See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/371519986

Challenges to Adoption of Digital Agriculture in India

Conference Paper · December 2022

DOI: 10.1109/ICMIAM56779.2022.10147002

CITATIONS READS

0 29

2 authors:

Jyotiranjan Hota Virendra Kumar Verma

KIIT University Indian Institute of Management (IIM) Mumbai India (formerly NITIE Mumbai)
30 PUBLICATIONS 95 CITATIONS 14 PUBLICATIONS 47 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Additive manufacturing or 3D printing View project

Adoption of Multivendor ATM Technology in India View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Virendra Kumar Verma on 06 July 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Challenges to Adoption of Digital Agriculture
in India
Jyotiranjan Hota
Associate Professor, KIIT School of
Management, Bhubaneswar, India
2022 International Conference on Maintenance and Intelligent Asset Management (ICMIAM) | 978-1-6654-6179-5/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/ICMIAM56779.2022.10147002
jyotiranjan_h@yahoo.com
Abstract— There is a paradigm shift due to digital
technology disruption in agricultural value chain. In the current
context, digital agriculture is indispensable for sustainable
agriculture, farmers’ livelihood and inclusive growth. Application of
AI, Machine Learning, Deep Learning, IoT enabled sensors, drones
and cobots are some key technologies which have vital roles in
modern practices of agriculture. However, Adoption of digital
agriculture in India is at a nascent stage. It is necessary to address
multiple challenges to adoption of digital technology to achieve
sustainable developments goals in India. The aim of the study is to
decipher the challenges of digital technology adoption in India and
to apply Interpretive Structural Modelling which ranks and finds out
the inter dependencies among the key challenges. ISM modelling as
a qualitative modelling tool develops a hierarchical structure among
the key challenges. The research work limits the study in India. The
study is first of its kind which applies ISM as a qualitative modelling
tool to challenges to digital agriculture in Indian context.
Keywords— Digital Agriculture, Interpretive Structural
Modelling, Hierarchical Structure, Sustainable Agriculture,
Quantitative Modelling
I. INTRODUCTION
As the world's population continues to grow, the
agriculture industry faces a number of difficulties. We'll
need efficient, effective, long-lasting, thorough, open, and
adaptable food systems if we're going to feed the expanding
population. It is urgently necessary to change the agriculture
system in place in order to achieve this.
The Indian government has prioritized digital agricultural
growth in order to ensure food security and reduce poverty
[19]. Over the years, Indian agriculture has undergone
substantial change, and instead of relying on food assistance,
we are now a reliable net exporter of food [20]. This
transition was made feasible by a number of policies,
production techniques like genetically modified or altered
crops, infrastructural investments like automation
employing machines, tools, and equipment, markets,
institutions, and research [25]. The structure of Indian
agriculture has gradually evolved as digital agricultural
growth has moved its attention to recognizing technical
advancements in the industry and acknowledging them, with
the goal of improving the financial circumstances of farmers
[27].
Farmers face a variety of issues nowadays, such as a labor
shortage, high farming costs, and low profits [30]. Few
studies have examined the obstacles to adoption of digital
agriculture in India, despite the country's substantial
advancements and
XXX-X-XXXX-XXXX-X/XX/$XX.00 ©20XX IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: KIIT University. Downloaded on June 19,2023 at 07:00:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Virendra Kumar Verma
Assistant Professor, KIIT School of
Management, Bhubaneswar, India
virunit@gmail.com
advances in this area. Our country's population growth is
one of the factors that can be seen as both beneficial and
harmful. As a result, the demand for resources and food
would increase, while at the same time we would be able to
offer the rest of the world with skilled labor [11][40]. The
Indian digital agricultural sector is accustomed to dealing
with complex problems like improving efficiency and
productivity, irrigation problems, draughts, protecting
against false crops, decreasing agricultural land, etc [4]. We
still rely on the monsoon for irrigation decades after gaining
our independence, and today's climate change has a
significant impact on weather patterns and, as a result, on
rain-fed crops due to erratic rainfall.
Although practically every other sector of the Indian
economy has experienced a boom in digital growth,
agriculture has lagged behind [21] [39]. All of the
fundamental issues with our farmlands must be addressed
using emerging technology; doing so will help to double
farmers' incomes and increase crop yield [24]. It is
practically impossible for Indian agriculture to be
scientifically transformed in a year or less since the country
is so diverse; instead, it requires a long-term plan with
immediate priority areas that will reach even the most
remote regions of the country. The ultimate goal of the
country should be to conserve water and maintain soil
nutrients. Rapid digital agricultural growth necessitates
intense work from the entire farming community, which
will progressively reduce our global footprint in the form of
exports [34]. A number of agro startups have also begun to
make contributions toward creating a sustainable
ecosystem that will connect different parties involved in
agriculture [23]. Drones are used in agricultural farmlands
all over the world to precisely inspect pest locations and
spray agrochemicals with pinpoint accuracy [7], but digital
revolution in agriculture in India will be a lengthy and
comprehensive chapter. Although the central government
has passed laws to remove prohibitions on the use of drones
in agriculture, much more must be done quickly.
In order to address the disconnect between the farming
community and technological advancements, Indian
