Assessing the impact of information literacy on farmers’ decision-making processes: A mixed-methods approach

Abstract

This article investigates the link between information literacy and farmers’ decision-making processes, highlighting the potential for improving information literacy to promote sustainable agricultural practices. This study employed a mixed-methods approach – that is, qualitative and quantitative data collection techniques. It was found that gender did not significantly influence the reported skills and behaviours. However, the use of digital technologies showed a significant positive correlation with seeking information on new agricultural practices (r = .254, p < .01). This shows that proficient users of digital tools are more likely to seek new agricultural information actively. This research emphasizes the importance of collaboration and knowledge-sharing among farmers and stakeholders to effectively use agricultural information in decision-making, with implications for academic research and practical agricultural interventions.

Keywords

Assessing agriculture information information literacy farmers’ decision-making processes mixed-methods approach

Background

In many economies, especially developing countries, agriculture is critical in promoting improved social, cultural and political conditions within communities and economic development. The decision-making processes of farmers are crucial in navigating the opportunities and challenges in the agricultural landscape, shaping their practices, productivity and overall success in the agricultural sector. Farmers use a range of factors in their decision-making processes when it comes to agriculture. Home requirements, goals and resources significantly influence farmers’ choices. Price-related factors, such as land, labour, water, seed and fertilizers, encourage farmers to make careful choices to increase their productivity and profits. Non-price elements, such as information about farming practices and loan availability, are also considered (Bidaralli and Jayasheela, 2018). Farmers make decisions in a dynamic and complicated arena where they are exposed to changes in the economy, politics, social structure and environment (Hayden et al., 2021). Methods may change depending on each farmer's unique situation and circumstances. Farmers make complex decisions in their agricultural endeavours, affecting crop productivity, resource management and sustainability. When choosing crops and planting seeds, they consider the climate, the soil, the market demand and personal experience. They use personal experience, traditional knowledge, scientific information and technology to make these decisions. They assess their resources, including land, labour, finances and inputs like seeds, fertilizers and machinery, to determine feasibility and allocate resources efficiently. To ensure the longevity of their enterprises, they also consider crop rotation, soil health management, resource conservation and income diversification. The decision-making processes are individual and collective, with farmers sharing knowledge and collaborating with the agricultural community.

Information literacy

The term ‘information literacy’ was coined in 1974 by Paul Zurkowski, the then president of the Information Industry Association. He used the term in a proposal submitted to the US National Commission on Libraries and Information Science. Zurkowski used it to describe ‘information literates’ and ‘information illiterates’. Nowadays, it has become a buzzword and is used by authors in different ways, such as in the expressions info literacy, informacy, information empowerment, information competence, information literacy and skills, information handling skills, and information problem-solving skills (Swapna and Biradar, 2017). According to the Alexandria Proclamation on Information Literacy and Lifelong Learning of 2005:

Information Literacy lies at the core of lifelong learning. It empowers people from all walks of life to seek, evaluate, use, and create information effectively to achieve their personal, social, occupational, and educational goals. It is a basic human right in a digital world and promotes social inclusion of all nations. (IFLA, 2005)

According to the American Library Association (1989), to be information-literate, a person must be able to recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate and use the needed information effectively.

Since its inception in 1974, information literacy has transformed significantly. Initially, it focused on basic skills like finding and evaluating information. However, with the advent of digital technologies, it has evolved into a multifaceted concept encompassing critical thinking, digital literacy and lifelong learning. According to the Association of College and Research Libraries (2020), information literacy is crucial in today's rapidly changing and abundant information environment. With diverse choices in academic study, the workplace and our personal lives, the uncertain quality and quantity of information poses significant challenges to society. Today, information literacy emphasizes understanding the context of information, including its production, dissemination and societal impacts. Moreover, there is a growing emphasis on metacognitive skills such as self-reflection, encouraging individuals to assess their information-seeking behaviours. Overall, the evolution of information literacy reflects broader societal changes and recognizes the complex interplay between individuals, technology and information in the digital age.

Moreover, various organizations, associations and individuals have defined the term ‘information literacy’ and built different information literacy models/frameworks. Information literacy models offer structured frameworks that are essential for navigating the complex digital information landscape. For example, one of the most recognized information literacy frameworks is the Association of College and Research Libraries’ (2015) ‘Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education’, which promotes critical skills like source evaluation and ethical information, and empowers individuals to make informed decisions by considering the credibility, relevance and appropriateness of the information for their research or problem-solving needs. By following these models, individuals enhance their ability to find reliable information, fostering lifelong learning and adaptability in an ever-evolving information environment. Overall, these models are crucial for cultivating discerning consumers and responsible information creators.

Information literacy and digital literacy are interconnected, with digital literacy enhancing the ability to access and evaluate information effectively in the digital realm. The term ‘digital literacy’, coined by historian and educator Paul Gilster in 1997, is a concept that emerged in the 1990s during the Internet revolution. Gilster (1997: 1) defines digital literacy as ‘the ability to understand and use information in multiple formats from a wide range of sources when it is presented via computers’. According to Gilster, being digitally literate is being able to assess knowledge critically – even when it is provided in various formats – and decide how best to use it in various real-world scenarios. Although information is still the major focus of most debates on digital literacy, Buckingham (2006) points out that some studies concentrate on the broader cultural uses of the Internet, such as the capacity to use search engines for simple information retrieval. The retrieval and processing of information using digital technologies, as well as communication and knowledge creation through digital technologies, is central to the many definitions of digital literacy that have been proposed (Magesa et al., 2023).

Information literacy and digital literacy in agriculture are crucial as they empower farmers with the knowledge and skills to make informed choices regarding crop selection, pest management, soil health, water conservation, climate change adaptation, market trends, and more. It involves knowing how to access reliable agricultural information from diverse sources, including agricultural extension services, research institutions, government agencies and digital platforms. In their research article, Jiaoping et al. (2009) define farmers’ information literacy as the discovery and receiving of the information needed by farmers themselves, and their ability to absorb and utilize the acquired information to satisfy their information searching and objectives. According to Wang (2016), farmers’ information literacy refers to the fact that farmers can search, judge and select the information they need through the utilization of information equipment such as computers, the Internet, and so on, and have the ability to apply that information in agricultural production and their daily lives.

Literature review

Information is needed in every field of life. Information, indeed, has been described as the fifth need of man, after air, water, food and shelter (Kemp, 1976). For agriculture to be fully developed, farmers need information from different disciplines (Sani et al., 2014). Farmers’ information needs differ from individual to individual and country to country. Farmers’ age, gender, income, farm size and level of education, among other socio-economic characteristics, all impact their ability to access information (Mittal and Mehar, 2016). Farmers also need information other types of agricultural information, such as education, economic, cultural, political, technological and health information. Information can come from almost any source, but farmers prefer to seek information from fellow farmers because they believe that such information is more reliable as they are dealing with the same problems (Raya et al., 2018). A study by Kumar and Devi (2020) found that agriculture, education and health are the main areas where all farmers need information. Farmers need this information to boost their output and make a profit. The information needs of smallholder farmers arise from having to solve problems related to pest hazards, weed control, lack of water, soil fertility, farm credit, labour shortages and soil erosion (Yusuf et al., 2021). Farmers use different tools and sources to access and acquire the required information. Several studies have found that farmers’ most preferred sources of information are colleagues, relatives or fellow farmers (Adio et al., 2016; Bachhav, 2012; Bagal et al., 2018; Yaseen et al., 2016). Other studies have found that radio is their main source of information (Ademola and Olatokum, 2018; Meitei and Devi, 2009), whereas Ganjihal et al. (2023) found that social media (WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram, etc.) is the primary source of information for farmers. Mtega (2018) discovered that smallholder farmers preferred to watch and listen to agricultural programmes on the television and radio, which were their primary sources of agricultural knowledge, whereas Blattman et al. (2002) found that word of mouth was the primary source of information. Duhan and Singh (2017) conducted a study to determine which sources farmers used to obtain significant information about weather forecasts and agricultural activities, and their study reveals that print newspapers were the most reliable and authentic source for farmers to get the latest weather information. A study by Okediji et al. (2020) found that most farmers were skilled in using mobile phones to communicate, and used and relied on agricultural extension agents for agricultural information. Most studies have found that illiteracy, the lack of access to formal channels of information, technological problems, lack of awareness, lack of financial support, and the non-availability of electricity and/or constant power interruptions are significant problems faced by farmers when accessing the information they require (Ademola and Olatokum, 2018; Akanda and Roknuzzaman, 2012; Kumar and Devi, 2020; Obidike, 2011; Ogunbeni et al., 2013; Okediji et al., 2020; Pattar, 2018). Also, Ume et al. (2020) found that restricted access to information services, a low farm income, time-constraint problems, language barriers and a poor knowledge-sharing culture are the major constraints faced by farmers. Obidike (2011) mentions that agricultural information not being broadcast on the radio and television in their native dialect is another problem faced by farmers.

Information literacy is helpful for everybody in every field of life, be it in the academic, political, health, business, media or agriculture sectors. Information literacy is crucial for the capability approach, requiring users to become critical information consumers to avoid overload and develop new intellectual skills (Raya et al., 2018). In various agricultural activities, farmers’ decision-making is a complex and multifaceted process that involves considering a range of factors to optimize outcomes. Effective decision-making requires a blend of expertise and adaptability, and a keen understanding of local conditions. As agriculture continues to evolve, farmers’ ability to make informed decisions becomes increasingly vital for sustainable and productive farming practices. Reimers and Klasen (2011) demonstrate that agricultural information provisions through education have a considerable impact on agricultural productivity due to rapid technical changes, and the knowledge and skills acquired through education help farmers to adapt more readily to the new opportunities provided by technological innovations. So, information literacy for farmers is vital for informed decision-making, ensuring that they can assess and utilize diverse sources of agricultural information effectively, leading to more sustainable and profitable farming practices. Qu and Zhong (2013) highlight that improving farmers’ information literacy is essential as it increases their income, broadens their viewpoints and improves their living standards. Agricultural information literacy is also seen as a set of skills and competencies for identifying, accessing and using agricultural information to facilitate enhanced agricultural productivity (Attama and Igwe, 2015), and it can enhance farmers’ human capital, increase agricultural productivity, and contribute to better living conditions for farmers (Raya et al., 2018). It also helps farmers navigate challenges like climate change, market volatility and resource constraints, improving livelihoods and contributing to food security and economic development in rural communities. Djuara and Gandasari (2018) point out that agricultural extension workers must possess strong information literacy skills in today's information-rich environment to effectively collect, process and distribute agricultural information, which is vital for driving agricultural development.

Digital literacy is unquestionably crucial in today's society, whether it involves university students, company executives or farmers. In an era of advancing agricultural technology, the decision to adopt new tools and techniques adds a layer of complexity. Farmers all over the world use a digitized database of agricultural data (Mokhtar et al., 2022). The adoption of digital technology is mainly recognized as a key motivation for production-changing advancements in agriculture (Liu and Zhou, 2023), but Magesa et al. (2023) found that the process of the adoption of digital technologies by farmers in different countries for accessing and sharing agricultural information and knowledge has not been smooth. A low level of digital literacy has consequences for the agricultural activities of smallholder farmers. Satpathy (2022) mentions that digital technologies can enhance agriculture productivity by utilizing resources effectively and responsibly, enabling farmers to produce more. Digital agriculture technology has the potential to revolutionize crop and livestock production, making it more productive, ecologically friendly and efficient (Birger et al., 2020). Smallholder farmers can use digital agriculture to overcome obstacles, boost productivity, join food value chains and adopt climate-smart practices (Baskaran-Makanju et al., 2021). Farmers must possess adequate digital literacy skills to utilize all the digital technologies in farming effectively. A study by Adelakun and Olupitan (2022) found that most crop farmers in Oyo State, Nigeria, had low digital literacy, with lack of training being the most significant constraint. Despite this, the perception of using digital tools was generally favourable. Adelakun and Olupitan suggest that the government should establish a digital literacy initiative, specifically targeting farmers to improve their digital skills through training. Gumbi et al.’s (2023) study also reveals limited research on digital literacy, affordability and business-model innovation, and the common challenges faced by farmers included the digital infrastructure, affordability and digital literacy. Zhang and Bao (2023) highlight that agricultural and rural informatization is vital for modernization and can improve farmers’ livelihoods through digital empowerment. Still, current policies focus on the rural infrastructure, and farmers’ digital literacy remains overlooked. Li et al. (2024) suggest that farmers with higher levels of digital literacy can obtain timely and adequate information through online training, consulting experts and other channels. Ganjihal et al. (2023) also emphasize the significance of digital literacy in agriculture, highlighting its role in enabling rural farmers to access information and connect with others via social media. Zhang and Zhang (2024) suggest that digital literacy enhances farmers’ willingness to engage in e-commerce sales, providing access to financial resources and agricultural production services, and thereby promoting sustainable agricultural practices and economic growth. Quin and Zhang (2022) point out that farmers urgently need to enhance their digital literacy as it is the fundamental building block for rural rehabilitation and agricultural and rural modernization. Syafuddin and Meideina (2023) highlight the importance of e-agriculture for farmers to enhance their agricultural quality, and that the widespread use of information and communications technology has led to increased digital literacy skills, including information searches, resource management, digital collaboration and increased digital participation. Therefore, governments and society must support the development of human resources for farmers, ensuring the effective use of technology in agriculture.

