Systematic review uncovers multi-subsystem drivers of agricultural Internet of Things adoption in developing economies, indicating that technology uptake requires integrated socio-technical...
Despite rapid global growth in agricultural Internet of Things (IoT) markets, adoption among smallholder farmers in developing economies remains persistently low and unevenly understood. Existing systematic reviews rely predominantly on individually centred behavioural frameworks, such as TAM, UTAUT, and BRT, which explain technology acceptance through attitudinal constructs while overlooking the institutional, infrastructural, financial, and cultural conditions that govern adoption outcomes on the ground. This study addresses that gap by presenting the first systematic literature review to apply Socio-Technical Systems Theory (STST) as the organising analytical framework for synthesising empirical evidence on IoT adoption in agriculture across developing economies. Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a dual-database search of Scopus and Web of Science yielded 8,923 records; after structured screening, 21 empirical studies representing 16 distinct geographical contexts met all inclusion criteria. Thematic synthesis identified 30 adoption-relevant factors, systematically mapped across nine STST subsystems: people, infrastructure, technology, process and procedures, financial circumstances, regulatory frameworks, stakeholders, culture, and goals. Key enablers across contexts include peer endorsement, multi-stakeholder partnerships, and performance-aligned policy incentives; persistent barriers include high equipment costs, unreliable rural infrastructure, weak extension services, and cultural attachment to traditional practices. The analysis reveals that IoT adoption in agriculture is not a discrete technical decision, but a socio-technical process shaped by the simultaneous interaction of these nine subsystems. This review provides researchers with a replicable analytical structure and offers policymakers, agricultural extension services, and technology developers a structured, context-sensitive tool for designing farmer-centred digital transformation initiatives in resource-constrained agricultural settings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jibrin et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: