, and α 0.8 or higher is a very good level (Hulin et al., 2001). The results revealed that the reliability of the questionnaire variables (0.60- 0.91) was acceptable to very good (Table 1).

Q- The data collection process is limited. It would be useful if the author(s) could provide details on the sampling technique.

Response) it's edited. Indeed, all those who had drip irrigation in the district were 174 farmers and all of them were asked to complete the questionnaire. In addition, the authors used Random sampling to select non-adopters farmers.

Edited text:

The district agriculture office provided a list of 174 farmers who had adopted drip irrigation in that region. We interviewed all 174 in their home, by phone, or in the agriculture office (whichever was most convenient to them). We then selected randomly 100 non-adopters who were located in the same region and asked them the same questions. In total, our data consists of 274 observations.

 

Q- There are some in-text citation errors (e.g., line 186… (Rogers, 2010 Aubert et al. (2012)

Response) we edited all of the errors in referencing and citation.

Q- Results- In like 249, in the sentences "m is the number of predictors variables", Do you mean n? Does not exist "m" in the formula ((1) DF=c1×X1+c2×X2+⋯+cn × Xn + a).

Response) The correct word is n. so we edited the text. n is the number of predictors variables.

 

Q- Discussion- Theoretical implications should be mentioned in the discussion., while the authors claim that the current research findings are consistent with previous scholars, the authors are advised to emphasize on the theoretical research gaps that the present findings can contribute to strengthening the insight of this paper.

Response) it's corrected. (Page 2)

Added text:

To date, the prevailing approach to understand the drivers of farmers’ decisions regarding the adoption of water-saving technologies and practices is economic rationality, whereby the individual is motivated by the objective of maximizing his/her utility, subject to a series of constraints related to farm size, low levels of education, and limited financial resources (Castillo et al., 2021). However, the success of economic motivations depends mainly on the level of social capital (Micheels & Nolan, 2016; Hunecke et al., 2017; Agurto Adrianzen, 2014; Lambrecht et al., 2014). Hence, there is a research gap, thus demonstrating that it is necessary to consider all economic and socio-economic factors along with social capital factors.

In this study, we examine those factors that affect farmers’ adoption of improved irrigation methods from a multi-dimensional perspective. Since it is well-known that acceptance of new technology ultimately depends on multiple and interrelated factors (Swanepoel et al., 2016), we examine those factors affecting farmers’ adoption from three theoretical perspectives simultaneously. All three are already considered in the adoption literature: farmers’ socio-economic characteristics, their technology characteristics, and their social capital (Figure 1). Our study examines how social capital variables, farmers’ socio-economic characteristics, and technology characteristics affect the adoption decision of farms in the Behbahan district of Khuzestan province in southwest Iran.

 

Q- References in the text should be reviewed, you should use one style only

Response) it's corrected.

 

Q- Tables should be in the same format.

Response) We edited all the tables to have the same format.   

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The article entitled “Why have economic incentives failed to convince farmers to adopt drip irrigation in southwestern Iran? ” is interesting and publishable in the Sustainability after a minor Revision. I have some concerns and suggestions for the authors to improve the manuscript further:

The authors address economic factors in the title, but socio-economic characteristics, social capital, and technology characteristics are also examined. Why? Is the purpose of study the factors affecting adoption of drip irrigation or the lack of effect of economic incentives?

Line 21 and 29, the sentences of "The question is 21 why?" and "In total, our data consists of 274 observations" are redundant.

The novelty of the study should be clearly explained in the 'Introduction'.

Why did you consider variables of "distance to the agricultural office, water resource, and city" as socio-economic factors?

Line 191-194, there is a repeat of the first paragraph of the Materials and Methods.

The location of study should be more explained (with a map) in the Materials and Methods and other details should be provided such as facilities provided to farmers for drip irrigation adoption.

In the Materials and Methods, the author should reorganize to make it better and clearer. How do you sample 100 non-adopters and 174 adopters to interview?

The conclusion section need to rewritten, also, more clearly and more linked you the main insights from the research. There is a loose link between the theoretical foundation and the conclusion on the one hand, and the results on the other.

I consider it necessary that the conclusions section establishes more clearly the contributions of this work. This will help to enhance the relevance of the work. Likewise, I consider it necessary that the authors write down various implications both at an academic level (advances in theory) and at a professional level (implications for policy makers) derived from this research.