Research problem

The relationship between information literacy and farmers’ decision-making processes is crucial in modern agriculture, where information resources are abundant. However, there is a research gap in understanding the direct impact of information literacy on farmers’ decisions. The interaction between information literacy, technologies, market dynamics and environmental considerations is also relatively unexplored.

Objectives

The objectives of this study are as follows: (1) to assess the decision-making patterns of farmers with varying levels of information literacy and (2) to find out the challenges farmers face in accessing and effectively using agricultural information in their decision-making.

Hypothesis

There is no significant difference in the distribution of information literacy assessment across categories of gender.

There is no relationship between the participants’ qualifications, experience and distribution of information literacy assessment.

Methodology

The areas under study were the villages of Myntkung and Biar of the Laskein Community and Rural Development Block in West Jaintia Hill District, Meghalaya, India. A simple random sampling technique was employed to select participants from these two villages. A random sample of 60 farmers was selected from each village. This was done to ensure representation from a diverse range of farmers in terms of age, experience and agricultural practices. A total of 120 farmers was therefore selected for this study. The head of the family or any member of the family considered the key member for receiving and passing on information was chosen as the respondent.

The research utilized a mixed-methods approach to gain comprehensive insights into the farmers’ information literacy and decision-making processes. The quantitative component involved a survey, which was administered to a representative sample of farmers from the two villages. The survey assessed their information literacy levels, information sources and decision-making behaviours. The qualitative component involved in-depth interviews with a subset of the survey respondents to explore the underlying factors that influenced their decision-making. A structured interview schedule was prepared in English and their native language to help the respondents better understand the questions and get an appropriate response. This was done because most of the farmers were illiterate and did not understand the English language. The interviews were conducted based on a one-on-one interactive information communication – a one-time process. It is to be noted that the interviews were not recorded.

Data analysis and interpretation

The data collected was analysed using SPSS. Out of the 120 participants, 10 (8.3%) identified as male, whereas 110 (91.7%) identified as female. The low participation of men in this survey may be attributed to the matrilineal structure that is prevalent in Meghalaya. Additionally, illiteracy could have contributed to the notably lower representation of men, potentially due to their absence from home during the collection of the research data. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that females designate many government schemes. In this study, we have gathered extensive data on the impact of information literacy on farmers' decision-making processes. The mixed-methods approach provided both quantitative and qualitative insights into this relationship. For a detailed breakdown of the data and additional analysis, please refer to Appendix 1.

Frequency distribution by age

The data presented in Figure 1 represents the age distribution of the 120 participants. The most significant proportion of the participants falls within the 41–50 age group, comprising 65 individuals (54.2% of the sample). The 51–60 age group includes 23 participants (19.2% of the sample), while the 31–40 age group contains 14 participants (11.7% of the sample). Participants below the age of 30 and above 60 number 11 (9.2% of the sample) and 7 (5.8% of the sample), respectively.

Figure 1.

Frequency distribution by age.

Frequency distribution by qualifications

The data in Figure 2 illustrates the educational qualifications of the sample of 120 participants, categorized into different qualification levels. The most significant proportion of the participants had a ‘Below Class 5’ qualification level, which accounts for 69 individuals (57.5% of the sample). The ‘Class 6–10’ qualification level is represented by 30 participants (25.0% of the sample), while the ‘Illiterate’ category includes 17 participants (14.2% of the sample). The smallest group is individuals with a ‘Class 11–12’ qualification level, comprising 4 participants (3.3% of the sample).

Figure 2.

Frequency distribution by qualification.

Frequency distribution by experience

The data in Figure 3 shows the distribution of the number of years of work experience among the 120 participants, categorized into different year ranges. A small percentage of the participants (2 individuals, 1.7% of the sample) falls within the ‘1–5 years’ experience range. The ‘5–10 years’ experience range is represented by 10 participants (8.3% of the sample). Participants with ‘10–15 years’ of experience number 15 individuals (12.5% of the sample). Most of the participants (93 individuals, 77.5% of the sample) had ‘more than 15 years’ of experience.

Figure 3.

Frequency distribution by experience.

Frequency distribution of information literacy assessment based on Likert scale

Table 1 represents the assessment of information literacy using a Likert scale as an ordinal measure (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). From Table 1, for Statistic 1, the median is 3, which indicates that the respondents neither agreed nor disagreed that they were confident in their ability to access agricultural information from various sources, and the mode is 4, which means that the respondents agreed that they were confident in their ability to access agricultural information from various sources. For Statistic 2, the median and mode are both 4, which means that the respondents agreed that they could evaluate the reliability of the information they found related to farming practices. For Statistic 3, the median and mode are both 1, which means that the respondents strongly disagreed that they knew how to use digital technologies (e.g. smartphones, the Internet) to access agricultural information. For Statistic 4, the median and mode are both 1, which means that the respondents strongly disagreed that they regularly sought information to stay updated on new agricultural practices. For Statistic 5, the median and mode are both 4, which means that the respondents agreed that they could effectively apply the information they collected to improve their farming decisions.

