Submitted:
16 April 2025
Posted:
17 April 2025
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
Introduction
Problem Statement
Literature Review
Objectives of the Study
- Evaluating the influence of e-Mobile Technology on the rural women farmers of Kanpur.
- To explore how mobile technology advances inclusive development in agriculture.
- To explore the demographic differences concerning the adoption of e-Mobile Technology against rural women farmers.
- To examine different barriers and challenges women experience in using the mobile technology for agricultural purposes.
- To offer advocacy measures to the policymakers and other concerned parties with a view to ensure greater effectiveness of mobile technology on rural women farmers.
Significance of the Research Work
Research Questions
- How do rural women farmers in Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, benefit from the adoption of e-mobile technology?
- What are the impacts of mobile technology on agricultural productivity, market access, and income generation for rural women?
- What effects do demographic variables like age, household income, and education have on rural women farmers’ adoption and use of mobile technology?
- What are the major barriers to the adoption of e-Mobile Technology among rural women in Kanpur, and how can they be overcome?
- How does mobile technology foster social connectivity, empowerment, and socio-economic integration for rural women farmers in Kanpur?
Methodology
Data Collection and Participants
3. Assign Numeric Values:
Garrett Ranking Test:
-
Limited Network Coverage (Rank 1, Mean Score: 6.23):
- ○
- Limited network coverage emerges as the most significant challenge, with a mean score of 6.23. This suggests that rural areas face substantial difficulty in accessing reliable mobile services, which is a primary barrier to mobile phone usage.
- ○
- The high number of respondents rating this issue with a score of 1 (7 points) further emphasizes the severity of this problem.
-
Reliance on Male Family Members for Financial Decisions (Rank 1, Mean Score: 5.49):
- ○
- The challenge of relying on male family members for financial decisions ranks second, with a mean score of 5.49. This reflects a societal issue where financial autonomy may be restricted, which limits the effective use of mobile phones for financial transactions or decisions.
-
Technical Support Services (Rank 2, Mean Score: 5.66):
- ○
- The inadequate technical support services in rural areas, with a mean score of 5.66, ranks second. The challenge is prominent as technical issues with mobile devices or network services may be harder to resolve in areas lacking sufficient support infrastructure.
-
A Lack of Education (Rank 2, Mean Score: 2.91):
- ○
- The lack of education about mobile phone usage ranks lower, with a mean score of 2.91, indicating that while it is a challenge, it may not be as urgent compared to others like network coverage and technical support.
-
Mobile Services Available in Local/Regional Languages (Rank 3, Mean Score: 3.77):
- ○
- The availability of mobile services in local/regional languages is another important issue, but it ranks third with a mean score of 3.77. This is crucial for ensuring that mobile services are accessible to those who may not be familiar with national or global languages like English.
-
Insufficient Guidance on Mobile Phone Usage (Rank 4, Mean Score: 3.18):
- ○
- The lack of guidance on how to use mobile phones ranks fourth, suggesting that although it is a concern, other issues such as network coverage and technical support take precedence.
-
Health Concerns Associated with Mobile Phone Radiation (Rank 5, Mean Score: 1.89):
- ○
- Health concerns related to mobile phone radiation rank last with a mean score of 1.89, indicating that this is considered a relatively minor issue by rural respondents.
Conclusion
Discussion and Conclusions
ICT Training and Skill Development:
Peer Learning and Mentorship:
Impact on Rural Productivity:
Policy Implications and Support Mechanisms:
Addressing Mobile Network and Infrastructure Challenges:
Study Limitations and Future Research Directions:
Increasing Mobile Use and Promoting Financial Aid:
Conclusion:
Declaration of Interest
- Financial Interests: None to declare.
- Non-Financial Interests: The authors have no personal or professional affiliations that could be perceived as having influenced the research conducted or the conclusions drawn in this study.
- Research Funding: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
- Conflict of Commitment: The authors confirm that there are no agreements with any entity that could influence the research integrity or the publication of the paper.
- Personal Relationships and Competing Interests: The authors declare that there are no personal relationships or competing interests that could have influenced the work reported in this paper.
References
- Ahmad, B.; Sarkar, M. A. R.; Khanom, F.; Lucky, R. Y.; Sarker, M. R.; Rabbani, M. G.; Ray, S. R. R.; Rahman, M. N.; Sarker, M. N. I. Experience of farmers using mobile phone for farming information flow in Boro rice production: A case of Eastern Gangetic Plain. Social Sciences & Humanities Open 2024, 9, 100811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aker, J. C. Dial “A” for agriculture: A review of information and communication technologies for agricultural extension in developing countries. Agricultural Economics 2011, 42(6), 631–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Broadband Commission Working Group on the Digital Gender Divide Recommendations for action: Bridging the gender gap in Internet and broadband access and use;Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development. 2017. Available online: https://broadbandcommission.org/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2021/02/WGDigitalGenderDivide.pdf.