institutions, both public and private, have taken
concerted response. They have mobilized essential agro
services, like weather forecasts and block chain technology,
to support Indian digital agriculture services.
To identify the hierarchical relationships between the
issues, it is important to assess the barriers to the adoption
of digital agriculture in India. To successfully implement
the adoption of digital agriculture in India, these obstacles
must be removed.
In terms of adoption measures, our study identifies the
linkages between the adoption of digital agriculture in India.
Using ISM and MICMAC methodologies, this research
identified, examined, and modeled high driving difficulties.
Modeling these barriers will help us better understand how
they interact. Finally, this study aids in the development of
appropriate strategies by decision-makers to boost the use of
digital agriculture in India.
The paper has been structured in the following manner:
review of literature, research gap, research objective,
methodology, discussion and conclusion.
II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This section describes how to conduct a literature search
to find challenges with digital agriculture. The review
describes the digital agriculture challenges in India. Ten
challenges are identified from forty-seven research papers
published between 2020 and 2021. Multiple databases like
EBSCO, PROQUEST, Google Scholar, Scopus and Science
Direct were searched with keywords like “Digital
Agriculture”, “Challenges” and “India”. Timeline of the
review was from 2002 to 2022. Subsequently, identified
challenges are grouped into themes.
List of Challenges of Digital Agriculture
1. Lack of digital agriculture knowledge: - Farmers are
facing a lack of digital agriculture knowledge because of
unavailable resources, financial support, skills, and digital
literacy [14] [15]. A digital agriculture ecosystem needs
farmers and agripreneurs' innovation. Agroindustry,
agricultural banks, agricultural research institutions, and
experts must support and expand digital agriculture
knowledge, financial support, awareness, collaboration,
and startups to invest in digital agriculture skill programs
for farmers [22].
2. Poor access to network and internet connectivity: - Most
farms are in distant areas with poor internet connectivity,
limiting transmission speeds. Communication lines can be
blocked by crops, shelters, and other obstacles. These
factors have made it more expensive to send data, which
has slowed the spread of precision agriculture systems [9]
[10] [18]. At the same time, Indian agriculture is facing
poor communication infrastructure because of inadequate
access to telecommunication infrastructure, inadequate
government support, and inadequate investment in
agricultural infrastructure [26] [31] [2].
3. Lack of supportive regulations: - The farm
regulations of India are an international issue. Three new
farm laws passed by India in September 2020 without
any discussion in the public or in parliament have
garnered a lot of attention worldwide [32] [33].
Despite advancements in the provision of financial
services, India’s formal financial system and
institutions have not adequately benefited the poor
farmers [3] [18]. Governments, banks, researchers, and
Authorized licensed use limited to: KIIT University. Downloaded on June 19,2023 at 07:00:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
financial experts need to make it easy for them to use the
formal financial system. The government, research
community, and experts need to solve these regulatory
issues.
4. High Capital Cost: - The high capital costs, such as
energy inputs, and the high levels of expertise needed for
successful production, fertilizer, labor ratios, and high rate
of investment are obstacles for open-field agriculture [16]
[38]. Government, banks, and research professionals must
propose low cost capital initiatives for agriculture.
5. Small land Holding: - The largest issue facing Indian
agriculture is the shrinking size of land holdings, which
could ultimately render the sector unprofitable. As a result,
there has been a sharp decline in the amount of land
cultivable land during the past few years, raising concerns
about an impending crisis in food security [8] [14].
6. Renting and sharing practices: -
Small-scale farmers share their land for farming. 78%
of Indian properties are less than two hectares, accounting
for 32.2% of total operated area. Small-scale farming isn't
profitable [28] [29] [36].
7. Need for strong data ecosystem: - Data sharing is
becoming more common even if it is still new. It's the next
step for data. These data ecosystems change institutions'
internal to external focus, catalyzing fresh thinking and
insights. Progress in data sharing depends on many
stakeholders' involvement. AI, Big data and IoT combined
technology will help to make in data sharing ecosystem
[5][6] [35]. Experts and researchers helps in the design of
real world situations that are not possible in India.
8. Lower digital literacy in grassroots level: - Digital
literacy is learning how to use digital tools in a
communicative, collaborative manner through social
interaction. Digital literacy is defined as the capacity to use
technology for information and communication to obtain,
analyze, develop, and convey information, which requires
both technical and cognitive skills. The adoption rate of
digital literacy at grassroots level is very poor in India [12]
[13] [26]. Researchers and the agro industry need to
redesign and rethink to improve farmers' digital
literacy level.
9. Data Trust and Security: - Data trust, data privacy, data
security, data validation, and data storage are bottlenecks
and current challenges in digital agriculture [9] [40].
Researchers and IT experts need to work together to
improve agriculture data with the support of IoT
technology.
10. Complexity to capture variety of crops, climate zones,
soil conditions under a digital umbrella: - The complexity
of collecting different crops, climate zones, and soil
conditions under a digital umbrella between digital
agriculture and their surroundings makes adoption of
 digital agriculture difficult [28] [31] [17].