Table 1.

Frequency distribution of information literacy assessment based on the Likert scale.

Statistic	1	2	3	4	5
	I am confident in my ability to access agricultural information from various sources	I can evaluate the reliability of the information I find related to farming practices	I know how to use digital technologies (e.g. smartphones, the Internet) to access agricultural information	I regularly seek information to stay updated on new agricultural practices	I can effectively apply the information I gather to improve my farming decisions
N	120	120	120	120	120
Mdn	3.00	4.00	1.00	1.00	4.00
Mo	4	4	1	1	4

Independent-samples Mann–Whitney U test

A series of independent-samples Mann–Whitney U tests was conducted to examine the distributions for various aspects of agricultural-information-related skills and behaviours (information literacy assessment) across the categories of gender. The significance level was set at .050.

As shown in Table 2, the analysis reveals that for all five skills and behaviours tested, there was no statistically significant difference in the distributions across the gender categories. Specifically, the distributions of participants’ confidence in accessing agricultural information from various sources (p = .548), ability to evaluate the reliability of the farming-practices-related information found (p = .351), proficiency in using digital technologies for accessing agricultural information (p = .716), regularity of seeking information to stay updated on new agricultural practices (p = .373), and effectiveness in applying information gathered to improve farming decisions (p = .531) did not vary significantly based on gender.

Table 2.

Independent-samples Mann–Whitney U test.

Hypothesis test summary
Null hypothesis		Test	Sig.^a,b	Decision
1	Distribution of ‘I am confident in my ability to access agricultural information from various sources’ is the same across categories of gender	Independent-samples Mann–Whitney U test	.548	Retain the null hypothesis
2	Distribution of ‘I can evaluate the reliability of the information I find related to farming practices’ is the same across categories of gender	Independent-samples Mann–Whitney U test	.351	Retain the null hypothesis
3	Distribution of ‘I know how to use digital technologies (e.g. smartphones, the Internet) to access agricultural information’ is the same across categories of gender	Independent-samples Mann–Whitney U test	.716	Retain the null hypothesis
4	Distribution of ‘I regularly seek information to stay updated on new agricultural practices’ is the same across categories of gender	Independent-samples Mann–Whitney U test	.373	Retain the null hypothesis
5	Distribution of ‘I can effectively apply the information I gather to improve my farming decisions’ is the same across categories of gender	Independent-samples Mann–Whitney U test	.531	Retain the null hypothesis

Significance level is .050.

Asymptotic significance is displayed.

As a result, all the null hypotheses were retained, indicating no evidence to support the presence of gender-related differences in these aspects of agricultural-information-related skills and behaviours among the participants. These findings suggest that, within the context of this study, gender does not appear to be a significant factor influencing the reported skills and behaviours.

The mean rank represents the average rank of the responses within each group (see Figure 4). In the context of the Likert scale, a higher mean rank indicates a tendency towards more agreement with various aspects of agricultural-information-related skills and behaviours across the categories of gender. For example, for the statement ‘I regularly seek information to stay updated on new agricultural practices’, based on the mean ranks, it seems that, on average, males responded more negatively (strongly disagree) to the statement compared to females (who responded with disagree). This suggests that, on average, males were less likely than females to seek information to stay updated on new agricultural practices.

Figure 4.

Independent-samples Mann–Whitney U test showing various aspects of agricultural information-related skills and behaviours distributed across genders.

Frequency distribution of sources relied on by farmers for accessing agricultural information

When it comes to farmers’ decision-making about crop selection, pest management or resource allocation, and how much they considered the reliability of information, most of the farmers responded that the creditability and reliability of information was of great importance when it came to decision-making about any agricultural activities. As can be seen from Table 3, most of the farmers relied on their fellow farmers (79.2%) for accessing agricultural information, followed by agricultural extension services (8.3%). Government agricultural agencies and farmers’ cooperatives/associations were each used by 4.2% of the farmers, while only 0.8% used social media platforms.

Table 3.

Frequency distribution of sources farmers rely on for accessing agricultural information.

Source	f	%
Agricultural extension services	10	8.3
Fellow farmers	95	79.2
Government agricultural agencies	5	4.2
Farmers’ cooperatives/associations	5	4.2
Newspapers/radio	4	3.3
Social media platforms	1	0.8
Total	120	100.0

Pearson correlation

A Pearson correlation analysis was conducted to explore the relationships between the participants’ qualifications, experience and various aspects of their agricultural-information-related skills and behaviours. The data set comprised 120 participants. For the Pearson correlation matrix (Table 4), the various agricultural-information-related skills (information literacy assessment) were coded as follows for ease of comprehension:

Q1 = I am confident in my ability to access agricultural information from various sources.

Q2 = I can evaluate the reliability of the information related to farming practices.

Q3 = I know how to use digital technologies (e.g. smartphones, the Internet) to access agricultural information.

Q4 = I regularly seek information to stay updated on new agricultural practices.

Q5 = I can effectively apply the information I gather to improve my farming decisions.

Table 4.

Pearson correlation: correlation matrix of qualifications, experience and agricultural-information-related skills and behaviours.

	Qualifications	Experience	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Q5
Qualifications	1
Experience	−.014	1
Q1	−.014	−.024	1
Q2	−.116	−.029	.083	1
Q3	.075	.075	−.055	.095	1
Q4	.025	−.193*	−.091	−.002	.254**	1
Q5	.053	.105	.012	.008	.198*	−.058	1

*Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed).

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Qualifications had a very weak and non-significant correlation with confidence in accessing agricultural information from various sources (r = −.014, p = .881), as well as with the ability to evaluate the reliability of the farming-related information found (r = −.116, p = .206). Experience similarly showed negligible correlations with confidence (r = −.024, p = .796) and with other skills, such as using digital technologies (r = .075, p = .416) and applying the information gathered for better farming decisions (r = .105, p = .252). Confidence in accessing agricultural information demonstrated non-significant correlations with most skills and behaviours, except for a weak positive correlation with seeking information to stay updated on new agricultural practices (r = .083, p = .368).

