Abstract
This study investigates the sociopsychological factors influencing Tunisian farmers’ adoption of sustainable pest management techniques by employing the motivation-opportunity-ability framework and using partial least squares structural equation modelling. It is the first empirical study to test this framework in predicting farmers’ readiness to reduce pesticide usage in agriculture, distinguishing between intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. The findings reveal that both intrinsic and extrinsic motivations significantly impact farmers’ readiness to reduce pesticide use. Particularly, extrinsic motivations, such as peer influence and prevailing practices within the community, play a crucial role, highlighting the importance of social dynamics in sustainable agricultural decisions. Additionally, opportunities to adopt non-chemical pest control methods, enhanced by access to information and technology, positively influence farmers’ intentions to minimize pesticide use. These results suggest that enhancing farmers’ motivation through targeted educational programs and fostering opportunities via supportive policy environments are key strategies to promoting sustainable pest management practices in the region.
Introduction
In the context of intensifying agricultural inputs, pesticides have become the predominant method for protecting crops and ensuring yield stability in market-driven agriculture (Bellon et al., 2020; Sharma et al., 2019). Their overuse, however, has increasingly made agriculture a significant source of environmental pollution, contributing to the loss of functional biodiversity (i.e. natural enemy reduction), land degradation, and the contamination of air, water, and soil (Pretty et al., 2018). This issue is particularly severe in intensive production systems, such as horticulture, where high disease and pest pressures force farmers to rely heavily on chemical solutions (Caracciolo and Lombardi, 2012; Macharia et al., 2013). Such reliance on pesticides not only hinders the transition to more sustainable production systems but also poses significant health risks, necessitating a critical reassessment of agricultural practices.
For instance, it is estimated that each year approximately three million farmers suffer from severe pesticide poisoning, while an additional 25 million endure less severe symptoms (Faostat, 2023). Unsafe pesticide practices range from the use of banned chemicals to improper storage and even the repurposing of cleaned pesticide containers for storing food or drinking water (Damalas and Eleftherohorinos, 2011). The root causes of these adverse effects typically include misconceptions, insufficient knowledge, inadequate regulatory frameworks, and gaps in educational outreach among farmers (Lelamo et al., 2023; Sarkar et al., 2021).
Over recent years, intensified research into sustainable agricultural practices has provided farmers with more effective solutions to enhance the sustainability of their operations (Raimondo et al., 2024). These practices aim to minimize both environmental and social impacts, fostering a shift towards greater agricultural sustainability. Sustainable methods such as biopesticides and integrated pest management strategies are increasingly seen as viable solutions. These approaches not only aim to reduce the environmental footprint of agriculture but also bolster the resilience of food systems against pest outbreaks and climatic variabilities. Similarly, organic farming, which shuns synthetic chemicals, follows ecological principles and a holistic approach to pest control, making it a prominent option (Biondi et al., 2018). In this context, the development of biopesticides from natural sources and the innovation in non-chemical control tools are becoming globally prioritized for sustainable pest management (Isman, 2017; Pavela and Benelli, 2016).
However, despite the availability of more sustainable pest control practices and policy interventions—particularly within the EU—to promote sustainable production protocols, several obstacles persist. Factors such as farmers’ personal traits, environmental variability, and economic and political influences (Feliciano, 2022; Raimondo et al., 2021) are impeding the wider adoption of sustainable pest management practices. The results remain suboptimal, partly because complex factors like personal attributes and psychological motivations impact decision-making (Bakker et al., 2021; Spina et al., 2023). Recent studies underscore the importance of psychological and behavioral dimensions in influencing farmers’ willingness to adopt sustainable agricultural practices (Despotović et al., 2021; Spina et al., 2023).
However, most research on farmers’ behavioral factors has been conducted in more developed countries, where societal environmental awareness is more pronounced. In contrast, there is still a significant gap in understanding the decision-making processes of farmers in less developed economies, such as those along the southern Mediterranean, like Tunisia.