III. RESEARCH GAP

Table 1
Number of studies are conducted which explore digital
Standard
agriculture categories for deciphering priorities among a Challenges Mean Deviation
variety of enablers and challenges. It is plausible that these Lack of digital agriculture
challenges interact with themselves, confounding a causal knowledge 4.268293 0.895108659
linkage. Though these challenges have been studied in Poor access to network
isolated manner to have impact on digital agriculture, study and internet connectivity 3.707317 1.123474576
on interaction among these challenges is lacking. At the Lack of supportive
regulations 3.463415 1.206183257
same time, there is scarcity of literature on prioritizing the
challenges. High Capital Cost 3.853659 1.013927404

IV. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY Small Land Holding 4 1.204159458

Renting and Sharing
The aim of this research is to endorse the identified Practices of Lands 3.585366 1.094888345
challenges in India. ISM methodology is conducted to Need for strong data ecosystem 4.170732 0.891696109
discover the interrelationship between the validated Lower digital literacy
challenges and rank them into multiple levels. Further, in grass root level 4.292683 0.955089065
MICMAC analysis is planned to portray the driving and Data Trust and Security 4.02439 1.193478213
dependence power of challenges of digital agriculture in Complexity to capture variety of
four quadrants. crops, climate zones, soil
conditions under a digital
umbrella 4.121951 1.029444558
V. METHODOLOGY
The research study was accomplished in three phases.
Table 2: SSIM
A. Identification of Digital Agriculture Challenges through
literature Review Sno Challenges 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
Ten challenges are deciphered from literature which
are discussed in preceding section. 1 Lack of digital V O X O O O O O A
agriculture
B. Validation of Challenges through Expert Opinion knowledge
The challenges identified from the literature have been
validated by the agroindustry professionals, agricultural 2 Poor access to O X X X O O A A
network and internet
bankers, agropreneurs and professors from rural connectivity
management institutes. Based on a review of literature, ten
challenges of digital agriculture were identified for 3 Lack of supportive V V V X V V V
verification from thirty- six experts. They were selected regulations
based on judgmental sampling. To conduct t test, minimum
thirty experts are required. An online survey was conducted 4 High Capital Cost X V V X X X
based on a structured questionnaire based on judgmental
5 Small land Holding V O V V X
sampling. The expert responses ranged from most
important (5) to least important. An analysis of the expert’s 6 Renting and sharing V X O X
responses reveals a strong relevance on all the challenges practices of Lands
with low standard deviation(Table1).
7 Need for strong data A X A
C. Modelling of Challenges using ISM ecosystem
Interpretive Structural Modelling (ISM) has been used to
model the digital agriculture challenges in Indian context. 8 Lower digital V V
ISM-MICMAC methodology was selected from alternative literacy in
grassroots level
methodologies like ANP, AHP, DEMATEL, Graph
Theory, SEM and BMW methodologies [23]. 9 Data Trust and X
Security
Here, nine experts were selected through judgmental
sampling as ISM conducts thirty-six pairwise comparison 10 Complexity to
and require consensus building to move forward avoiding capture variety of
complexity of multiple experts. These experts have also crops,
c li m a t e
participated in expert survey and given their consent to take
zones, soil
part in second phase of research. conditions under a
digital umbrella

Authorized licensed use limited to: KIIT University. Downloaded on June 19,2023 at 07:00:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Criteria for selection for ISM Modelling be 1 and (k, m) input in IRM will be 0
• Agroindustry professionals, agricultural 2. If (m, k) input in SSIM is A then (m, k) input in IRM will
bankers and professionals of digital agriculture be 0 and (k, m) input in IRM will be 1
3. If (m, k) input in SSIM is X then (m, k) input in IRM will
be 1 and (k, m) input in IRM will be 1
• Business School Professors or Researchers with 4. If (m, k) input in SSIM is O then (m, k) input in IRM will
knowledge and expertise on digital agriculture be 0 and (k, m) input in IRM will be 0
Table 3: Final Reachability Matrix Step 3: Final Reachability Matrix and Level Partitioning
Challenge Driving
s Z1 Z2 Z3 Z4 Z5 Z6 Z7 Z8 Z9 Z10 Power “ISM” package developed using R is refereed [1], which
Z1
1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1
7 eliminated the manual time-consuming effort to build Final
Reachability Matrix (Table 3) and further level partitioning.
Z2 9
1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1
The reachability and antecedent set for each challenge is
Z3 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 found from FRM. The intersection of these sets is resulting for
Z4
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 all the challenges. The challenges for which the reachability
0
and the intersection sets are the same occupy the top level in
Z5
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1
0
the ISM Model. Once the top-level element is found out,
Z6 9
it is separated from the other elements. The same
0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
procedure is followed to search the elements in next level.
Z7
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 This process is continued until the level of each element is
0
found. Here, this process is automated using R Software. An
Z8
1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1
9
excel file is generated, which contains all reachability sets,
Z9 9
antecedent sets and intersection sets with level partitioning.
1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1
Figure 1: MICMAC Analysis
Z10 9
0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Dependenc
8 10 9 10 6 9 10 10 10 10
e