The recommendations should be only proposed based on the area conditions.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Enclosed you can find our latest edited paper including the revised manuscript in the highlighted background based on required modification according to all received comments and guides.

Overall, below, you can find the main modifications and our responses which are done in detail inside the attached revised manuscript.

REVIEWER- The article entitled “Why have economic incentives failed to convince farmers to adopt drip irrigation in southwestern Iran? ” is interesting and publishable in the Sustainability after a minor Revision. I have some concerns and suggestions for the authors to improve the manuscript further:

Q. The authors address economic factors in the title, but socio-economic characteristics, social capital, and technology characteristics are also examined. Why? Is the purpose of study the factors affecting the adoption of drip irrigation or the lack of effect of economic incentives?

Response) As mentioned in the paper, in Iran (Page 2), credits and support from farmers for accepting and installing drip irrigation systems were high. Economic incentives (in the title) refer to government financial and credit support to farmers.

see below paragraph in the introduction:

According to article 35 of the Sixth Iranian Development Plan, about $300 million is budgeted for investments in new and improved irrigation schemes by farmers. Based on this plan, the government pays 85% of all costs for implementing a new irrigation system, leaving the farmer's share at only 15% (IRNA, 2018). 

 

Q. Line 21 and 29, the sentences of "The question is 21 why?" and "In total, our data consists of 274 observations" are redundant.

Response) The reviewer's comment is correct and these two sentences were deleted.

Q. The novelty of the study should be clearly explained in the 'Introduction'.

Response) The following corrections were made to explain the novelty of the paper (See the last paragraph of the introduction-before title of the conceptual framework).

To date, the prevailing approach to understand the drivers of farmers’ decisions regarding the adoption of water saving technologies and practices is economic rationality, whereby the individual is motivated by the objective of maximizing his/her utility, subject to a series of constraints related to farm size, low levels of education, and limited financial resources (Castillo et al., 2021). However, the success of economic motivations depends mainly on the level of social capital (Micheels & Nolan, 2016; Hunecke et al., 2017; Agurto Adrianzen, 2014; Lambrecht et al., 2014). Hence, there is a research gap, thus demonstrating that it is necessary to consider all economic and socio-economic factors along with social capital factors.

In this study, we examine those factors that affect farmers’ adoption of improved irrigation methods from a multi-dimensional perspective. Since it is well-known that acceptance of new technology ultimately depends on multiple and interrelated factors (Swanepoel et al., 2016), we examine those factors affecting farmers’ adoption from three theoretical perspectives simultaneously. All three are already considered in the adoption literature: farmers’ socio-economic characteristics, their technology characteristics, and their social capital (Figure 1). Our study examines how social capital variables, farmers’ socio-economic characteristics, and technology characteristics affect the adoption decision of farms in the Behbahan district of Khuzestan province in southwest Iran.

Why did you consider variables of "distance to the agricultural office, water resource, and city" as socio-economic factors?

Response) as written in the manuscript, Socio-economic factors refer to the personal characteristics of the main decision-maker on the farm". Indeed, Socioeconomic factors are related to the social standing or class of an individual or group. Therefore, farms that are far from water sources, extension centers, and the city are likely to have lower prices and indicate the lower financial status of landowners.  A vast literature review has also shown these variables in the socio-economic category.

 

Q. Line 191-194, there is a repeat of the first paragraph of the Materials and Methods.

Response) we removed it.

 

Q. The location of study should be more explained (with a map) in the Materials and Methods and other details should be provided such as facilities provided to farmers for drip irrigation adoption.

Response) see below text:

According to article 35 of the Sixth Iranian Development Plan, about $300 million is budgeted for investments in new and improved irrigation schemes by farmers. Based on this plan, the government pays 85% of all costs for implementing a new irrigation system, leaving the farmer's share at only 15% (IRNA, 2018). 

Also, the map of Behbahan county was added to the methodology.

Q. In the Materials and Methods, the author should reorganize to make it better and clearer. How do you sample 100 non-adopters and 174 adopters to interview?

Response) All those who had drip irrigation in the district were 174 farmers and all of them were asked to complete the questionnaire. We then selected using random sampling, 100 non-adopters who were located in the same region and asked them the same questions.

Q. The conclusion section need to rewritten, also, more clearly and more linked you the main insights from the research. There is a loose link between the theoretical foundation and the conclusion on the one hand, and the results on the other. I consider it necessary that the conclusions section establishes more clearly the contributions of this work. This will help to enhance the relevance of the work. Likewise, I consider it necessary that the authors write down various implications both at an academic level (advances in theory) and at a professional level (implications for policy makers) derived from this research. The recommendations should be only proposed based on the area conditions.

 

Response) In a separate paragraph, the policy recommendations were explained in detail.

Added text on page 11:

. Policy Implication

According to the results of significant variables, some important strategies are suggested to enhance adoption of modern irrigation technologies by farmers.

The results of the five innovation characteristics show that the two characteristics of compatibility and complex affected the acceptance of drip irrigation technology.

It can be generally concluded that increased adoption of modern irrigation technologies is possible by showing farmers how these technologies are compatible, providing proper training and information that facilitates its implementation and provides practical solutions that generate a positive outlook for farmers to adopt these technologies.

The results confirm that one important reason for farmers' not adopting is the complexity of applying modern irrigation technologies. It is suggested that appropriate technical guidelines that reduce the complexity of drip irrigation systems be provided to farmers. Existing users can also be encouraged to guide their peers in maintaining equipment and optimizing the efficiency of drip irrigation technology.

The greater the distance between the farm and the water resources and the city the less likely that irrigation technology is adopted. Therefore, it is necessary to seriously consider an important recommendation in this regard. The large distance between farms and water resources and the city may indicate the poorer financial situation of the farmer, thus making it financially difficult for them to implement advanced irrigation systems. Therefore, it is suggested that different credits be considered for farms that are far away from water sources and cities. In addition, it is probably be more expensive to install irrigation systems on these farms, which will increase the need for government funding. In contrast, farmers with larger farmland are more likely to accept irrigation. On these lands, the installation of modern irrigation technologies is probably more cost-effective and, instead of financial aid, it is necessary to increase people's knowledge and information about the importance of modern irrigation technology. The level of education affects the adoption of irrigation technology. The effect of education is probably due to the understanding of global water scarcity issues, the ability to calculate the benefits of reducing water consumption versus the cost of installing drip irrigation in the long term, as well as generally better knowledge and awareness. Therefore, agricultural extension associations in the region should inform farmers in simple way about issues like water shortages in Iran. It is also necessary to train farmers on the amount of water and the money saved after installing drip irrigation using simplified number and figures.

added text on page 12 in the conclusion

The results of this study provide insight into the diffusion of modern irrigation innovations in Iran. The results reveal different processes underlying the diffusion of water-saving technologies among adopters and non-adopters, demonstrating the importance of understanding how innovations are perceived, how farmers use social networks, and their socio-economics characteristics. The combination model including different dimensions of socio-economic characteristics, social capital networks, and innovation characteristics best predicts those factors affecting the adoption of drip irrigation technology.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

 

 

 

Review report

Is the review clear, comprehensive and of relevance to the field? Is a gap in knowledge identified?

The study is interesting and relevant to the science and agricultural practice. A gap in knowledge is well identified.

 

Was a similar review published recently and, if yes, is this current review still relevant and of interest to the scientific community?

The current review is still relevant and of interest to the scientific community.

 

Are the cited references current (mostly within the last 5 years)? Are any citations omitted? Does it include an abnormal number of self-citations?

The article cites quite current references, but  citations for 2020-2021 period are badly needed.

 

Are the statements and conclusions drawn coherent and supported by the listed citations?

The conclusions drawn should be more coherent and refer to the findings part.

 

Are the figures/tables/images/schemes appropriate? Do they properly show the data? Are they easy to interpret and understand?

The tables are not easy to interpret and understand, especially table 2. Better, more concise interpretations of the results are recommended.

„ 0. How to Use This Template”, page 1 – this sentence should be cancelled

Materials and Methods, page 4

“A cross-sectional survey was undertaken in Behbahan district in Khuzestan province 192 in southwest Iran. Behbahan is located in the southeastern corner of Khuzestan province 193 and has an arid climate.” This sentence repeats twice in the text of the manuscript.

Table 1, page 8 – this table should be cancelled.

 

Author Response

Q. Are the cited references current (mostly within the last 5 years)? Are any citations omitted? Does it include an abnormal number of self-citations?

The article cites quite current references, but citations for 2020-2021 period are badly needed.