This study turns its focus to Tunisia, where the widespread use of synthetic pesticides has notably increased alongside the agricultural sector's expansion (Abdallah et al., 2021; Bouagga et al., 2019). Despite its relatively modest land area of 163,610 km2, Tunisia plays a crucial role in the agricultural landscape (Faostat, 2023). In 2021, the area dedicated to vegetable cultivation, including both open-field and greenhouse operations, spanned over 118,000 hectares, producing 313 million tonnes of vegetables. This production has significantly advanced the cultivation techniques and methodologies for key crops like tomatoes and courgettes, leading to a tenfold increase in vegetable exports, which reached $1.2 billion in 2021 (Faostat, 2023). Notably, a significant portion of these exports is destined for EU countries, where consumers are increasingly aware of and concerned about sustainable agricultural practices and the use of pesticides.
However, following the intensification of its agricultural sector, Tunisia's heightened use of chemical pesticides is raising concerns that mirror the global challenges of sustainable pest management in agriculture. This situation emphasizes the need for Tunisia to align more closely with the rising environmental standards expected by its European trading partners and consumers. Besides the motivation from EU consumers, there is also a potential growing market within Tunisia itself. Tunisian consumers generally have a positive perception of sustainable agriculture, viewing organic products as healthier, more environmentally friendly, and tastier than conventional ones (Mtimet et al., 2020). However, increasing awareness and accessibility of sustainable products is necessary (Zlaoui et al., 2021) since consumer understanding remains limited due to misinformation and lack of availability (Callieris et al., 2016).
This highlights a significant gap in understanding the unique challenges and perspectives of farmers in countries like Tunisia, underscoring the importance of localized research to foster effective and sustainable agricultural practices in such contexts.
This study aims to investigate the readiness of Tunisian farmers to reduce synthetic pesticide usage, utilizing the Motivation, Opportunity, and Ability (MOA) framework. Several cognitive models have been proposed to interpret individual choices and behaviors, including the well-known theory of planned behavior (Ajzen, 1985). Among these, the MOA framework stands out as a model specifically designed to understand pro-environmental and pro-social behaviors (MacInnis et al., 1991; Olander and Thøgersen, 1995). This framework delineates three primary components that explain individual choices: 1. ‘Motivation’—the drive to select certain actions over others, 2. ‘Opportunity’—the circumstances that facilitate desired behaviors, and 3. ‘Ability’—the capability to execute intentions (Olander and Thøgersen, 1995). While the MOA framework has been applied in various contexts of pro-environmental behavior, including home energy conservation (Baumhof et al., 2018), circular food consumption (Raimondo et al., 2024) and food waste management (Soma et al., 2021), to the best of our knowledge, only few studies applying the MOA model specifically to farmers (Li et al., 2019; Zhu and Habisch, 2020).
The remainder of the paper is structured as follows: the second section outlines the theoretical framework and research hypotheses, followed by the presentation of materials and methods, the presentation of results and a comprehensive discussion and conclusion.
Study background
The motivation-opportunity-ability model
The present study utilizes the MOA (Motivation-Opportunity-Ability) framework, initially introduced by Olander and Thøgersen in 1995, and further expanded upon by Rothschild in 1999. The framework aims to examine the primary factors that influence farmers’ willingness to decrease pesticide usage in agriculture. The MOA model emerged as an extension of earlier behavioral theories developed between 1980 and 1990, which aimed to create attitude models encompassing behaviors that are not entirely volitional. Among the previous models that contributed to the development of the MOA framework are: i) the theory of planned behavior proposed by Ajzen in 1985, ii) the subjective culture model introduced by Triandis in 1977 and expanded upon in 1980, and iii) the theory of trying developed by Bagozzi and Warshaw in 1990. Olander and Thøgersen (1995) discovered that by incorporating ability and opportunity as moderators in the relationship between attitude and behavior, the prediction of behavior significantly improves within the environmental domain.