Procedure of ISM followed are narrated in this section

[41] [42] [43] [44].
Step I: Structural self-interaction matrix (SSIM)
Here, we find pair wise relationship among the
challenges based on opinion of a panel of experts. Experts
were consulted to decipher relationship among digital
agriculture challenges in India using four symbols (Table
2).
V – Challenge i will supports/influences to achieve
challenge j;
A - Challenge j will supports/influences to achieve
challenge i;
X - Challenge i and j will supports/influences to achieve
each other; and
O - Challenge i and j are unrelated Step 4: MICMAC Analysis using Driving-
Dependence Diagram
Step 2: Initial Reachability Matrix The SSIM has been
transformed into a binary matrix by replacing V, A, X and O MICMAC analysis establishes dependency and driving
by 1 and 0 as per given case power among online educational challenges within ISM and
identifies key challenges within the hierarchy of challenges.
The matrix thus obtained is called the Initial The coordinates of driving power and dependency are
Reachability Matrix (IRM). The substitution of 1s and 0s are positioned in respective quadrants (Figure 1).
done as per the following rules:
Dependent Challenges: These challenges have strong
This matrix is derived from SSIM which is formed based dependent power and weak driving power. These challenges
on pair wise comparison of challenges. Here, the four are heavily influenced by other challenges.
symbols of SSIM are replaced by ‘1’ and ‘0’ based on the
following rules Autonomous Challenges: These challenges possess weak
dependency and weak driving power. So, they maintain
1. If (m, k) input in SSIM is V then (m, k) input in IRM will few links with other challenges due to very less impact.