The ability to evaluate the reliability of farming-related information was weakly and non-significantly correlated with most other variables, except for a weak positive correlation with using digital technologies (r = .095, p = .302). Similarly, the skill of effectively applying information gathered to improve farming decisions had negligible correlations with other variables, except for a weak positive correlation with the ability to use digital technologies (r = .198, p = .030). Interestingly, the use of digital technologies exhibited a significant positive correlation with seeking information to stay updated on new agricultural practices (r = .254, p < .01), suggesting that those participants who were proficient in using digital tools were more likely to seek new agricultural information actively.

Overall, this correlation analysis provides insights into the relationships between qualifications, experience, and various agricultural-information-related skills and behaviours. However, most correlations were weak and non-significant, highlighting the complexity of the factors influencing these skills and behaviours.

Challenges faced by farmers in accessing and effectively using agricultural information in decision-making

The frequency distribution for the challenges faced by farmers in accessing and using agricultural information effectively in decision-making was calculated using the multiple-response method, coding the variables as dichotomies and counting the values as 1 (see Table 5).

Table 5.

Challenges faced by farmers in accessing and effectively using agricultural information in decision-making.

Problems^a	n	%	% of cases
Limited access to information	93	17.4	77.5
Language barriers	70	13.1	58.3
Information overload	41	7.7	34.2
Quality and reliability	74	13.8	61.7
Time constraints	63	11.8	52.5
Cost	73	13.6	60.8
Lack of awareness	75	14.0	62.5
Fragmentation of information	46	8.6	38.3

Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1.

The challenges encountered by farmers in accessing agricultural information were analysed and categorized based on the participants’ responses. The most frequently reported challenges were as follows:

Limited access to information. Approximately 77.5% of the participants identified limited access to information as a significant challenge. This indicates a substantial concern among the respondents regarding the availability and accessibility of agricultural information.

Language barriers. Language barriers were reported by 58.3% of the participants, indicating that linguistic differences may impede adequate access to agricultural information.

Quality and reliability. About 61.7% of the participants expressed concerns about the quality and reliability of the available agricultural information. This highlights the importance of ensuring accurate and trustworthy sources of information.

Information overload. Around a third (34.2%) of the participants mentioned dealing with information overload, which suggests that managing the abundance of information available is a significant concern.

Time constraints. Approximately 52.5% of the participants faced challenges related to time constraints, underscoring the balance required between farming activities and seeking information.

Cost. Around 60.8% of the participants cited cost as a challenge, indicating that financial considerations can impact access to agricultural information.

Lack of awareness. Roughly 62.5% of the participants indicated a lack of awareness as a challenge, highlighting the need for the increased dissemination of available information.

Fragmentation of information. About 38.3% of the participants reported challenges arising from the fragmentation of information sources, indicating potential difficulties in aggregating relevant information.

Factors influencing farmers in their decision-making processes

The frequency distribution for the factors influencing farmers in their decision-making processes was calculated using the multiple-response method. The results are as follows:

Cost considerations. Approximately two-thirds (69%) of the farmers prioritized cost considerations in their decision-making processes. Cost-effective strategies and financial considerations were crucial factors influencing their choices.

Weather conditions. Almost half (45%) of the farmers took weather conditions into account when making decisions on their farm. This reflects the significance of considering climate and weather patterns to optimize agricultural practices.

Market trends. Market trends played an important role in the decision-making processes of 55% of the farmers. This suggests that most farmers were attuned to market dynamics so that they could make informed choices regarding crop selection and the timing of sales.

Environmental sustainability. Environmental sustainability was crucial for 33% of the farmers. This indicates many farmers’ growing awareness and commitment to adopting environmentally friendly practices and promoting long-term sustainability.

Technological advancements. Almost a third (29%) of the farmers considered technological advancements in their decision-making. This reflects a group of farmers who value and integrate technological innovations in their farming practices for improved efficiency and productivity.

Responses to the question ‘Have you ever encountered conflicting or contradictory information regarding a farming practice? If yes, how did you resolve this discrepancy?’

Most of the farmers responded to this question with a ‘yes’ and said that they had encountered conflicting or contradictory information regarding farming practices on several occasions. To resolve such discrepancies, most of them sought help from fellow farmers who possessed valuable first-hand experience and practical knowledge relevant to farming practices, making them reliable sources of information when faced with conflicting advice. Many felt that seeking help from fellow farmers fostered a sense of community and mutual support, allowing for the exchange of perspectives, successful strategies and lessons learned. The respondents also believed that participation in farmer networks, discussion groups or agricultural cooperatives provided ongoing opportunities for learning and mentorship, enhancing their decision-making abilities and resilience in addressing the uncertainties in farming practices.

Responses to the question ‘Do you actively seek opportunities for learning and improving your information literacy skills related to farming? If yes, what resources or activities do you find most helpful?’

Most of the farmers rarely sought out opportunities to improve their information literacy skills related to farming due to various challenges. Limited government awareness programmes and resources made it difficult to access relevant information. Some farmers mentioned that their inability to read and write posed significant barriers to engaging with written materials. Consequently, they relied heavily on word-of-mouth communication within their community, which may not always provide accurate or up-to-date information. Despite these challenges, many farmers recognized the importance of staying informed and trying to access resources such as the radio (whenever broadcasts were in their local language) or community gatherings for agricultural knowledge.

Responses to the question ‘In what ways do you feel that having access to accurate and timely information influences your decision-making processes?’

Almost 87% of the farmers believed that having access to accurate and timely information significantly influenced their decision-making processes by enabling them to make informed choices based on current data and insights. Most of the farmers also thought that timely and accurate information enhanced the quality of their decisions, minimized risks and allowed for timely adjustments in response to changing circumstances, ultimately leading to more effective outcomes and improved productivity in their endeavours.

Impact of information literacy on farmers’ decision-making processes

Information literacy can significantly impact farmers’ decision-making processes, affecting their agricultural practices and overall productivity. When farmers possess information literacy skills, they can benefit in the following ways:

Access to diverse information sources. Information literacy enables farmers to access various information sources, such as agricultural research papers, weather forecasts, market trends and best practices. This empowers them to stay up to date with the latest agricultural developments, leading to better decision-making.

Improved crop selection. Farmers with information literacy skills can gather data on crop varieties, their performance in specific climates, their resistance to pests and diseases, and market demand. With this knowledge, they can make informed decisions about which crops to cultivate for maximum yield and profitability.