At its core, the MOA theory posits that individuals are more likely to engage in a specific behavior if they perceive it as aligning with their interests and are aware of the consequences of not acting (motivation) if they have accessible options to encourage the behavior (opportunity), and if they possess the necessary skills and knowledge to perform the behavior (ability) (van Geffen et al., 2020).
Motivation encompasses the factors that drive intention-setting, such as personal values, attitudes, and subjective norms (Olander and Thøgersen, 1995). Opportunity refers to the factors in the individual's environment that can act as facilitators or barriers to performing the specific behavior. Ability, on the other hand, relates to an individual's capability to successfully carry out the behavior (Olander and Thøgersen, 1995).
Building upon the work of Olander and Thøgersen (1995), who emphasized the utility of the MOA framework in explaining behaviors associated with goals requiring abilities, resources, and discipline, the current study aims to explore the motivations, opportunities, and abilities of farmers regarding the reduction of pesticide use. Thus far, only a limited number of studies have investigated the role of motivation, opportunity, and ability in influencing farmers’ willingness to adopt more sustainable practices in agriculture (Li et al., 2019; Zhu and Habisch, 2020).
Theoretical framework and research hypotheses
Our framework incorporates the fundamental constructs of the MOA model to assess farmers’ readiness to reduce pesticide usage. Motivation, opportunity, and ability are utilized as predictors in this context. Additionally, certain constructs have been considered as predictors of farmers’ motivation and opportunity to decrease pesticide use. These include: i) environmental protection, ii) the adoption of biological pest control measures, iii) the perception of phytosanitary issues, and iv) the average cost of crop protection. Furthermore, the farmer's level of education is included as a socio-demographic construct. A visual representation of the theoretical framework can be seen in Figures 1 and 2.
Graphical representation of the study's hypothesis. Note: MOT_EXT = Extrinsic motivation (inc. social norm); MOT_INT = Intrinsic motivation (inc. personal values and attitude); OPP = opportunity; ABI = ability; REA = readiness; Env_PROT = Environmental protection; Adopt_BIO = Applies biological pest control measures; Cost_PROT = Average costs of crop protection; Phito_PROBL = incidence of phytosanitary problems; EDU = Education.
Graphical representation of the results of direct effects. Note: MOT_EXT = Extrinsic motivation (inc. social norm); MOT_INT = Intrinsic motivation (inc. personal values and attitude); OPP = opportunity; ABI = ability; REA = readiness; Env_PROT = Environmental protection; Adopt_BIO = Applies biological pest control measures; Cost_PROT = Average costs of crop protection; Phito_PROBL = incidence of phytosanitary problems; EDU = Education. *p < 0.1; **p < 0.05; *** p < 0.01.
According to Olander and Thøgersen (1995), motivation can be seen as an internal driving force that compels individuals to engage in specific activities. In the context of this study, motivation is examined through two distinct constructs: i) intrinsic motivation (MOT_INT) and ii) extrinsic motivation (MOT_EXT) (Zhu and Habisch, 2020). Extrinsic motivation refers to external factors that influence behavior independently from the activity itself, such as social pressure. On the other hand, intrinsic motivation encompasses the influence of personal factors, such as attitude and personal values, on the intended behavior (Zhu and Habisch, 2020). Both intrinsic and extrinsic motivations have been found to positively impact the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices by farmers (Zhu and Habisch, 2020).
Accordingly, the following hypotheses are proposed:
Previous studies (Friesen et al., 2010; Molyneaux-Smith et al., 2003) have observed that farmers’ ability to engage in a specific behavior improves after developing a positive attitude towards that behavior. Based on this understanding, the following hypothesis is proposed for testing:
The lack of opportunity refers to the absence of environmental factors that hinder an individual from engaging in a particular behavior. According to Hughes (2010), opportunity emphasizes the situational and contextual factors that facilitate people in behaving in a desired manner. Conversely, when opportunities are adequately provided, a specific behavior is more likely to be performed (Olander and Thøgersen, 1995).
