Understanding factors affecting non-participants’ interest in community-supported agriculture
Received date: 2023-10-20
Revised date: 2024-07-10
Accepted date: 2024-08-21
Online published: 2024-09-25
Community-supported agriculture (CSA) has emerged as a viable solution for addressing the agricultural challenges faced by countries like Indonesia. This study uses the well-established unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT2) model to examine the interest in CSA of potential customers in Indonesia. A standardized questionnaire was distributed to 1200 respondents, and the data were analyzed using structural equation model-partial least square (SEM-PLS) in SmartPLS 4.0 software. The results capture potential CSA consumer interest and will help to improve CSA development strategies in Indonesia. The model explains 44.4% of customers’ intentions, and identifies performance expectancy as the decisive factor in customers’ willingness to participate in CSA. Performance expectancy (0.292), hedonic motivation (0.262), social influence (0.259), and facilitating conditions (0.086) positively influence customers’ interest in participating in a CSA program. The adoption of CSA programs by both farmers and customers could be increased by implementing regulations that provide tax incentives and subsidies, offering training on sustainable farming practices, facilitating the establishment of distribution channels, and establishing guidelines for fair price and quality standards. This study shows the high potential for the implementation of CSA in Indonesia. It could also be used as a foundation for the development of new policies regarding sustainable agriculture markets in Indonesia.
Maula Fadhilata RAHMATIKA , Agus SUMAN , Wildan SYAFITRI , Sri MULJANINGSIH . Understanding factors affecting non-participants’ interest in community-supported agriculture[J]. Regional Sustainability, 2024 , 5(3) : 100160 . DOI: 10.1016/j.regsus.2024.100160
| [1] | Araújo Vila N., Fraiz Brea J.A., Pelegrín Borondo J., 2021. Applying the UTAUT 2 Model to a non-technological service: The case of Spa Tourism. Sustainability. 13(2), 803, doi: 10.3390/su13020803. |
| [2] | Barbalova I., 2021. Megatrends: Quantifying Wellness. Euromonitor International. [2023-07-10]. https://www.euromonitor.com/article/megatrends-quantifying-wellness. |
| [3] | Brown C., Miller S., 2008. The impacts of local markets: A review of research on farmers markets and community supported agriculture (CSA). Am. J. Agr. Econ. 90(5), 1296-1302. |
| [4] | Campbell L.M., Boucquey N., Stoll J., et al., 2014. From vegetable box to seafood cooler: Applying the community-supported agriculture model to fisheries. Soc. Nat. Resour. 27(1), 88-106. |
| [5] | Chen J.H., Gao Z.F., Chen X.Q., et al., 2019. Factors affecting the dynamics of community supported agriculture (CSA) membership. Sustainability. 11(15), 4170, doi: 10.3390/su11154170. |
| [6] | Chipenda C., 2023. Resilience and livelihood diversification in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic: A case of smallholder farmers in Goromonzi District, Zimbabwe. Afr. Today. 69(4), 125-149. |
| [7] | Cimperman M., Bren?i? M.M., Trkman P., 2016. Analyzing older users’ home telehealth services acceptance behavior—applying an Extended UTAUT model. Int. J. Med. Inform. 90, 22-31. |
| [8] | Cone C., Myhre A., 2000. Community-supported agriculture: A sustainable alternative to industrial agriculture? Hum. Organ. 59(2), 187-197. |
| [9] | Cowley F.C., Syahniar T.M., Ratnawati D., et al., 2020. Greater farmer investment in well-formulated diets can increase liveweight gain and smallholder gross margins from cattle fattening. Livest. Sci. 242, 104297, doi: 10.1016/j.livsci.2020.104297. |
| [10] | Cumming G., Hunter-Thomson K., Young T., 2020. Local food 2.0: How do regional, intermediated, food value chains affect stakeholder learning? A case study of a community-supported fishery (CSF) program. J. Environ. Stud. Sci. 10(1), 68-82. |
| [11] | Davis F.D., 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 13(3), 319, doi: 10.2307/249008. |
| [12] | Davis F.D., Bagozzi R.P., Warshaw P.R., 1992. Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace1. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 22(14), 1111-1132. |