Authorized licensed use limited to: KIIT University. Downloaded on June 19,2023 at 07:00:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Independent Challenges: These challenges are often visible
as key challenges due to high driving power and
low dependencies.
Linkage Challenges: These challenges possess very high
dependency and also very high driving power. So, these
challenges are unbalanced. So, any action on these
challenges impacts each other.
The challenge ‘Small Land Holding’ found to be
independent with high driving power and low dependence
on other nine challenges. All other challenges are found to
be linkage challenges. May be, less research studies on
challenges to digital agriculture in Indian are the reasons.
So, these nine challenges are quite unstable and any action
on them impacts each other.
Table 4: ISM Model
Z2 Z4 Z6 Z7 Z8 Z9
Z1
Z5
Z3
Step 5: Interpretive Structural Model
The generated structural model (Table 4) is derived into
three levels. The challenge “Lack of supportive regulations”
in level 3 is established to be the most vital challenge of
digital agriculture in India. This challenge leads to “Lack of
digital agriculture knowledge” and “Small Land Holding
“present in level 2. The challenges “Poor access to network
and internet connectivity”, “High Capital Cost”, “Renting
and sharing practices of Lands”, “Need for strong data
ecosystem”, “Lower digital literacy in grassroots level”,”
Data Trust and Security” and “Complexity to capture variety
of crops, climate zones, soil conditions under a digital
umbrella” in level 1 are found to be the least important
challenges.
VI. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
During initial stage of the research, ten challenges are
found out from literature and further validated through a
questionnaire from experts. All the digital challenges are
found to be significant based on the opinion survey.
Subsequently, these validated challenges of digital
agriculture are modelled using Interpretive structural
modelling. The most vital challenge to adoption of digital
agriculture in India is found to be the lack of supportive
regulations. It is a concern for research communities,
academia and government to do away with regulatory
bottleneck in India to support adoption of digital
agriculture. This challenge influences the challenges “Lack
of digital agriculture knowledge” and “Small Land
Authorized licensed use limited to: KIIT University. Downloaded on June 19,2023 at 07:00:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Holding” in level 2. Farmers should possess digital skills
and must be aware of the benefits of implementation
of digital agriculture programs. Supportive regulations
can assist farmers with small land holding through
investment and other related financial assistance schemes
from government, agricultural banks and agro industries.
All the seven Level 3 challenges are supported by these
middle level challenges of ISM model. These challenges
states that data sharing eco systems can be achieved through
Artificial Intelligence, Big data and Internet of Things.
Indian agriculture is facing poor communication
infrastructure. Research needs to develop low-cost internet
connectivity and high transmission speeds. At the same
time, state and central governments, the research
community, and experts need to rethink policies to solve
the challenges of renting and sharing practices of lands. The
way we store data, access data and govern data are also
Z10
thought provoking for policy makers.
Subjectivity in opinion of experts may exist in
developing ISM model as a limitation of the study. Future
work may also be accomplished to perform statistical
validation through structural equation Modelling. To
