Behavioural Insights into Dairy Farmers’ Adoption of Feeding Innovations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Philippine Carabao Center (PCC) has promoted various feeding innovations to enhance buffalo-based dairy enterprise and increase milk production, yet adoption rates have been suboptimal. This study explores the decision-making processes of dairy farmers regarding the adoption of these innovations, focusing on how attitudes and subjective norms influence their intentions to implement PCC-endorsed feed technologies, such as improved forage, concentrate feeding, legume supplementation, and forage ensiling. Data were collected through structured interviews with 60 dairy farmers. The analysis was conducted using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). Results showed that socioeconomic factors and farm characteristics minimally impact the intention to adopt innovations, with land ownership and herd size positively influencing concentrate feeding. Perceived usefulness and difficulty significantly shape farmers' intentions, indicating that constraints like land availability and high production costs hinder the adoption of legume supplementation and forage ensiling. While attitudes toward feeding innovations are generally positive, practical challenges limit their uptake. Social norms, shaped by extension staff and peer farmers, play a significant role in influencing farmers' intentions to adopt these innovations. This study emphasized the need to address practical barriers to enhance the uptake of feeding innovations and improve dairy buffalo production.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".