Adoption of modern farming techniques. Access to information about advanced farming techniques, sustainable practices and innovative technologies can help farmers improve their agricultural methods. This may include using precision farming, drip irrigation, organic farming or integrated pest management, which can lead to increased efficiency and reduced environmental impact.

Risk management. Informed decision-making allows farmers to assess potential risks and challenges related to weather patterns, disease outbreaks, market fluctuations and input costs. Armed with relevant information, farmers can develop contingency plans and strategies to mitigate risks and minimize losses.

Financial planning and market intelligence. Information literacy equips farmers with the ability to analyse market trends, consumer demands and commodity prices. They can then plan their production and sales strategies accordingly, optimizing their income and financial sustainability.

Increased productivity and profitability. By making well-informed decisions, farmers can enhance their productivity, optimize resource utilization and minimize wastage. As a result, they can achieve higher profitability and improve their economic well-being.

Engagement with agricultural extension services. Information-literate farmers are more likely to seek out and actively engage with agricultural extension services. These services provide expert advice, training and technical support, further enhancing farmers’ knowledge and decision-making capabilities.

Discussion

Agricultural information is often dispersed across various sources and platforms, making it difficult for farmers to access comprehensive and integrated information. The findings of this study emphasize the prominent role of fellow farmers as a preferred source of agricultural information, possibly due to their practical experience and first-hand knowledge within the farming domain. Farmers often have limited access to information in remote or rural areas due to inadequate Internet connectivity, the lack of information centres or limited extension services. The information is often in technical or specialized language, which can be difficult for some farmers to understand, especially those with lower levels of education or literacy. The abundance of information can be overwhelming, leading to decision-making paralysis and potential financial losses. Farmers may not be aware of various sources of agricultural information, lack technical skills or have limited time to process information. Accessing specific information sources or adopting new technologies may come with financial costs, particularly for small-scale or resource-constrained farmers. Farmers’ decision-making processes are crucial for driving agricultural development, food security and environmental sustainability. Addressing access, quality, language and awareness concerns is essential to enhance farmers’ ability to make informed decisions and improve agricultural practices.

The findings of this study highlight how important information literacy is in influencing farmers’ decision-making processes. The quantitative investigation shows relationships between higher levels of information literacy and farmers’ ability to make wiser and more calculated decisions. The qualitative data highlights several factors influencing farmers’ decision-making processes on the farm, including cost considerations, weather conditions, market trends, environmental sustainability and technological advancements. The qualitative study also shows that most farmers sought helps from their fellow farmers and frequently relied on word-of-mouth communication due to low government awareness and resources, and access to accurate information significantly enhances decision-making, while encountering conflicting information prompts critical evaluation and experimentation for informed choices. The research also emphasizes how important it is for farmers and other stakeholders to collaborate and share knowledge to use agricultural information in decision-making effectively, which influences academic research and real-world agricultural interventions. By understanding and addressing these factors, farmers can make more informed and strategic decisions to enhance the overall viability and sustainability of their farming operations.

The survey findings informed the qualitative phase by identifying key themes and guiding the development of the interview questions. They provided context for understanding farmers’ perspectives on information literacy and decision-making, allowing for a deeper exploration of specific issues. Additionally, the survey results helped contextualize the qualitative findings by providing quantitative support and comparison points. Overall, the survey served as a foundation for the qualitative inquiry, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of how information literacy influences farmers’ decision-making processes.

Implications

This study has significant implications for both academic research and practical agricultural interventions. By delving into the relationship between information literacy and farmers’ decision-making, the findings could inform tailored interventions to enhance agricultural practices. From a scholarly perspective, this research contributes to the growing body of literature at the intersection of information literacy and agriculture. It underscores the importance of considering farmers as producers and information consumers in a technologically advancing world. The mixed-methods approach allows for a nuanced understanding of the complex dynamics involved, offering valuable insights for future researchers exploring similar intersections between information literacy and various domains. On a practical level, the implications extend to agricultural policymakers and extension services. Understanding how information literacy influences decision-making enables the development of targeted programmes and tools that empower farmers with the right skills and knowledge. Implementing initiatives to enhance information literacy among farmers can lead to more informed decisions, improved crop management and increased agricultural productivity. Ultimately, this study paves the way for evidence-based strategies to strengthen farmers’ information capabilities, contributing to sustainable and resilient agricultural systems.

Limitations

Despite its contributions, this study also exhibits some limitations. First, the sample may not fully represent all farming communities due to geographical and demographic constraints. Future research could include a more diverse and extensive participant pool to enhance generalizability. Moreover, the study primarily focuses on the impact of information literacy on decision-making, without delving into potential contextual factors that might influence this relationship. Future research could explore factors such as socio-economic conditions or access to technology, for example, to provide a more comprehensive understanding.

Conclusion

Information literacy and digital literacy are crucial in empowering farmers to make well-informed decisions, leading to improved agricultural practices, increased productivity and better livelihoods. Such literacy allows farmers to adapt to changing circumstances, adopt innovative technologies, and contribute to sustainable and responsible agricultural practices. Overcoming the challenges they face requires a multi-pronged approach involving efforts from governments, non-governmental organizations, agricultural organizations and technology providers. Solutions may include improving the digital infrastructure, enhancing information dissemination channels, providing training and capacity-building programmes, and tailoring information to suit farmers’ needs and circumstances. Additionally, promoting collaboration and knowledge-sharing among farmers and stakeholders can further enhance the effective use of agricultural information in decision-making.

Recommendations

Following are some of the recommendations to enhance farmers decision making and their information literacy skills:

Enhance information literacy programmes. This study advocates for developing and implementing targeted information literacy programmes for farmers. These programmes could focus on improving digital literacy, critical evaluation of information sources and effective use of technology for decision-making.

Promote access to technology. It is suggested that initiatives be implemented to improve farmers’ access to technological tools and platforms. This might involve supporting infrastructure development, providing subsidies for technology adoption or collaborating with technology companies to create farmer-friendly applications.

Training and capacity building. The importance of ongoing training and capacity building for farmers should be emphasized. This could include workshops, seminars and training sessions on information literacy, modern agricultural practices and the use of technology in farming.