- Dey, M. M.; Paraguas, F. J.; Kambewa, P.; Pemsl, D. E. The impact of integrated aquaculture–agriculture on small-scale farms in Southern Malawi. Agricultural Economics 2010, 41(1), 57–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gevel, J. V.; Gevel, J. V.; Etten, J. V.; Deterding, S. Citizen science breathes new life into participatory agricultural research: A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 2020, 40(1), 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ismail, N. A.; Bakar, M. A.; Mohammed Jamsari, N. N.; Sia, G. M. Factors influencing the attraction of ICT among customers in the agriculture-based sector in Klang, Selangor. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences. 2023. Available online: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Factors-Influencing-The-Attraction-of-Ict-among-in-Ismail-Bakar/1abfb3202b9ff9111793b630b2b981765078e5d8.
- Jensen, R. The digital provide: Information (technology), market performance, and welfare in the South Indian fisheries sector. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 2007, 122(3), 879–924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lele, U.; Goswami, S. The fourth industrial revolution, agricultural and rural innovation, and implications for public policy and investments: A case of India. Agricultural Economics 2017, 48(5), 639–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mukherjee, S.; Jha, S. K. Utilization pattern of information and communication technologies among the farming community of West Bengal. Indian Journal of Extension Education 2024, 60(1), 7–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nur-E-Alam, S. M.; Ali, M. S.; Haque, M. Z. Use of cell phone in receiving agricultural information by the farmers. Semantics Scholar. 2019. Available online: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Use-of-Cell-Phone-in-Receiving-Agricultural-by-the-Nur-E-Alam-Ali/0781dd7be6d3360aec375202313b48a263033122.
- Quandt, A.; Salerno, J. D.; Neff, J. C.; Baird, T. D.; Herrick, J. E.; McCabe, J. T.; Xu, E.; Hartter, J. Mobile phone use is associated with higher smallholder agricultural productivity in Tanzania, East Africa. PLoS ONE 2020, 15(8), e0237337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rahman, M. S.; Haque, M. E.; Afrad, M. S. I.; Hasan, S. S.; Rahman, M. A. Impact of mobile phone usage on empowerment of rural women entrepreneurs: Evidence from rural Bangladesh. Heliyon 2023, 9(11), e21604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sani, Y.; Abdurrahman, S.; Idi, S.; Aminu, B. A. Perception of poultry farmers on the performance of extension service delivery in the western zone of Bauchi State, Nigeria. Nigerian Journal of Agriculture and Agricultural Technology. 2023. Available online: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/PERCEPTION-OF-POULTRY-FARMERS-ON-THE-PERFORMANCE-OF-Sani-Abdurrahman/2a3207041305178cc54bb3bd732077094baf1a6a.
- Suri, K.; Sharma, S. Bridging the gap: Understanding the digital gender divide in Jammu and Kashmir Union Territory. International Journal of Education Management and Social Sciences 2023, 12(1), 131–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Takahashi, K.; Muraoka, R.; Otsuka, K. Technology adoption, impact, and extension in developing countries’ agriculture: A review of the recent literature. Agricultural Economics 2019, 50(6), 627–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Udisha, O.; Ambily Philomina, I. G. Bridging the digital divide: Empowering rural women farmers through mobile technology in Kerala. Sustainability 2024, 16(21), 9188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
| S. No. | Category | Frequency (f) or (O) | Percentage (%) | Expected (E) | (O−E)2 | (O−E)2/E | Chi-Square Value | df-Value | α -Value | critical value |
| 1. | Age | |||||||||
| Less than 25 | 16 | 10.00 | 38.4 | 522.24 | 13.58 | 52.47 | 4 | 0.05 | 9.488 | |
| 25-35 | 27 | 18.18 | 38.4 | 131.04 | 3.41 | |||||
| 36-45 | 44 | 27.50 | 38.4 | 31.36 | 0.82 | |||||
| 46-55 | 31 | 20.62 | 38.4 | 54.76 | 1.43 | |||||
| More than 55 | 74 | 46.25 | 38.4 | 1276.96 | 33.23 | |||||
| 2. | Religion | |||||||||
| Hindu | 56 | 35.00 | 80 | 576 | 7.2 | 14.4 | 1 | 0.05 | 3.841 | |