Within the farming environment, opportunities can be influenced by various contextual factors, including economic, political, financial, and climatic factors (Teklewold et al., 2013). For instance, climate change may contribute to a higher incidence of pests and diseases, thereby increasing farmers’ expenses for crop protection and potentially discouraging the availability of opportunities to adopt biological pest control measures. Building upon these observations, the following hypotheses are developed:
The concept of ability pertains to the skills and knowledge necessary to successfully perform a behavior (van Geffen et al., 2020). In simpler terms, the easier an activity is for an individual to carry out, the more likely it is to be completed (Olander and Thøgersen, 1995). In line with the findings of Li and colleagues (2019), farmers consider their technical operational ability when selecting green fertilization practices. Despite farmers’ strong motivation to adopt green practices, the likelihood of adopting them will be low if their ability to implement such practices is limited (Li et al., 2019).
Based on the above understanding, the following two hypotheses are developed:
Furthermore, the intrinsic motivations of farmers to reduce pesticide usage may also be positively influenced by certain factors, such as: i) the interviewer already implementing biological pest control techniques, ii) the interviewer attaching significant importance to environmental protection, and iii) the interviewer considering phytosanitary issues in their local area as relevant. For instance, farmers who have already adopted alternative production practices may exhibit a higher motivation to reduce pesticide usage (Home et al., 2019), and increased environmental awareness has been linked to a greater likelihood of adopting sustainable agricultural practices (Despotović et al., 2021). Moreover, with the growing public awareness about the negative consequences of widespread chemical pesticide use 1 , a heightened perception of phytosanitary problems can serve as a driving force towards adopting alternative and more sustainable practices.
Based on these considerations, the following hypotheses have been formulated:
Some authors have highlighted the significance of farmers ‘education in the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices (Teklewold et al., 2013), noting a higher level of adoption of sustainable practices among more educated farmers (Foguesatto and Machado, 2022). Consequently, we anticipate that:
Materials and method
Data description
To assess the readiness of Tunisian farmers to reduce the use of chemical pesticides in tomato and courgette cultivation, a face-to-face survey was conducted from April 2021 to October 2022. The extended duration of the survey was due to the intermittent availability of the farmers and the need for significant intermediation by local producer organizations. The survey was carried out in the Sousse area, situated in the northeast region of Tunisia, which shares a cross-border area with Italy. To ensure sufficient statistical power for detecting significant correlations among the constructs under investigation, a sample size of 88 was calculated, aiming for a medium effect size of 0.3, with a power of 0.90 and an alpha level of 0.05. However, challenging conditions during the sampling process and concerns about the reliability of the data collected led to only 84 valid questionnaires being retrieved. This resulted in a slight decrease in the power of the study to 0.89. Informed consent was obtained from each participant before the survey, adhering to ethical research standards.
The questionnaire encompassed various sections, delving into the demographic characteristics of farmers, structural details about their farms, the utilization of pesticides and other inputs, and the adoption of specific agricultural practices or specific pest management practices. (Table 1).
Variables description.
Note: ® = reversed item; N.A. = not applicable.
A dedicated section of the questionnaire gathered information essential for assessing the psychological constructs of the MOA framework. The survey assessed both intrinsic and extrinsic motivations; intrinsic motivations related to farmers’ beliefs about the environmental benefits of reducing pesticide use, such as improved soil conditions and reduced soil pollution. Extrinsic motivations were measured by the influence of valued opinions and prevalent practices regarding organic pest control methods in their area. Additionally, the survey examined opportunities perceived by farmers in implementing organic pest control strategies and their self-assessed ability, particularly in managing pests like Tuta absoluta and Bemisia tabaci with alternative methods. Readiness to reduce pesticide use was captured through several future-oriented statements about reducing pesticide usage within the current year, over the next five years, and regularly in the long term. The survey also inquired about the importance farmers place on environmental protection, their current adoption of biological pest control measures, the average costs associated with crop protection, and the relevance of phytosanitary problems in their area. Demographic information collected included gender, age, educational level—which ranged from middle school to master's or PhD degrees—and farm size in hectares.