Facilitate peer learning. The establishment of peer-learning networks among farmers should be encouraged. This could be a platform for sharing experiences, best practices and tips on utilizing information for decision-making.

Integration with extension services. It is recommended that information literacy components be integrated into existing agricultural extension services. This would ensure that farmers receive continuous support and guidance in effectively utilizing information.

Policy advocacy. Policy changes need to be called for and the importance of information literacy in agriculture should be recognized. This could involve working with government bodies to incorporate information literacy components into agricultural policies and programmes.

Research on information needs. There should be further studies to pinpoint farmers’ precise information requirements in various settings or geographical areas. Information literacy programmes can thereby be better tailored to meet farmers’ particular difficulties in different agricultural settings.

Collaboration and partnerships. Cooperation between government agencies, non-governmental organizations, educational institutions and private sector entities should be encouraged to pool resources and expertise in promoting information literacy among farmers.

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 received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Tiplut Wann

Rudolf Carey Chyne

Author biographies

Tiplut Wann is a research scholar in the Department of Library and Information Science at North Eastern Hill University, India. His research interests include information literacy and agricultural development programmes.

Jiarlimon Khongtim, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Department of Library and Information Science at North Eastern Hill University, India. Her areas of interest include information literacy and students’ reading habits.

Rudolf Carey Chyne is a research scholar in the Department of Library and Information Science at North Eastern Hill University, India. His research interests include information literacy and students’ reading habits.

Appendix 1: Structured Interview Schedule

1. Name (Optional):_____________________

2. Gender: (a) Male (b) Female

3. Age (years)

(a) < 30

(b) 31–40

(d) 51–60

(e) 60+

4. Qualifications

(a) Illiterate

(b) Below Class 5

(d) Class 11–12

(e) Degree level and above

5. Years of experience

(a) 1–3

(b) 4–6

(d) 10+

6. Information literacy assessment

Information literacy assessment using a Likert Scale where 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral/undecided, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree.

(a) I am confident in my ability to access agricultural information from various sources

1 2 3 4 5

(b) I can evaluate the reliability of the information I find related to farming practices

1 2 3 4 5

(d) I regularly seek information to stay updated on new agricultural practices

1 2 3 4 5

(e) I can effectively apply the information I gather to improve my farming decisions

1 2 3 4 5

7. Sources farmers rely on for accessing agricultural information

(a) Agricultural extension services

(b) Fellow farmers/relatives

(d) Farmers’ cooperatives/associations

(e) Social media platforms

8. Challenges faced by farmers in accessing and using agricultural information effectively in decision-making (multiple responses allowed)

(a) Limited access to information

(b) Language barriers

(d) Information overload

(e) Time constraints

(f) Cost

(g) Lack of awareness

(h) Fragmentation of information

9. What are the factors that influence farmers in their decision-making processes on a farm?

10. In what ways do you feel that having access to accurate and timely information influences your decision-making processes?

11. Do you actively seek opportunities for learning and improving your information literacy skills related to farming? If yes, what resources or activities do you find most helpful?

12. Have you ever encountered conflicting or contradictory information regarding a farming practice? If yes, how did you resolve this discrepancy?

References

Adelakun

Olupitan

(2022) Level of digital literacy among crop farmers in Oyo State. International Journal of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development 12(1): 16–23.

Ademola

Olatokum

(2018) Agricultural information sources and literacy of fruit farmers: A qualitative inquiry. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3123707

Adio

Abu

Yusul

, et al. (2016) Use of agricultural information sources and services by farmers to improve productivity in Kwara State. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) 1456: Article 1456. Available at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1456

Akanda

Roknuzzaman

(2012) Agricultural information literacy of farmers in the Northern Region of Bangladesh. Information and Knowledge Management 2(6). Available at: https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/IKM/article/download/2491/2663

American Library Association (1989) Presidential Committee on Information Literacy: Final report. Available at: https://www.ala.org/acrl/publications/whitepapers/presidential

Association of College and Research Libraries (2015) Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. Available at: https://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework

Association of College and Research Libraries (2020) Information literacy competency standards for higher education. Available at: https://alair.ala.org/bitstream/handle/11213/7668/ACRL%20Information%20Literacy%20Competency%20Standards%20for%20Higher%20Education.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Attama

Igwe

(2015) Dimensions of information literacy and the expectations from librarians in diverse environments in Nigeria. International Journal of Learning & Development 5(2): 65–77.

Bachhav

(2012) Information needs of the rural farmers: A study from Maharashtra, India: A survey. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) 866: Article 866. Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/866

10.

Bagal

Sharma

Manhas

(2018) Awareness and utilization of communication sources by the farmers in J&K. International Journal of Agriculture Science 10(2): 5005–5009.

11.

Baskaran-Makanju

Hoo

Mitchell

, et al. (2021) The digital agriculture revolution will take more than innovation. Available at: http://mkt-bcg-com-public-pdfs.s3.amazonaws.com/prod/digital-agriculture-and-development.pdf

12.

Bidaralli

Jayasheela (2018) Decision-making process of farmers in agriculture: An empirical study in Shivamogga District. International Journal of Research in Social Sciences 8(6): 264–282.

13.

Birger

Daum

Pray

(2020) Who drives the digital revolution in agriculture? A review of supply-side trends, players, and challenges. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 43(4): 1260–1285.

14.

Blattman

Jensen

Roman

(2002) Assessing the need and the potential of community networking for developing countries: A case study from India. Available at: https://edev.media.mit.edu/SARI/papers/CommunityNetworking.pdf

15.

Buckingham

(2006) Defining digital literacy: What do young people need to know about digital media? Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy 1(4): 263–277.

16.

Duhan

Singh

(2017) Sources of agricultural information accessed by farmers in Haryana, India. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 6(12): 1559–1565.

17.

Ganjihal

Kwati

(2023 Digital literacy among rural farmers: A study. In: Singh K, Jadhav US and Ghante PB (eds) Digital Literacy among Rural Farmers: A Study. New Delhi: Ess Ess Publications, 250–256.

18.

Gilster

(1997) Digital Literacy. New York: Wiley, 1.

19.