interpret the links, Total Interpretive Structural Modelling
can be applied to ISM model [37]. The decision making
trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) technique can
be performed to find out causal relationship. However,
application of ISM modelling to the challenges of digital
agriculture is a methodological contribution in Indian
context. This qualitative study can also be applied to other
developing countries like India.
REFERENCES
[1] A. Anand and G. Bansal, “Interpretive structural modelling for
attributes of software quality.” Journal of Advances in
Management Research, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 256–269, Aug. 2017,
doi: 10.1108/jamr-11-2016-0097.
[2] Argade, Aashish, et al. “Connecting Smallholders’ Marketplace
Decisions to Agricultural Market Reform Policy in India – an
Empirical EArgade, Aashish, et al. “Connecting Smallholders’
Marketplace Decisions to Agricultural Market Reform Policy in
India – an Empirical Exploration.” Journal of Macromarketing,
vol. 41, no. 3, 2021, pp. 471–483.,
https://doi.org/10.1177/0276146721997885.
[3] Bahinipati, Chandra Sekhar, and Unmesh Patnaik. “What
Motivates Farm-Level Adaptation in India? A Systematic Review.”
Climate Change and Community Resilience, 2021, pp. 49–68.,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0680-9_4.
[4] R. Beri, A. S. Upadhyaya, and A. Kolas, (Eds.). “Food Governance
in India: Rights, Security and Challenges in the Global Sphere.”
2022, Taylor & Francis.
[5] Bisht, Ishwari Singh. “Agri-Food System Dynamics of Small-
Holder Hill Farming Communities of Uttarakhand in North-
Western India: Socio- Economic and Policy Considerations for
Sustainable Development.” Agroecology and Sustainable Food
Systems, vol. 45, no. 3, 2020, pp. 417–449.,
https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2020.1825585.
[6] Chaudhari, Sagar Lotan, and Manish Sinha. “A Study on Emerging
Trends in Indian Startup Ecosystem: Big Data, Crowd Funding,
Shared Economy.” International Journal of Innovation Science,
vol. 13, no. 1, 2021, pp. 1–16., https://doi.org/10.1108/ijis-09-
2020-0156.
[7] Chiranjeeb, Kumar, et al. “Application of Drones and Sensors in
Advanced Farming.” Artificial Intelligence and Smart Agriculture
Applications, 2022, pp. 1–30.,
https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003311782-1.
[8] Dagar, Vishal, et al. “Variations in Technical Efficiency of Farmers
with Distinct Land Size across Agro-Climatic Zones: Evidence
 from India.” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 315, 2021, p.
128109., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128109.
[9] Dey, Kushankur, and Umedsingh Shekhawat. “Blockchain for
Sustainable e-Agriculture: Literature Review, Architecture for Data
Management, and Implications.” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol.
316, 2021, p. 128254.,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128254.
[10] Dlodlo, Nomusa, and Josephat Kalezhi. “The Internet of Things in
Agriculture for Sustainable Rural Development.” 2015 International
Conference on Emerging Trends in Networks and Computer
Communications (ETNCC), 2015,
https://doi.org/10.1109/etncc.2015.7184801.
[11] L. Grinin. “Revolution and modernization traps.” In Handbook of
Revolutions in the 21st Century, 2022, p. 219-238. Springer, Cham.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86468-2_8.
[12] Gautam, Rahul Singh, et al. “Financial Technology and Its Impact
on Digital Literacy in India: Using Poverty as a Moderating
Variable.” Journal of Risk and Financial Management, vol. 15, no.
7, 2022, p. 311., https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm15070311.
[13] R. S. Gautam, and J. Kanoujiya. “Role of Regional Rural Banks in