| [13] | De Tavernier J., 2012. Food citizenship: Is there a duty for responsible consumption? J. Agric. Environ. Ethics. 25(6), 895-907. |
| [14] | Diekmann L.O., Gray L.C., Thai C.L., 2020. More than food: The social benefits of localized urban food systems. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 4, 534219, doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2020.534219. |
| [15] | Diekmann M., Theuvsen L., 2019. Non-participants interest in CSA-Insights from Germany. J. Rural Stud. 69, 1-10. |
| [16] | Emergen Research, 2022. Health Foods Industry Overview. [2023-07-13]. https://www.emergenresearch.com/industry-report/health-foods-market. |
| [17] | European CSA Research Group, 2016. Overview of Community Supported Agriculture in Europe. URGENCI. [2023-07-10]. http://urgenci.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Overview-of-Community-Supported-Agriculture-in-Europe-F.pdf. |
| [18] | F. Hair Jr, J., Ringle C.M., Sarstedt M., 2011. PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. J. Market. Theory Pract. 19(2), 139-151. |
| [19] | F. Hair Jr, J., Sarstedt M., Hopkins L., et al., 2014. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An emerging tool in business research. European Business Review. 26(2), 106-121. |
| [20] | F. Hair Jr, J., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle C.M., et al., 2016. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). New York: SAGE. |
| [21] | Forssell S., Lankoski L., 2015. The sustainability promise of alternative food networks: an examination through “alternative” characteristics. Agric. Human Values. 32(1), 63-75. |
| [22] | Galt R.E., Bradley K., Christensen L., et al., 2017. What difference does income make for Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) members in California? Comparing lower-income and higher-income households. Agric. Human Values. 34(2), 435-452. |
| [23] | Helm S., Eggert A., Garnefeld I., 2010. Modeling the impact of corporate reputation on customer satisfaction and loyalty using partial least squares. In: Esposito VinziV., ChinW., HenselerJ., (Handbookof Partial Least Squares.eds). Heidelberg: Springer. |
| [24] | Henseler J., Ringle C.M., Sinkovics R.R., et al., 2009. The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. In: SinkovicsR.R., GhauriP.N., (NewChallenges to International Marketing.eds). Leeds: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. |
| [25] | Henseler J., Ringle C.M., Sarstedt M., 2015. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 43(1), 115-135. |
| [26] | Lu X.Y., Zhang R.T., Zhu X.M., 2019. An empirical study on patients’ acceptance of physician-patient interaction in online health communities. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 16(24), 5084, doi: 10.3390/ijerph16245084. |
| [27] | Mangi M., Anwar R.S., Khan S., et al., 2023. Enhancing sustainability in the agricultural sector amid COVID-19: An implication of the transactional theory. Sustainability. 15(13), 9960, doi: 10.3390/su15139960. |
| [28] | Mehrabi S., Perez-Mesa J.C., Giagnocavo C., 2022. The role of consumer-citizens and connectedness to nature in the sustainable transition to agroecological food systems: The mediation of innovative business models and a multi-level perspective. Agriculture-Basel. 12(2), 203, doi: 10.3390/agriculture12020203. |
| [29] | Morgan E.H., Severs M.M., Hanson K.L., et al., 2018. Gaining and maintaining a competitive edge: Evidence from CSA members and farmers on local food marketing strategies. Sustainability. 10(7), 2177, doi: 10.3390/su10072177. |
| [30] | Muhie S.H., 2022. Novel approaches and practices to sustainable agriculture. J. Agric. Food Res. 10, 100446, doi: 10.1016/j.jafr.2022.100446. |
| [31] | Muljaningsih S., Galuh A.K., 2018. Intention model of waste management education concept based on green campus in Brawijaya University. Indonesian Journal of Environment and Sustainable Development. 9(2), 129-139. |
| [32] | Najib M., Sumarwan U., Septiani S., et al., 2022. Individual and socio-cultural factors as driving forces of the purchase intention for organic food by middle class consumers in Indonesia. Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing. 34(3), 320-341. |
| [33] | Nunes R., Silva V.L., Consiglio-Kasemodel M.G., et al., 2020. Assessing global changing food patterns: A country-level analysis on the consumption of food products with health and wellness claims. J. Clean Prod. 264, 121613, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121613. |