Gumbi

Twinomurinzi

(2023) Towards sustainable digital agriculture for smallholder farmers: A systematic literature review. Sustainability 15(16): Article 12530.

20.

Hayden

Mattimoe

Jack

(2021) Sensemaking and the influencing factors on farmer decision-making. Journal of Rural Studies 84: 31–44.

21.

IFLA (2005) Beacons of the information society: The Alexandria Proclamation on Information Literacy and Lifelong Learning. Available at: https://www.ifla.org/publications/beacons-of-the-information-society-the-alexandria-proclamation-on-information-literacy-and-lifelong-learning/

22.

Jiaoping

Yangkui

Yaoquing

(2009) An investigative report on information literacy training of individual farmers in central and on issues related to remedial measures: A case study of farmers’ information literacy in a few districts of Hubei Province, Chinese. Journal of Library and Information Science 2(2): 71–82.

23.

Kemp

(1976) Nature of Knowledge: An Introduction for Librarians. London: Clive Bingley.

24.

Kumar

Devi

(2020) Farmers’ perspective on agricultural information literacy: A case study of Jind District, India. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) 3836: Article 3836. Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/3836

25.

Djuara L

Gandasari (2018) Information literacy among extension workers in Cianjur Regency. International Journal of Social Science and Economic Research 3(12): 7130–7141.

26.

Goa

, et al. (2024) Can digital literacy improve organic fertilizer utilization rates? Empirical evidence from China. Environment, Development and Sustainability. Epub 7 April 2024. DOI: 10.1007/s10668-024-04793-1.

27.

Liu

Zhou

(2023) Digital literacy, farmers’ income increase, and rural internal income gap. Sustainability 15(14): Article 11422.

28.

Magesa

Jonathan

Urassa

(2023) Digital literacy of smallholder farmers in Tanzania. Sustainability 15(17): Article 13149.

29.

Meitei

Devi

(2009) Farmer’s information needs in rural Manipur: An assessment. Annals of Library and Information Studies 56(1): 35–40.

30.

Mittal

Mehar

(2016) Socioeconomic factors affecting adoption of modern information and communication technology by farmers in India: Analysis using multivariate probit model. Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension 22(2): 199–212.

31.

Mokhtar

WNHW

Izhar

TAT

Zaini

, et al. (2022) The importance of digital literacy skills among farmers for sustainable food security. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences 12(1): 235–246.

32.

Mtega

(2018) The usage of radio and television as agricultural knowledge sources: The case of farmers in Morogoro Region of Tanzania. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology 14(3): 252–266.

33.

Obidike

(2011) Rural farmers’ problems accessing agricultural information: A case study of Nsukka local government area of Enugu State, Nigeria. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) 660: Article 660. Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/660

34.

Ogunbeni

Ogungbo

Adeleke

(2013) Agricultural information needs of farmers in Lagos State, Nigeria. International Journal of Agriculture Science Research 2(4): 116–123.

35.

Okediji

Moruf

Hakeemat

(2020) Agricultural information literacy skills and information used by farmers in the Iwo senatorial district of Osun State, Nigeria. Journal of Science and Technology and Education 8(3): 69–76.

36.

Pattar

(2018) A study of information literacy skills of farmers of Koppal and Raichur district of Hyderabad and Karnataka region. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts 6(1): 1023–1033.

37.

Zhong

(2013) The investigation and analysis of the new generation farmers’ information literacy in Chongqing Province, Xiaoyan. In: International Conference on Advances in Social Science, Humanities, and Management (ASSHM) , Guangzhou, China, 14–15 December 2013, pp. 837–844. Guangzhou: Atlantis Press. http://doi.org10.2991/asshm-13.2013.156

38.

Quin

Zhang

(2022) The current situation and causes of farmers’ digital literacy. Advances in Social Science, Education, and Humanities Research 664: 2334–2337.

39.

Raya

Wastutiningsih

Penggalih

, et al. (2018) The ethics of agricultural information literacy of farmers in the Coastal Sandy Land of Yogyakarta special region. In: Sukartiko

Nuringtyas

Marliana

S, et al.

(eds) Proceeding of the 2nd International Conference on Tropical Agriculture. Cham: Springer, 71–86.

40.

Reimers

Klasen

(2011) Revisiting the role of education for agricultural productivity. Discussion Papers No. 90, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Courant Research Centre–Poverty, Equity and Growth (CRC–PEG), Göttingen, Germany. Available at: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/90475/1/CRC-PEG_DP_90.pdf

41.

Sani

Boadi

Oladokun

, et al. (2014) The generation and dissemination of agricultural information to farmers in Nigeria: A review. IOSR Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science 7(2): 102–116.

42.

Satpathy

(2022) Digital transformation for sustainable agriculture: A progressive method for smallholder farmers. Current Science 123(12): 1436–1440.

43.

Swapna

Biradar

(2017) Information literacy model for higher education institutions in India. International Journal of Digital Library Services 7(3): 31–50.

44.

Syafuddin

Meideina

(2023) Collaboration to build resilient farmers’ human resources: Digital literacy program in agriculture as a joint education effort. WIMAYA: Interdisciplinary Journal of International Affairs 4(2): 94–103.

45.

Ume

Okoro

Ben-Chukwu

, et al. (2020) Assessment of information needs and information seeking behaviour of rice farmers in Enugu North agricultural zone of Enugu State, Nigeria. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) 4(9): 354–363.

46.

Wang

(2016) Research in cultivation of farmer’s information literacy in information age. Available at: http://doi.org/10.12783/dtetr/sste2016/6485

47.

Yaseen

, et al. (2016) Farmers’ access to agricultural information sources: Evidences from rural Pakistan. Journal of Agricultural Chemistry Environment 5: 12–19.

48.

Yusuf

Adio

Zwalmam

, et al. (2021) Challenges in accessing agricultural information sources and services by farmers in the Edu local government area of Kwara State. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal): Article 6192. Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/6192

49.

Zhang

Bao

(2023) Internet platform enterprises and farmers digital literacy improvement. SHS Web of Conferences 152: Article 04003.

50.

Zhang

(2024) The influence of digital literacy on the phenomenon of deviation between farmers’ e-commerce sales willingness and behavior: Evidence from rural China. Sustainability 16(7): Article 3000.