Response) We agree and added new citation for 2020-2022 such as:

1. Boazar, M., Abdeshahi, A., & Yazdanpanah, M. (2020). Changing rice cropping patterns among farmers as a preventive policy to protect water resources. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 1-17.
2. Castillo, G. M. L., Engler, A., & Wollni, M. (2021). Planned behavior and social capital: Understanding farmers’ behavior toward pressurized irrigation technologies. Agricultural Water Management, 243, 106524.
3. Wang, W., Zhao, X., Li, H., & Zhang, Q. (2021). Will social capital affect farmers’ choices of climate change adaptation strategies? Evidences from rural households in the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, China. Journal of Rural Studies, 83, 127-137.
4. Warner, L. A., Lamm, A. J., & Silvert, C. (2020). Diffusion of water-saving irrigation innovations in Florida’s urban residential landscapes. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 47, 126540.
5. Mirzaei, A., Azarm, H., Yazdanpanah, M., & Mardani Najafabadi, M. (2022). Socio-economic, social-capital and psychological characteristics and climate change adaptive behavior of farmers in Iran. Climate Research, https://doi.org/10.3354/cr01683.
6. Savari, M., Eskandari Damaneh, H., & Damaneh, H. E. (2021). Factors influencing farmers’ management behaviors toward coping with drought: evidence from Iran. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 64(11), 2021-2046.
7. Rouzaneh, D., Yazdanpanah, M., & Jahromi, A. B. (2021). Evaluating micro-irrigation system performance through assessment of farmers' satisfaction: implications for adoption, longevity, and water use efficiency. Agricultural Water Management, 246, 106655.

Q. The conclusions drawn should be more coherent and refer to the findings part.

Response) See the below edition.

According to the results of significant variables, some important strategies are suggested to enhance adoption of modern irrigation technologies by farmers.

The results of the five innovation characteristics show that the two characteristics of compatibility and complex affected the acceptance of drip irrigation technology.

It can be generally concluded that increased adoption of modern irrigation technologies is possible by showing farmers how these technologies are compatible, providing proper training and information that facilitates its implementation and provides practical solutions that generate a positive outlook for farmers to adopt these technologies.

The results confirm that one important reason for farmers' not adopting is the complexity of applying modern irrigation technologies. It is suggested that appropriate technical guidelines that reduce the complexity of drip irrigation systems be provided to farmers. Existing users can also be encouraged to guide their peers in maintaining equipment and optimizing the efficiency of drip irrigation technology.

The greater the distance between the farm and the water resources and the city the less likely that irrigation technology is adopted. Therefore, it is necessary to seriously consider an important recommendation in this regard. The large distance between farms and water resources and the city may indicate the poorer financial situation of the farmer, thus making it financially difficult for them to implement advanced irrigation systems. Therefore, it is suggested that different credits be considered for farms that are far away from water sources and cities. In addition, it is probably be more expensive to install irrigation systems on these farms, which will increase the need for government funding. In contrast, farmers with larger farmland are more likely to accept irrigation. On these lands, the installation of modern irrigation technologies is probably more cost-effective and, instead of financial aid, it is necessary to increase people's knowledge and information about the importance of modern irrigation technology. The level of education affects the adoption of irrigation technology. The effect of education is probably due to the understanding of global water scarcity issues, the ability to calculate the benefits of reducing water consumption versus the cost of installing drip irrigation in the long term, as well as generally better knowledge and awareness. Therefore, agricultural extension associations in the region should inform farmers in simple way about issues like water shortages in Iran. It is also necessary to train farmers on the amount of water and the money saved after installing drip irrigation using simplified number and figures.

---

The results of this study provide insight into the diffusion of modern irrigation innovations in Iran. The results reveal different processes underlying the diffusion of water-saving technologies among adopters and non-adopters, demonstrating the importance of understanding how innovations are perceived, how farmers use social networks, and their socio-economics characteristics. The combination model including different dimensions of socio-economic characteristics, social capital networks, and innovation characteristics best predicts those factors affecting the adoption of drip irrigation technology.

 

Q. The tables are not easy to interpret and understand, especially table 2. Better, more concise interpretations of the results are recommended.

Response) Tables were generally simplified. Additional columns were removed and the findings were carefully noted. 

Q„ 0. How to Use This Template”, page 1 – this sentence should be cancelled

Response) it removed

Q. Materials and Methods, page 4

“A cross-sectional survey was undertaken in Behbahan district in Khuzestan province 192 in southwest Iran. Behbahan is located in the southeastern corner of Khuzestan province 193 and has an arid climate.” This sentence repeats twice in the text of the manuscript.