| [34] | Ostrom M.R., 2007. Community supported agriculture as an agent of change:Is it working? In: HinrichsC., LysonT., (Remaking the North American Food System:eds). Strategies for Sustainability. Lincoln: University of Nebraska, 99-120. |
| [35] | Peterson H.H., Taylor M.R., Baudouin Q., 2015. Preferences of locavores favoring community supported agriculture in the United States and France. Ecol. Econ. 119, 64-73. |
| [36] | Pole A., Gray M., 2013. Farming alone? What’s up with the “C” in community supported agriculture. Agric. Human Values. 30(1), 85-100. |
| [37] | Rosol M., Barbosa R., 2021. Moving beyond direct marketing with new mediated models: evolution of or departure from alternative food networks? Agric. Human Values. 38(4), 1021-1039. |
| [38] | Rosset P.M., Martínez-Torres M.E., 2012. Rural social movements and agroecology: Context, theory, and process. Ecol. Soc. 17(3), 3, doi: 10.5751/ES-05000-170317. |
| [39] | Sage C., 2014. The transition movement and food sovereignty: From local resilience to global engagement in food system transformation. J. Consum. Cult. 14(2), 254-275. |
| [40] | Schrank Z., Running K., 2018. Individualist and collectivist consumer motivations in local organic food markets. J. Consum. Cult. 18(1), 184-201. |
| [41] | Shabia G.N.A., 2021. Community supported agriculture’s contribution to the agrarian movement in Indonesia: Lessons from Germany. Journal of Agrarian and Land Affairs. 7(2), 181-198. |
| [42] | Shi Y., Cheng C.W., Lei P., et al., 2011. Safe food, green food, good food: Chinese community supported agriculture and the rising middle class. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability. 9(4), 551-558. |
| [43] | Tang H.Y., Liu Y., Huang G.Q., 2019. Current status and development strategy for community-supported agriculture (CSA) in China. Sustainability. 11(11), 3008, doi: 10.3390/su11113008. |
| [44] | Van Oers L.M., Boon W.P.C., Moors E.H.M., 2018. The creation of legitimacy in grassroots organisations: A study of Dutch community-supported agriculture. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 29, 55-67. |
| [45] | Vara S., Dwarapureddi B.K., Dash S., 2022. Sustainable agriculture and organic farming. In: SengarR.S., ChaudharyR., BhadauriyaH.S., (Handbook of Research on Green Technologies for Sustainable Management of Agricultural Resources.eds). Pennsylvania: IGI Global, 108-128. |
| [46] | Vasquez A., Sherwood N.E., Larson N., et al., 2017. Community-supported agriculture as a dietary and health improvement strategy: A narrative review. J. Acad. Nutr. Diet. 117(1), 83-94. |
| [47] | Vassalos M., Gao Z.F., Zhang L., 2017. Factors affecting current and future CSA participation. Sustainability. 9(3), 478, doi: 10.3390/su9030478. |
| [48] | Venkatesh V., Morris M.G., Davis G.B., et al., 2003. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Q. 27(3), 425-478. |
| [49] | Venkatesh V., Thong J.Y.L., Xu X., 2012. Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Q. 36(1), 157-178. |
| [50] | Venkatesh V., Thong J.Y.L., Xu X., 2016. Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: A synthesis and the road ahead. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 17(5), 328-376. |
| [51] | Wang G.L., Lu Q., Capareda S.C., 2020. Social network and extension service in farmers’ agricultural technology adoption efficiency. PLoS One. 15(7), e0235927, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235927. |
| [52] | Wharton C.M., Hughner R.S., MacMillan L., et al., 2015. Community supported agriculture programs: A novel venue for theory-based health behavior change interventions. Ecol. Food Nutr. 54(3), 280-301. |
| [53] | Zhou M., Huang J.L., Wu K.X., et al., 2021. Characterizing Chinese consumers’ intention to use live e-commerce shopping. Technol. Soc. 67, 101767, doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101767. |
| [54] | Zoll F., Specht K., Opitz I., et al., 2018. Individual choice or collective action? Exploring consumer motives for participating in alternative food networks. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 42(1), 101-110. |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
REGSUS Wechat
新公网安备 65010402001202号