| Muslim | 104 | 65.00 | 80 | 576 | 7.2 | |||||
| 3. | Educational Qualifications | |||||||||
| Less than High School | 54 | 33.75 | 40 | 196 | 4.9 | 7.85 | 3 | 0.05 | 7.815 | |
| High School | 41 | 25.63 | 40 | 1 | 0.025 | |||||
| Intermediate | 34 | 21.25 | 40 | 36 | 0.9 | |||||
| More than Intermediate | 31 | 19.37 | 40 | 81 | 2.025 | |||||
| 4. | Yearly Family Income (Rs.) | |||||||||
| < 100,000 | 67 | 41.88 | 53.33 | 186.91 | 3.5 | 8.63 | 2 | 0.05 | 5.991 | |
| 100,001 - 200,000 | 37 | 23.12 | 53.33 | 266.74 | 5.0 | |||||
| > 200,000 | 56 | 35.00 | 53.33 | 7.13 | 0.13 | |||||
| 5. | Spouse’s Job | |||||||||
| Retired Employee | 35 | 21.87 | 40 | 25 | 0.625 | 17.05 | 3 | 0.05 | 7.815 | |
| Government Employee | 41 | 25.63 | 40 | 1 | 0.025 | |||||
| Private Job | 24 | 15.00 | 40 | 256 | 6.4 | |||||
| Business | 60 | 37.50 | 40 | 400 | 10 | |||||
| 6. | Family Type | |||||||||
| Nuclear | 74 | 46.25 | 80 | 36 | 0.45 | 0.9 | 1 | 0.05 | 3.841 | |
| Joint | 86 | 53.75 | 80 | 36 | 0.45 | |||||
| Sl. No. | Activities | Integration of mobile phones | |||||||
| Pre-Mobile Phone Adoption | Post-Mobile Phone Adoption | ||||||||
| No Use | Less Use | Average Use | High Use | No Use | Less Use | Average Use | High Use | ||
| 1 | How easy is it for you to get price information for agricultural products and inputs? | 51 | 53 | 26 | 30 | 9 | 28 | 32 | 91 |
| 2 | How accessible is the market for you to buy and sell agricultural products? | 41 | 62 | 32 | 25 | 11 | 23 | 55 | 71 |
| 3 | How comfortable are you with voicing your opinions and suggestions regarding farming practices? | 54 | 45 | 32 | 28 | 12 | 11 | 74 | 63 |
| 4 | How often do you attend classes or training related to new cultivation methods or the use of new machinery? | 53 | 40 | 32 | 35 | 15 | 21 | 45 | 79 |
| 5 | How easily can you access finance options like loans, insurance, and payments? | 48 | 59 | 25 | 28 | 11 | 19 | 55 | 75 |
| 6 | How well-connected are you to other farmers and community organizations for information sharing and support? | 47 | 57 | 43 | 13 | 19 | 26 | 43 | 72 |
| 7 | How well do you receive updates about government schemes and services available for farming? | 56 | 68 | 12 | 24 | 12 | 22 | 32 | 94 |
| 8 | How easy is it for you to purchase agricultural machinery, pesticides, and other inputs online? | 86 | 52 | 10 | 12 | 11 | 19 | 45 | 85 |
| 9 | How often do you access farming-related information without the need for physical travel? | 74 | 63 | 10 | 13 | 18 | 22 | 56 | 64 |
| No Use | Less Use | Average Use | High Use | |
| t-values | 11.21 | 8.63 | -7.33 | -10.87 |
| Critical t-values | 3.182 | 3.182 | 3.182 | 3.182 |
| Degree of Freedom (n-1) | 8 | |||
| S.N. | Issues with Mobile Phone Use in Rural Locations | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | No. of Respondents | Score | Mean Score | Rank |
| 1 | Reliance on male family members for financial decisions. | 52 | 41 | 23 | 21 | 23 | 0 | 0 | 160 | |||
| 364 | 246 | 115 | 84 | 69 | 0 | 0 | 878 | 5.49 | 1 | |||
| 2 | A lack of education hinders the ability to use it effectively | 8 | 7 | 21 | 20 | 22 | 35 | 47 | 160 | |||
| 56 | 42 | 105 | 80 | 66 | 70 | 47 | 466 | 2.91 | 2 | |||
| 3 | Limited network coverage in rural areas. | 76 | 56 | 17 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 160 | |||
| 532 | 336 | 85 | 44 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 997 | 6.23 | 1 | |||
| 4 | Insufficient guidance on how to use mobile phones. | 11 | 13 | 18 | 29 | 28 | 35 | 44 | 160 | |||
| 77 | 78 | 90 | 116 | 84 | 70 | 44 | 509 | 3.18 | 4 | |||
| 5 | Technical support services are inadequate in rural areas. | 60 | 37 | 28 | 18 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 160 | |||
| 420 | 222 | 140 | 72 | 51 | 0 | 0 | 905 | 5.66 | 2 | |||
| 6 | Mobile services available in local/regional languages | 21 | 32 | 28 | 0 | 0 | 45 | 34 | 160 | |||
| 147 | 192 | 140 | 0 | 0 | 90 | 34 | 603 | 3.77 | 3 | |||
| 7 | Health concerns associated with mobile phone radiation. | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 45 | 53 | 62 | 160 | |||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 135 | 106 | 62 | 303 | 1.89 | 5 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).