Empirical analysis
Once the data were collected, the Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) was performed to investigate the farmers’ readiness to reduce the use of chemical pesticides. The PLS-SEM is a multivariate technique recently used for analyzing adaptation behavior to climate change by farmers (Sargani et al., 2023) as well as farmers’ intentions to adopt organic pest management practices (Spina et al., 2023). The multivariate method consists of a measurement (or outer) model and a structural (or inner) model. While the former provides relationships between latent constructs (or latent variables) and the items they are defined by, the structural model shows the relationships between latent constructs themselves (Venturini and Mehmetoglu, 2019). Once the measurement model was specified, it was validated by the indicator reliability (reflective factor loadings > 0.4) and the internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha, DG and rho A > 0.6 in exploratory research) (Sarstedt et al., 2022). Then, both convergent and discriminant validity of the measurement model were assessed. Convergent validity is achieved when the average variance extracted (AVE) of the construct is equal to or higher than 0.5, while discriminant validity is achieved by the Fornell-Larcker criterion, comparing the square root of the average variance extracted (AVE) with the correlation of latent constructs (Venturini and Mehmetoglu, 2019). To assess the severity of common method bias, the Harmon one-factor test was implemented (Podsakoff et al., 2003) as well as the collinearity among the constructs was tested (Kock, 2015). The structural model assessment was based on path coefficient values (Venturini and Mehmetoglu, 2019). All statistical analyses were performed using Stata 16 (Stata Corp LP, College Station, TX, USA).
Results
Descriptive statistics
In terms of the participants’ socio-economic profile, the sample consisted of 84 Tunisian farmers, with 69% being male and 31% female. Around half of the sample held a middle school (49%) while nearly 28% declared a postgraduate degree (doctorate and/or second-level master). The average age of the participants was 40 years, ranging from 18 to 71 years old. Table 2 presents the descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation, minimum, and maximum) for each item. The highest mean score is observed for the intrinsic motivation construct (MOT_INT.1 = 3.19 and MOT_INT.2 = 3.44) while the lowest one is observed for the ability construct (ABI = 2.00).
Descriptive statistics of items.
Note: MOT_EXT = Extrinsic motivation (inc. social norm); MOT_INT = Intrinsic motivation (inc. personal values and attitude); OPP = opportunity; ABI = ability; REA = readiness to reduce pesticides.
PLS-SEM output
The measurement model
Table 3 presents the results of the measurement model. In order to assess the validity of the measurement model (Venturini and Mehmetoglu, 2019), the researchers in this study initially examined the relationships between the latent constructs and items (indicator reliability). The factor loadings were found to be above the threshold of 0.4, ranging from 0.7 to 0.9. Regarding internal consistency, various commonly used indices such as Cronbach's alpha, Dillon-Goldstein's rho (DG), and rho A coefficient were considered. For all the constructs examined, the DG rho value exceeded 0.8 and the rho A coefficient exceeded 0.6, indicating high internal consistency. However, the Cronbach's alpha value was slightly below the threshold of 0.6 for the extrinsic motivation (EXT_MOT) construct. Cronbach's alpha values within the range of 0.5–0.7 are considered moderate and still acceptable, especially in psychological research (Nguyen et al., 2020). Moreover, Dillon-Goldstein's rho and rho A coefficient are often preferred in practical applications as they tend to provide more accurate estimates of internal consistency reliability compared to Cronbach's alpha (Sarstedt et al., 2022; Venturini and Mehmetoglu, 2019).
Factor loadings, Cronbach’s α, Dillon Goldstein's rho and rho A of the measurement model.