Rural Development and Its Influences on Digital Literacy in India.”
Iconic Research and Engineering Journals, vol. 5, no. 12, 2022, p.
92-101.
[14] A. Gulati, R. Paroda, P. Sanjiv, D. Narain, and A. Ghanwat. “Food
System in India: Challenges, Performance and Promise.” 2021,
Available at: https://bonndoc.ulb.uni-
bonn.de/xmlui/handle/20.500.11811/9136.
[15] Hackfort, Sarah. “Patterns of Inequalities in Digital Agriculture: A
Systematic Literature Review.” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 22, 2021,
p. 12345., https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212345.
[16] Jensen, M.H. “Controlled Environment Agriculture in Deserts,
Tropics and Temperate Regions - a World Review.” Acta
Horticulturae, no. 578, 2002, pp. 19–25.,
https://doi.org/10.17660/actahortic.2002.578.1.
[17] Khan, Imran Y, et al. “Promoting Climate Smart Agriculture through
Policies and Schemes in India: Temporal and Strategic Overview.”
International Journal of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, vol.
48, no. 5, 2022, https://doi.org/10.55863/ijees.2022.0547.
[18] Kiros, Shewit, and Getamesay Bekele Meshesha. “Factors Affecting
Farmers' Access to Formal Financial Credit in Basona Worana
District, North Showa Zone, Amhara Regional State, Ethiopia.”
Cogent Economics & Finance, vol. 10, no. 1, 2022,
https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2022.2035043.
[19] Kumar, Shruthi Koratagere, et al. “A Survey on Rural Internet
Connectivity in India.” 2022 14th International Conference on
COMmunication Systems & NETworkS (COMSNETS), 2022,
https://doi.org/10.1109/comsnets53615.2022.9668358.
[20] H. G. Jacoby. “Food prices, wages, and welfare in rural India.”
Economic Inquiry, vol. 54, no. 1, 2016, p. 159-176.
[21] Maiti, Dibyendu, et al. “Digitalisation and Development: Issues for
India and Beyond.” Digitalisation and Development, 2019, pp. 3–
29., https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9996-1_1.
[22] M. Trendov, S. Varas, and Zeng, M. “Digital technologies in
agriculture and rural areas: status report.” 2019, Available at:
https://www.fao.org/3/ca4887en/ca4887en.pdf.
[23] Mehrotra, Sonia, and Santosh Rupa Jaladi. “How Start-Ups in
Emerging Economies Embrace Circular Business Models and
Contribute towards a Circular Economy.” Journal of
Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 2022,
https://doi.org/10.1108/jeee-10-2021-0410.
[24] Narayanamoorthy, A. “Accelerating Farm Income Growth:
Opportunities and Challenges.” India Studies in Business and
Economics, 2022, pp. 439–457., https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-
19-0185-0_22.
[25] R. Birner, T. Daum, and C. Pray. “Who drives the digital revolution
in agriculture? A review of supply‐side trends, players and
challenges.” Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, vol. 43, no.
4, 2021, p. 1260-1285.
[26] Prasad, Shitala, et al. “Agriculture as a Service.” IEEE Potentials, vol.
40, no. 6, 2021, pp. 34–43.,
https://doi.org/10.1109/mpot.2015.2496327.
[27] A. More, and A. Aslekar. “Role of ICT & Fintech in Indian
Agriculture.” In 2022 International Conference on Decision Aid
Sciences and Applications (DASA), 2022, March, p. 900-904.
IEEE.
[28] Rakhra, Manik, and Ramandeep Singh. “A Study of Machinery and
Equipment Used by Farmers to Develop an Uberized Model for
Authorized licensed use limited to: KIIT University. Downloaded on June 19,2023 at 07:00:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
View publication stats
Renting and Sharing.” Materials Today: Proceedings, 2021,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.11.784.
[29] Rakhra, Manik, and Ramandeep Singh. “Economic and Social
Survey on Renting and Hiring of Agricultural Equipment of Farmers