Response) its removed

 

Q. Table 1, page 8 – this table should be cancelled.

Response) its removed

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

1. The authors of the paper Why have economic incentives failed to convince farmers to adopt drip irrigation in southwestern Iran? present an interesting theme, respectively, looking for a reasons why improved irrigation technology is not being adopted although there are generous government subsidies. The paper itself is well designed and proposed. The processed literature overview is relevant. Also, the objectives of the paper are well defined and supported by well proposed methodology. There are few minor problems reducing quality of the paper.

 

2. There are few spelling and grammar mistakes. Also some parts of paper template are left in main text, for example on line 38. Furthermore there is empty table (line 314), it is unclear if that table should contain some data or it is just left over from template.

 

3. Line 191 starts with Materials and Methods and then there are Materials and Methods again starting with line 200, this should be merged, also if figure 1 is part of Material and Methods then it also should be merged.

 

4. Suggestion: Conclusions could contain separate paragraph about policy recommendations regarding this study main findings

Author Response

Reviewer 4

1. The authors of the paper Why have economic incentives failed to convince farmers to adopt drip irrigation in southwestern Iran? present an interesting theme, respectively, looking for a reasons why improved irrigation technology is not being adopted although there are generous government subsidies. The paper itself is well designed and proposed. The processed literature overview is relevant. Also, the objectives of the paper are well defined and supported by well proposed methodology. There are few minor problems reducing quality of the paper.

Response) Thank you for your positive feedback. All defects were carefully corrected.

 

1. There are few spelling and grammar mistakes. Also some parts of paper template are left in main text, for example on line 38. Furthermore there is empty table (line 314), it is unclear if that table should contain some data or it is just left over from template.

Response) The referee's opinion is absolutely correct. The manuscript was edited by an English editor. Table 1, which was part of the template, and removed in the edited manuscript.

 

Q. Line 191 starts with Materials and Methods and then there are Materials and Methods again starting with line 200, this should be merged, also if figure 1 is part of Material and Methods then it also should be merged.

Response) the repeated paragraph removed.

Figure 1 is a continuation of the study framework and its location before methodology. We edited them.

Q. Suggestion: Conclusions could contain separate paragraph about policy recommendations regarding this study's main findings.

Response) According to your suggestion, in a separate paragraph, the policy recommendations were explained in detail.

 

According to the results of significant variables, some important strategies are suggested to enhance adoption of modern irrigation technologies by farmers.

The results of the five innovation characteristics show that the two characteristics of compatibility and complex affected the acceptance of drip irrigation technology.

It can be generally concluded that increased adoption of modern irrigation technologies is possible by showing farmers how these technologies are compatible, providing proper training and information that facilitates its implementation and provides practical solutions that generate a positive outlook for farmers to adopt these technologies.

The results confirm that one important reason for farmers' not adopting is the complexity of applying modern irrigation technologies. It is suggested that appropriate technical guidelines that reduce the complexity of drip irrigation systems be provided to farmers. Existing users can also be encouraged to guide their peers in maintaining equipment and optimizing the efficiency of drip irrigation technology.

The greater the distance between the farm and the water resources and the city the less likely that irrigation technology is adopted. Therefore, it is necessary to seriously consider an important recommendation in this regard. The large distance between farms and water resources and the city may indicate the poorer financial situation of the farmer, thus making it financially difficult for them to implement advanced irrigation systems. Therefore, it is suggested that different credits be considered for farms that are far away from water sources and cities. In addition, it is probably be more expensive to install irrigation systems on these farms, which will increase the need for government funding. In contrast, farmers with larger farmland are more likely to accept irrigation. On these lands, the installation of modern irrigation technologies is probably more cost-effective and, instead of financial aid, it is necessary to increase people's knowledge and information about the importance of modern irrigation technology. The level of education affects the adoption of irrigation technology. The effect of education is probably due to the understanding of global water scarcity issues, the ability to calculate the benefits of reducing water consumption versus the cost of installing drip irrigation in the long term, as well as generally better knowledge and awareness. Therefore, agricultural extension associations in the region should inform farmers in simple way about issues like water shortages in Iran. It is also necessary to train farmers on the amount of water and the money saved after installing drip irrigation using simplified number and figures.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Thank you very much for taking into account all my suggestions.

Good luck!