Note: MOT_EXT = Extrinsic motivation (inc. social norm); MOT_INT = Intrinsic motivation (inc. personal values and attitude); OPP = opportunity; ABI = ability; REA = readiness; Envir_Prot = Environmental protection; Adopt_BIO = Applies biological pest control measures; Cost_PROT = Average costs of crop protection; Phito_probl = incidence of phytosanitary problems.
Discriminant validity and average variance extracted (AVE) of the measurement model.
The average variance extracted (AVE) scores were all above 0.7, indicating convergent validity, which surpasses the threshold of 0.50. Additionally, the results of the Fornell-Larcker criterion indicated that none of the squared correlations exceeded the corresponding AVE scores. This finding suggests that the constructs have established discriminant validity (Table 4).
The structural model
The results of the direct effects in the structural model are depicted in Figure 1, where each oval represents a latent construct, and the arrows represent the hypothesized relationships between them. The path coefficients indicate the direction and strength of the direct relationships. The estimated values confirm that all hypotheses regarding the relationships among the constructs were accepted at a significance level below 0.1, except for the impact of ability on farmers’ readiness to reduce pesticide use. All significant path coefficients were aligned with the expected direction.
The findings revealed that intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, as well as opportunity, had positive effects on farmers’ readiness to reduce pesticide use. Extrinsic motivation emerged as the strongest predictor of REA (ß = 0.322, p = 0.002), followed by opportunity (ß = 0.266, p = 0.000) and intrinsic motivation (ß = 0.247, p = 0.006). Intrinsic motivation also demonstrated a positive and significant effect (ß = 0.207, p = 0.063) on farmers’ ability to reduce pesticide use. Regarding the direct effects of farmer and farm characteristics included in the model, the results indicated a positive relationship between the level of farmer education and readiness to reduce pesticide use (ß = 0.207, p = 0.035), suggesting that more educated farmers are more inclined to reduce pesticide usage. Furthermore, farmers who display greater concern for the environment are more motivated to reduce the use of chemical pesticides, indicating a positive effect of environmental protection on intrinsic motivation (ß = 0.271, p = 0.010). Intrinsic motivation to reduce chemical pesticides and the ability to reduce pesticides were also found to increase if farmers already adopt biological pest control measures, with coefficients of ß = 0.205 (p = 0.037) and ß = 0.237 (p = 0.034), respectively. Moreover, if a farmer perceives phytosanitary problems in their working area to be relevant, intrinsic motivation increases (ß = 0.337, p = 0.001). Lastly, a negative effect was observed between the average cost of protection for tomatoes and courgettes and the opportunity to reduce pesticide use (ß = -0.201, p = 0.067), indicating that if farmers spend a substantial amount on purchasing pesticides, the possibility of using biological control methods decreases.
To address the issue of collinearity in the structural model, a variance inflation factor analysis was conducted, revealing values below 3.3 (Table 5). These results indicate the absence of problematic collinearity among the constructs (Kock, 2015).
Multicollinearity check.
Discussion
The current study aims to investigate the effect of the MOA constructs on the readiness of Tunisian farmers to reduce pesticide use in agriculture. The results showed that both intrinsic and extrinsic motivations had positive effects on farmers’ readiness to reduce pesticides. This finding is in line with Olander and Thøgersen (1995), who suggested motivation, ability, and opportunity as the main determinants of pro-environmental behavior. Specifically, the statistical analysis revealed that extrinsic motivations played a pivotal role in farmers’ readiness to reduce pesticide use. This outcome aligns with several previous researchers (Ariani, 2017; Cirik, 2015; Dessart et al., 2019).
