Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Qualitative multi-case study reveals how farmers negotiate smart farming technology across technical and social domains, highlighting communication as vital social infrastructure.
Smart farming (SF) is widely promoted as a technological solution to agricultural productivity and sustainability challenges. However, existing research has largely focused on technology adoption, providing limited understanding of how farmers adapt and sustain innovation in practice. This study examines how farmers in West Java, Indonesia negotiate smart farming innovations under conditions commonly found across the Global South. Using an interpretive-constructivist paradigm and a qualitative multi-case design, data were collected through interviews and field observations with 33 SF farmers across six districts. Findings reveal three interconnected forms of negotiation: epistemic, technical, and institutional. Farmers acquire knowledge through digital platforms and peer-learning networks, adapt technologies to local farming conditions, and rely on communication networks to exchange knowledge and coordinate collective responses to uncertainty. The study reframes SF as a process of innovation negotiation and highlights communication as a social infrastructure that enables learning, adaptation, and technological sustainability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rasmira et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: