Development of a Conceptual Model Integrating Technology and Farmer Behavior for Livestock Production Optimization

Ahmad Fauzan; Siti Rahmawati; Dedi Kurniawan

Authors

Ahmad Fauzan Universitas Padjadjaran Author
Siti Rahmawati Institut Teknologi Bandung Author
Dedi Kurniawan Universitas Lampung Author

Keywords:

Farmer Behavior, Livestock Production Optimization, Precision Livestock Farming, Technology Adoption, Socio-Technical Model

Abstract

This study aims to develop a conceptual model that integrates technology and farmer behavior for livestock production optimization. The study addresses the gap between the availability of digital livestock technologies and their actual use in daily farm management. A qualitative exploratory case study design was used to examine how farmers interpret, adopt, modify, or resist livestock technologies. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews, limited participant observation, and document analysis involving livestock farmers, extension officers, livestock group leaders, animal health workers, and technology-related stakeholders. Thematic analysis revealed five major themes: technology as practical decision support, selective trust in digital data, behavioral adaptation in farm routines, social influence and peer learning, and the need for integrated support systems. The findings show that production optimization depends not only on technological readiness, but also on behavioral readiness, trust, habit formation, perceived usefulness, perceived control, and institutional support. This study contributes to the understanding of livestock digitalization as a socio-technical process that links technological capacity with farmer behavior. The proposed conceptual model offers theoretical value by integrating the Technology Acceptance Model, the Theory of Planned Behavior, and the Diffusion of Innovation. It also provides practical guidance for technology developers, extension services, cooperatives, and policymakers in designing farmer-centered digital livestock programs. Future research should test the model across different livestock systems using quantitative or mixed-methods approaches

References

Ahmed, H., Ekman, L., & Lind, N. (2024). Planned behavior, social networks, and perceived risks: Understanding farmers’ behavior toward precision dairy technologies. Journal of Dairy Science, 107(5), 2968–2982. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2023-23861

Ahmed, S. K. (2024). The pillars of trustworthiness in qualitative research. Journal of Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health, 2, 100051. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glmedi.2024.100051

Aquilani, C., Confessore, A., Bozzi, R., Sirtori, F., & Pugliese, C. (2022). Review: Precision livestock farming technologies in pasture-based livestock systems. Animal, 16(1), 100429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2021.100429

Bernabucci, G., Fusaro, I., van den Pol-van Dasselaar, A., Marandola, D., Benvenuti, M. N., Orefice, T., & Primi, R. (2025). Precision livestock farming: An overview on the application in extensive systems. Italian Journal of Animal Science, 24(1), 1228–1246. https://doi.org/10.1080/1828051X.2025.2480821

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in reflexive thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238

Byrne, D. (2022). A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Quality & Quantity, 56, 1391–1412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y

Cui, L., Wang, Y., Chen, W., Wen, W., & Han, M. S. (2023). Factors affecting the adoption of digital technology by farmers in China: A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 15(20), 14824. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152014824

Dell’Unto, D., Selvaggi, R., Pappalardo, G., & Cortignani, R. (2025). Adoption of precision livestock farming devices in the dairy cattle sector: An assessment based on agroeconomic modelling. Science of the Total Environment, 964, 180555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2025.180555

Groher, T., Heitkämper, K., & Umstätter, C. (2020). Digital technology adoption in livestock production with a special focus on ruminant farming. Animal, 14(11), 2404–2413. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731120001391

Jiang, B., Tang, W., Cui, L., & Deng, X. (2023). Precision livestock farming research: A global scientometric review. Animals, 13(13), 2096. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13132096

Kallioniemi, M. K., Kaseva, J., Uusitalo, R., & Hovinen, M. (2024). Enabling factors and constraints for the adoption of animal welfare-enhancing technologies among Finnish dairy farmers. Frontiers in Animal Science, 5, 1332525. https://doi.org/10.3389/fanim.2024.1332525

Kiger, M. E., & Varpio, L. (2020). Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE Guide No. 131. Medical Teacher, 42(8), 846–854. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2020.1755030

Kleen, J. L., & Guatteo, R. (2023). Precision livestock farming: What does it contain and what are the perspectives? Animals, 13(5), 779. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13050779

Kopler, I., Marchaim, U., Tikász, I. E., Opaliński, S., Kokin, E., Mallinger, K., Neubauer, T., Gunnarsson, S., Soerensen, C., Phillips, C. J. C., & Banhazi, T. (2023). Farmers’ perspectives of the benefits and risks in precision livestock farming in the EU pig and poultry sectors. Animals, 13(18), 2868. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13182868

Krampe, C., Ingenbleek, P. T. M., Niemi, J. K., & Serratosa, J. (2024). Designing precision livestock farming system innovations: A farmer perspective. Journal of Rural Studies, 111, 103397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2024.103397

Lim, W. M. (2025). What is qualitative research? An overview and guidelines. Australasian Marketing Journal, 33(2), 199–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/14413582241264619

Losacco, C., Marinaro, M., Caroprese, M., & Albenzio, M. (2025). An up-to-date overview on precision livestock farming. Agriculture, 15(13), 1383. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15131383

McNicol, L. C., Büchi, L., & Eory, V. (2024). Adoption of precision livestock farming technologies has the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from beef production systems. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 8, 1414858. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1414858

Mohr, S., & Kühl, R. (2021). Acceptance of artificial intelligence in German agriculture: An application of the technology acceptance model and the theory of planned behavior. Precision Agriculture, 22, 1816–1844. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-021-09814-x

Morrone, S., Dimauro, C., Gambella, F., & Cappai, M. G. (2022). Industry 4.0 and precision livestock farming: An up-to-date overview across animal productions. Sensors, 22(12), 4319. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22124319

Naeem, M., Ozuem, W., Howell, K., & Ranfagni, S. (2023). A step-by-step process of thematic analysis to develop a conceptual model in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231205789

Neethirajan, S. (2020). The role of sensors, big data and machine learning in modern animal farming. Sensing and Bio-Sensing Research, 29, 100367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbsr.2020.100367

Neethirajan, S., & Kemp, B. (2021). Digital livestock farming. Sensing and Bio-Sensing Research, 32, 100408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbsr.2021.100408

Schillings, J., Bennett, R., & Rose, D. C. (2021). Exploring the potential of precision livestock farming technologies to help address farm animal welfare. Frontiers in Animal Science, 2, 639678. https://doi.org/10.3389/fanim.2021.639678

Tzanidakis, C., Tzamaloukas, O., Simitzis, P., & Panagakis, P. (2023). Precision livestock farming applications for grazing animals. Agriculture, 13(2), 288. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13020288