The crucial role of social factors in affecting the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices is well documented. Farmers’ decisions to adopt sustainable practices seem to be influenced by their neighbors behavior (Dessart et al., 2019). According to Dessart and colleagues (2019), this occurs because neighboring farmers who have adopted sustainable practices may lead to the sharing of information about the real costs, benefits, and risks of conversion into a more sustainable production system. In the same way, Greiner (2015) found the positive effect of intrinsic motivation on farmers’ willingness to participate in biodiversity conservation programs. Moreover, the study findings showed that also opportunity to use biological pest control positively affects farmers’ readiness to reduce pesticides. It is well known in the scientific literature that if a farmer perceives any difficulties in adopting a more sustainable practice, it is less likely he/she will adopt it (Defrancesco et al., 2008). For instance, perceived obstacles, such as the lack of time or perceived higher cost or lower benefits, were found to be correlated to the non-adoption of soil conservation practices (Dessart et al., 2019). Conversely, Bakker et al. (2021) found that the availability of non-chemical alternatives and more precise technology can be viewed as an opportunity that encourage farmers to reduce the use of pesticides. A positive effect is also given by intrinsic motivation and the adoption of biological pest control practices on the ability to reduce pesticides. These results pointed out that farmers who are more aware of the negative effects of pesticide use on soil quality are more able to reduce the use of pesticides. One explanation of this relation could be that farmers who want to reduce the use of pesticides could have more interest in knowing alternative practices and increasing skills and knowledge on alternative measures (Despotović et al., 2021).
Accordingly, farmers who have already implemented biological pest control measures, are more able and prone to reduce pesticide use. This finding aligns with Chèze and colleagues (2020) and with Spina and colleagues (2023), who found that farmers’ willingness to adopt practices aimed at reducing pesticide use is motivated by perceived skills in doing it. Additionally, Stallman and James (2015) report that farmers who are deeply concerned about the negative environmental effects of pesticides, as well as those who perceive serious phytosanitary problems are more motivated to reduce pesticide inputs, thus supporting the positive effect of both environmental protection and phytosanitary problems on intrinsic motivation construct. Recent studies have already demonstrated that farmers aware of the environmental pollution caused by agricultural activities more probably introduce sustainable practices to reduce pesticide usage (Despotović et al., 2021).
Moreover, if phytosanitary issues are perceived as relevant by the farmer, internal motivations to reduce pesticide use increase. This is likely because significant phytosanitary problems require high pesticide usage, which in turn leads to soil degradation and pollution as well as a considerable increase in production costs that could discourage the farmer from using synthetic products. For example, Basso (2019) found a greater propensity of winegrowers to reduce the use of pesticides in the Prosecco production area since the rapid expansion of new vineyards implies a growing public awareness of the negative consequences of widespread chemical usage on health, on the environment (air, water, and soil), and the landscape. The study findings also revealed a negative relationship between the average cost incurred by farmers for protecting their tomato and courgette crops and the opportunity to use biological pest control strategies. This means that a higher cost for crop protection reduces the use of biological pest control practices. One explanation could be that if the farmer invests a lot of money in crop protection, they want to reduce the risk of yield loss, thus resorting to less biological methods for pest control. Several recent studies have indeed highlighted the explosion of pests and diseases caused by higher temperatures and lower precipitations (Di Vita et al., 2024; Skendžić et al., 2021) also predicting a critical loss of organic crop yields in the future, compared to the conventional system (Rasche, 2021).
Finally, it is worth emphasizing that education plays a significant role in shaping environmentally responsible behavior in pest control among farmers. Several studies consistently indicated that higher levels of education reduce the probability of using pesticides. For instance, a study conducted by Khan and Damalas in 2015 highlighted the role of education in discouraging pesticide use among Pakistani cotton farmers. Their findings underscore the association between higher education levels and greater awareness of environmentally friendly pest control alternatives. Moreover, Mzoughi (2014) revealed that farmers’ education levels had a noteworthy and positive impact on the adoption of organic farming practices. Conversely, lower education levels are often associated with a perception of lower risks and greater benefits from pesticide use. This underscores the importance of educational and awareness-raising efforts in promoting sustainable and environmentally responsible pest control practices among farmers.