in Punjab.” 2021 9th International Conference on Reliability,
Infocom Technologies and Optimization (Trends and Future
Directions) (ICRITO), 2021,
https://doi.org/10.1109/icrito51393.2021.9596343.
[30] Innazent, Jacob, et al. “Farm typology of smallholders integrated
farming systems in Southern Coastal Plains of Kerala, India.”
Scientific Reports, vol. 12, no. 1, 2022, p. 1-14.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-04148-0
[31] Ramasamy, Siva Shankar. “Sustainable Development in
Agriculture through Information and Communication Technology
(ICT) for Smarter India.” Research Anthology on Strategies for
Achieving Agricultural Sustainability, 2022, pp. 742–751.,
https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684- 5352-0.ch038.
[32] A. Shankar. “Indian Agriculture Farm Acts: 2020.” International
Journal of Modern Agriculture, vol. 10, no. 2, 2021, p. 2907-2914.
[33] Singh, Tanya, et al. “Resisting a ‘Digital Green Revolution’: Agri-
Logistics, India’s New Farm Laws and the Regional Politics of
Protest.” Capitalism Nature Socialism, vol. 32, no. 2, 2021, pp. 1–
21., https://doi.org/10.1080/10455752.2021.1936917.
[34] Sridhar, Adithya, et al. “Global Impact of Covid-19 on Agriculture:
Role of Sustainable Agriculture and Digital Farming.”
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2022,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022- 19358-w.
[35] Su, Yan, and Xianping Wang. “Innovation of Agricultural
Economic Management in the Process of Constructing Smart
Agriculture by Big Data.” Sustainable Computing: Informatics and
Systems, vol. 31, 2021,p. 100579.,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suscom.2021.100579.
[36] S. Suman. “Farming Practices in India.” 2022, Available
at: https://www.economicsdiscussion.net/india/farming/farming-
practices- in-india-top-3-types/12887
[37] Sushil. “Interpreting the Interpretive Structural Model.” Global
Journal of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 87–
106, Jun. 2012, doi: 10.1007/s40171-012-0008-3.
[38] Martinez, Brown, et al. “Potential of microbial electrosynthesis for
contributing to food production using CO2 during global
agriculture- inhibiting disasters.” Cleaner Engineering and
Technology, vol. 4, no. 100139, 2021.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clet.2021.100139.
[39] M. K. Tiwari. “Digitalization and Rural Development Challenges
in India.” EPRA International Journal of Socio-Economic and
Environmental Outlook (SEEO), vol. 9, no. 2, 2022, p. 60-68.
[40] Verma, Kimmi, et al. “An Empirical Analysis of the Contribution of
IOT Technologies in India.” 2022 9th International Conference on
Computing for Sustainable Global Development (INDIACom),
2022, https://doi.org/10.23919/indiacom54597.2022.9763243.
[41] Verma, Kamble, Ganapathy, et al. “3D Printing for sustainable food
supply chains: modelling the implementation barriers.”
International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, vol.
25, no. 2, 2022, p. 1-27.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2022.2037125.
[42] Verma, Kamble, Ganapathy, et al. “Overcoming the post-
processing barriers for 3D-printed medical models.” Rapid
Prototyping Journal, 29(1), 33-49, 2022,.
https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-08-2021-0208.
[43] Verma, Kamble, Ganapathy, et al. “3D-printed medical models
supply chain: barriers modeling and analysis.” Rapid Prototyping
Journal, (ahead-of-print), 2022. https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-11-
2021-0312.
[44] J.N. Warfield. “Developing subsystem matrices in structural
modeling.” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics,
vol. SMC-4, no. 1, 1974, p. 74-80, https://doi.org/10.1109/
TSMC.1974.5408523.