Conclusion
The adoption of more sustainable farming systems to reduce the use of pesticides is gaining momentum worldwide (Sharma et al., 2019). However, several factors affect the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices (Dessart et al., 2019). The current study empirically explores the fundamental constructs of the MOA model to assess Tunisian farmers’ readiness to reduce pesticide usage. Additionally, certain constructs have been considered as predictors of farmers’ motivation and opportunity to decrease pesticide use, including: i) environmental protection, ii) the adoption of biological pest control measures, iii) the perception of phytosanitary issues, and iv) the average cost of crop protection. Statistical analysis employing a PLS-SEM method was performed. To the best of our knowledge this is the first study in which the MOA model was tested for predicting farmers’ readiness to reduce pesticide usage in agriculture, differentiating between intrinsic and extrinsic motivations.
This study highlights the importance of both extrinsic and intrinsic motivation, as well as the opportunity to increase Tunisian farmers’ readiness to reduce pesticides. While ability does not affect farmers’ readiness, extrinsic motivation emerged as the strongest predictor, followed by opportunity and intrinsic motivation. The latter also showed a significant effect on farmers’ ability to reduce pesticide use. Thus, changing farmers’ personal values and attitudes, increasing social pressure, and improving individual opportunities should be considered impactful for increasing farmers’ readiness to reduce pesticides in agriculture.
Theoretical implications
This paper introduces the MOA framework for analyzing farmers’ decision-making processes in pro-social and pro-environmental contexts, thereby contributing to the ongoing discourse on sustainable agricultural practices. It emphasizes the necessity for a more comprehensive approach that encompasses sociopsychological, environmental, and systemic dimensions. The findings of this study provide important empirical evidence to the recent literature on the role of socio-psychological factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming systems and practices. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first empirical study examining Tunisian farmers’ readiness to reduce pesticide usage while differentiating between intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. This aspect could be more helpful in better understanding farmers behaviours.
Practical implications
To promote sustainable pest management practices in the region, it is crucial to enhance farmers’ motivation through targeted educational programs and create opportunities through supportive policy environments. Our findings underscore the significance of social dynamics in sustainable agricultural decisions, with extrinsic motivations, such as peer influence and prevailing community practices, playing a crucial role. Furthermore, facilitating opportunities to adopt non-chemical pest control methods, supported by access to information and technology, positively influences farmers’ intentions to minimize pesticide use. Interestingly, the ability of farmers, defined as possessing the necessary skills and resources to implement sustainable practices, did not significantly affect their readiness to adopt these methods. These results suggest that solely focusing on improving farmers’ ability may not be sufficient without addressing motivational and opportunity-related factors.
Limitations and future studies
Despite the study providing interesting theoretical and practical implications, it is not without limitations. Firstly, the non-representativeness of the sample of Tunisian horticulture, and any specific area in particular, does not allow for statistical inference. The study area is therefore limited, whereas a more extensive sample at a regional or national scale could provide a more reliable estimate of Tunisian farmers’ pesticide use. Furthermore, the construction of the ability construct as the capacity to combat two specific pests may have affected the non-significance of this construct on the farmer's readiness. While our study provides valuable insights into the adoption of sustainable pest management techniques within Tunisia, there is potential for further exploration through comparative studies between the northern Mediterranean area (developed countries) and the southern Mediterranean area (developing countries). Such comparative analyses could yield significant findings and deepen our understanding of the adoption and impact of sustainable agricultural practices across different socio-economic contexts. Future studies could investigate farmers’ readiness by creating more generic items regarding the ability construct and considering a representative sample of farmers, also in emerging economies. Additionally, future research could also investigate farmers’ perceptions regarding the effectiveness of new biological techniques for pest and disease control.
Footnotes
Declaration of conflicting interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Piano per la Ricerca 2016-2018 - linea di intervento 2 "Dotazione ordinaria" - seconda annualità (grant number UPB 5A722192125).
